Floor Statements

Mr. President, today I join with my colleagues, Senators Lieberman, Kerry, and Kennedy, to introduce the Quinebaug and Shetucket Rivers Valley National Heritage Corridor Amendments Act of 2007. Representatives Courtney and Neal have introduced a companion bill in the House.

The Quinebaug and Shetucket Rivers Valley National Heritage Corridor, or QSHC, was established in 1994 as the fifth National Heritage Corridor. National Heritage Areas are designated by Congress to preserve distinctive landscapes of historic, cultural, natural, and recreational resources. The QSHC is commonly known as ``The Last Green Valley,'' a rare rural landscape in the populous Northeast. In fact, the Valley stands out in night images from space for its absence of lights. It contains aboriginal and colonial archaeological sites, mills and mill villages that preserve the history of the early industrial revolution, and traditional farming communities. The QSHC non-profit management entity has restored architecturally and historically important buildings, developed interpretive projects, and developed conservation and open space plans. It has consistently leveraged an average of $19 for every $1 of appropriated Federal money.

The QSHC has developed a plan to become a self-sustaining entity by 2015, as laid out in ``The Trail to 2015: A Sustainability Plan for the Last Green Valley.'' The plan calls for replacing Federal funds with fees for services, private and corporate support, and income from a permanent fund. In the interim, Federal funds are necessary for capacity-building, awareness programs, and ongoing education of land- use decision-makers.

The Quinebaug and Shetucket Rivers Valley National Heritage Corridor has created a collaboration of 35 municipalities dedicated to preserving a unique slice of our American heritage. With an extension of its authorization, this preserve can exist in perpetuity. I urge my colleagues to support reauthorization of the QSHC.

Mr. President, today I join with my colleagues, Senators Lieberman, Kerry, and Kennedy, to introduce the Quinebaug and Shetucket Rivers Valley National Heritage Corridor Amendments Act of 2007. Representatives Courtney and Neal have introduced a companion bill in the House.

The Quinebaug and Shetucket Rivers Valley National Heritage Corridor, or QSHC, was established in 1994 as the fifth National Heritage Corridor. National Heritage Areas are designated by Congress to preserve distinctive landscapes of historic, cultural, natural, and recreational resources. The QSHC is commonly known as ``The Last Green Valley,'' a rare rural landscape in the populous Northeast. In fact, the Valley stands out in night images from space for its absence of lights. It contains aboriginal and colonial archaeological sites, mills and mill villages that preserve the history of the early industrial revolution, and traditional farming communities. The QSHC non-profit management entity has restored architecturally and historically important buildings, developed interpretive projects, and developed conservation and open space plans. It has consistently leveraged an average of $19 for every $1 of appropriated Federal money.

The QSHC has developed a plan to become a self-sustaining entity by 2015, as laid out in ``The Trail to 2015: A Sustainability Plan for the Last Green Valley.'' The plan calls for replacing Federal funds with fees for services, private and corporate support, and income from a permanent fund. In the interim, Federal funds are necessary for capacity-building, awareness programs, and ongoing education of land- use decision-makers.

The Quinebaug and Shetucket Rivers Valley National Heritage Corridor has created a collaboration of 35 municipalities dedicated to preserving a unique slice of our American heritage. With an extension of its authorization, this preserve can exist in perpetuity. I urge my colleagues to support reauthorization of the QSHC.

Mr. President, along with Senators Alexander, Bayh, Bennett, Boxer, Cantwell, Clinton, Coleman, Domenici, Durbin, Hatch, Levin, Lieberman, Salazar, and Schumer, I am in support of our resolution to proclaim the third week of April of 2007 as ``National Shaken Baby Syndrome Awareness Week.'' The Senate has passed similar resolutions each year since 2001, and we strongly support continued awareness of one of the most devastating forms of child abuse in this country, abuse that results in the severe injury, lifelong disability, or death of hundreds of children each year.

In recognition of the need to eliminate child abuse and to raise awareness about the issue, the month of April has again been designated ``National Child Abuse Prevention Month,'' an annual tradition that was initiated in 1979 by former President Jimmy Carter. As we focus on child abuse prevention this month, awareness and prevention of Shaken Baby Syndrome is an important component of these efforts.

I would like to recognize the many groups, including those formed by parents and relatives who have been killed or injured by shaking, who support this effort to increase awareness of one of the most devastating forms of child abuse. These supporters include the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Association of Neurological Surgeons, the American Psychological Association, The Arc of the United States, the Association of Maternal and Child Health Programs, the Association of University Centers on Disabilities, the Brain Injury Association of America, the Center for Child Protection and Family Support, the Child Welfare League of America, Children's Healthcare is a Legal Duty, the Congress of Neurological Surgeons, the Cynthia Gibbs Foundation, Don't Shake Jake, Easter Seals, Epilepsy Foundation of America, Family Voices, the Hannah Rose Foundation, the Kierra Harrison Foundation, the National Association of Children's Hospitals, the National Association of Child Care Resource & Referral Agencies, the National Center for Learning Disabilities, the National Child Abuse Coalition, the National Crime Prevention Council, the National Exchange Club Foundation, the National Family Partnership, the National Respite Coalition, the National Shaken Baby Coalition, Parents Anonymous, Prevent Child Abuse, the Shaken Baby Alliance, the Shaken Baby Association, Shaken Baby Prevention Inc., Shaken Baby Syndrome Prevention Plus, the SKIPPER Initiative, United Cerebral Palsy, A Voice for Gabbi, and many other groups.

I urge the Senate to adopt this resolution designating the third week of April 2007 as ``National Shaken Baby Syndrome Awareness Week,'' and to take part in the many local and national activities and events recognizing the month of April as National Child Abuse Prevention Month.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Best Pharmaceuticals for Children Amendments of 2007, which is a bill to reauthorize the Best Pharmaceuticals for Children Act--BPCA. If Congress doesn't act, this successful program will expire on October I, 2007. I thank my colleagues Senators Kennedy, Harkin, Bingaman, Murray, Clinton and Brown who are joining me as original cosponsors of this important legislation.

I am pleased that Senators Kennedy and Enzi, the distinguished chairman and ranking member of the Health Education Labor, and Pensions--HELP--Committee, have included this bill in the chairman's mark for S. 1082, which is expected to be voted on today in the HELP Committee.

I would also like to recognize the contributions and leadership of former Senator Mike De Wine, a friend and colleague, who always fought to ensure children would not be treated as second-class citizens when it came to drug and device development. He was a champion of BPCA along with me even when it wasn't popular to hold that view.

The story of the Best Pharmaceuticals for Children Act is one of huge success for children and their families. Children with a wide range of diseases such as HIV/AIDS, cancer, allergies, asthma, neurological and psychiatric disorders, and obesity can now lead healthier, more productive lives as a result of new information about the safety and efficacy of drugs they use to treat and manage their diseases where previously there was none.

Children are not simply little adults and results of the drug studies conducted under the BPCA have shown us that they should not be treated as such. Pediatric drug studies conducted. under the BPCA showed that children may have been exposed to ineffective drugs, ineffective dosing, overdosing, or side effects that were previously unknown.

Since the BPCA's passage in 1997 and its reauthorization in 2002, FDA has requested nearly 800 studies involving more than 45,000 children in clinical trials. Useful new pediatric information is now part of product labeling for 119 drugs. By comparison, in the 7 years prior to the BPCA's passage, only 11 studies of marketed drugs were completed. In the past 10 years, there has been a twentyfold increase in the number of drugs studied in infants, children, and adolescents since BPCA was enacted.

Labeling changes resulting from clinical studies under the BPCA have informed physicians of the proper dosing in the examples of Viracept, a protease inhibitor used in a combination therapy for the treatment of HIV, and Neurontin, a pain relief medication used to treat children with chronic pain. For children with epilepsy, the BPCA studies informed physicians that the drugs Keppra and Trileptal could be used safely and effectively at an even earlier age than previously known. Studies of Imitrex as a result of the BPCA showed no better results than placebo for the treatment of migraine headaches in adolescents. These same studies also showed serious adverse events due to Imitrex in pediatric populations and therefore the drug is not recommended to treat migraines in anyone less than 18 years of age.

Recent studies of the BPCA by the Government Accountability Office-- GAO--and by several authors from Duke University in an article which appeared in the Journal of the American Medical Association--JAMA--have demonstrated that the program is a success and have identified opportunities to strengthen the program. Authors of the recent JAMA article found that outside of the BPCA, the FDA is limited in the number and scope of studies for which it can require pediatric data for existing products on the market.

Data from this article showed that only a minority of drugs studied under the BPC, about 20 percent, had more than $1 billion in annual sales. In fact, the median drug granted exclusivity was a small-market drug with annual sales of $180 million and 30 percent of drugs studied had sales less than $200 million. This article went on to say that a universal reduction in the length of pediatric exclusivity from 6 to 3 months would mean that products with small profit margins may not be submitted for pediatric testing.

The BPCA has always tried to strike the right balance between cost to consumers and benefits to children. I believe there is an ongoing need to evaluate the cost of the incentive as it relates to reaching the goal of having medications properly studied and labeled for children. In fact, that is why I strongly support a 5-year sunset of the BPCA.

After 10 years, experience and data has shown us that for a small number of drugs, pediatric exclusivity has far exceeded the ``carrot'' it was intended to provide for manufacturers. As the authors of the recent JAMA article noted, ``our study shows that the Pediatric Exclusivity Program overcompensates blockbuster products for performing clinical trials in children, while other products have more modest returns on investment under this program.''

The bill I am introducing today contains a reasonable, workable proposal to address cost concerns without jeopardizing the extraordinary success of BPCA. I have worked closely with the chairman and ranking member of the HELP Committee to craft this proposal into the form it appears in this legislation and in the bipartisan chairman's mark which is expected to be voted on in the HELP Committee today.

On March 27, the HELP Committee held a hearing, which I chaired, entitled ``Ensuring Safe Medicines and Medical Devices for Children.'' We learned from pediatricians and a parent of five children, four of whom are HIV-positive, Mrs. Susan Belfiore, about the tremendous impact BPCA has had on the quality of life for countless numbers of children and their families. We received testimony with many suggestions for improvements to BPCA which I believe are reflected in this bill. I would also add that in the month since I circulated this bill as a draft, I received comments from several pharmaceutical companies. Some have been strongly supportive of this effort and many of their ideas and suggestions are incorporated in this bill.

The success of the BPCA has transformed the drug development process for children. It is my hope that we will achieve similar success with another piece of legislation I recently introduced called the Pediatric Medical Device Safety and Improvement Act. It is also contained within the chairman's mark to S. 1082 and I thank Chairman Kennedy and Ranking Member Enzi for working with me to ensure that medical devices used in children are safe and are designed specifically for their use.

The BPCA has had a long history of bipartisan support and it has been my longstanding hope that this initiative will continue to be bipartisan as the chairman's mark to S. 1082 moves to the Senate floor. The safety of our Nation's children is not a partisan issue.

As the parent of two young children, I know that it is essential that products used in children's growing bodies, whether they be drugs or devices, are appropriately tested and designed specifically for their use. We must continue the tremendous success of BPCA and its complementary program, the Pediatric Research Improvement Act, of which I am an original cosponsor, by strengthening both programs through the reauthorization process this year. It is essential that we use the past experience of both programs to ensure they will continue to thrive in the future.

I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.

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

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Best Pharmaceuticals for Children Amendments of 2007, which is a bill to reauthorize the Best Pharmaceuticals for Children Act--BPCA. If Congress doesn't act, this successful program will expire on October I, 2007. I thank my colleagues Senators Kennedy, Harkin, Bingaman, Murray, Clinton and Brown who are joining me as original cosponsors of this important legislation.

I am pleased that Senators Kennedy and Enzi, the distinguished chairman and ranking member of the Health Education Labor, and Pensions--HELP--Committee, have included this bill in the chairman's mark for S. 1082, which is expected to be voted on today in the HELP Committee.

I would also like to recognize the contributions and leadership of former Senator Mike De Wine, a friend and colleague, who always fought to ensure children would not be treated as second-class citizens when it came to drug and device development. He was a champion of BPCA along with me even when it wasn't popular to hold that view.

The story of the Best Pharmaceuticals for Children Act is one of huge success for children and their families. Children with a wide range of diseases such as HIV/AIDS, cancer, allergies, asthma, neurological and psychiatric disorders, and obesity can now lead healthier, more productive lives as a result of new information about the safety and efficacy of drugs they use to treat and manage their diseases where previously there was none.

Children are not simply little adults and results of the drug studies conducted under the BPCA have shown us that they should not be treated as such. Pediatric drug studies conducted. under the BPCA showed that children may have been exposed to ineffective drugs, ineffective dosing, overdosing, or side effects that were previously unknown.

Since the BPCA's passage in 1997 and its reauthorization in 2002, FDA has requested nearly 800 studies involving more than 45,000 children in clinical trials. Useful new pediatric information is now part of product labeling for 119 drugs. By comparison, in the 7 years prior to the BPCA's passage, only 11 studies of marketed drugs were completed. In the past 10 years, there has been a twentyfold increase in the number of drugs studied in infants, children, and adolescents since BPCA was enacted.

Labeling changes resulting from clinical studies under the BPCA have informed physicians of the proper dosing in the examples of Viracept, a protease inhibitor used in a combination therapy for the treatment of HIV, and Neurontin, a pain relief medication used to treat children with chronic pain. For children with epilepsy, the BPCA studies informed physicians that the drugs Keppra and Trileptal could be used safely and effectively at an even earlier age than previously known. Studies of Imitrex as a result of the BPCA showed no better results than placebo for the treatment of migraine headaches in adolescents. These same studies also showed serious adverse events due to Imitrex in pediatric populations and therefore the drug is not recommended to treat migraines in anyone less than 18 years of age.

Recent studies of the BPCA by the Government Accountability Office-- GAO--and by several authors from Duke University in an article which appeared in the Journal of the American Medical Association--JAMA--have demonstrated that the program is a success and have identified opportunities to strengthen the program. Authors of the recent JAMA article found that outside of the BPCA, the FDA is limited in the number and scope of studies for which it can require pediatric data for existing products on the market.

Data from this article showed that only a minority of drugs studied under the BPC, about 20 percent, had more than $1 billion in annual sales. In fact, the median drug granted exclusivity was a small-market drug with annual sales of $180 million and 30 percent of drugs studied had sales less than $200 million. This article went on to say that a universal reduction in the length of pediatric exclusivity from 6 to 3 months would mean that products with small profit margins may not be submitted for pediatric testing.

The BPCA has always tried to strike the right balance between cost to consumers and benefits to children. I believe there is an ongoing need to evaluate the cost of the incentive as it relates to reaching the goal of having medications properly studied and labeled for children. In fact, that is why I strongly support a 5-year sunset of the BPCA.

After 10 years, experience and data has shown us that for a small number of drugs, pediatric exclusivity has far exceeded the ``carrot'' it was intended to provide for manufacturers. As the authors of the recent JAMA article noted, ``our study shows that the Pediatric Exclusivity Program overcompensates blockbuster products for performing clinical trials in children, while other products have more modest returns on investment under this program.''

The bill I am introducing today contains a reasonable, workable proposal to address cost concerns without jeopardizing the extraordinary success of BPCA. I have worked closely with the chairman and ranking member of the HELP Committee to craft this proposal into the form it appears in this legislation and in the bipartisan chairman's mark which is expected to be voted on in the HELP Committee today.

On March 27, the HELP Committee held a hearing, which I chaired, entitled ``Ensuring Safe Medicines and Medical Devices for Children.'' We learned from pediatricians and a parent of five children, four of whom are HIV-positive, Mrs. Susan Belfiore, about the tremendous impact BPCA has had on the quality of life for countless numbers of children and their families. We received testimony with many suggestions for improvements to BPCA which I believe are reflected in this bill. I would also add that in the month since I circulated this bill as a draft, I received comments from several pharmaceutical companies. Some have been strongly supportive of this effort and many of their ideas and suggestions are incorporated in this bill.

The success of the BPCA has transformed the drug development process for children. It is my hope that we will achieve similar success with another piece of legislation I recently introduced called the Pediatric Medical Device Safety and Improvement Act. It is also contained within the chairman's mark to S. 1082 and I thank Chairman Kennedy and Ranking Member Enzi for working with me to ensure that medical devices used in children are safe and are designed specifically for their use.

The BPCA has had a long history of bipartisan support and it has been my longstanding hope that this initiative will continue to be bipartisan as the chairman's mark to S. 1082 moves to the Senate floor. The safety of our Nation's children is not a partisan issue.

As the parent of two young children, I know that it is essential that products used in children's growing bodies, whether they be drugs or devices, are appropriately tested and designed specifically for their use. We must continue the tremendous success of BPCA and its complementary program, the Pediatric Research Improvement Act, of which I am an original cosponsor, by strengthening both programs through the reauthorization process this year. It is essential that we use the past experience of both programs to ensure they will continue to thrive in the future.

I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.

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

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce, along with Senators Cochran, Kennedy, Stevens, Bingaman, Kerry and Rockefeller the Summer of Service Act of 2007. This bill offers middle school students the chance to spend a summer in service to their communities as they transition into high school.

The Summer of Service Act would create a competitive grant program that would enable States and localities to offer middle school students an opportunity to participate in a structured community service program over the summer months. It would employ service-learning to teach civic participation skills, help young people see themselves as resources to their communities, expand educational opportunities and discourage ``summer academic slide.'' Providing tangible benefits to their communities, Summer of Service projects would direct grantees to work on unmet human, educational, environmental and public safety needs and encourage all youth, regardless of age, income, or disability, to engage in community service. The program would also grant participants with an educational award of up to $500 which can later be used to pay for college.

Volunteerism not only brings support and services to communities in need, it also provides significant benefits to the students who participate. When young people participate in service activities they feel better able to control their lives in a positive way, avoiding risk

behaviors, strengthening their community connections and become more engaged in their studies. When service is tied to what students are learning in school, they often make gains on achievement tests, complete their homework more often, and increase their grade point average. Students who engage in service learning also improve their communication skills, gain increased awareness of career possibilities, and develop more positive workplace attitudes, setting the foundation for their place as America's future leaders. Studies also show that students who participate in community service are more likely to graduate high school and demonstrate interest in going to college.

We often hear today of the tremendous pressures our young people face at home, in school and in the afterschool hours. Summer of Service provides young people with the chance to be a positive change in their communities. For this reason, I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting the Summer of Service Act of 2007. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce, along with Senators Cochran, Kennedy, Stevens, Bingaman, Kerry and Rockefeller the Summer of Service Act of 2007. This bill offers middle school students the chance to spend a summer in service to their communities as they transition into high school.

The Summer of Service Act would create a competitive grant program that would enable States and localities to offer middle school students an opportunity to participate in a structured community service program over the summer months. It would employ service-learning to teach civic participation skills, help young people see themselves as resources to their communities, expand educational opportunities and discourage ``summer academic slide.'' Providing tangible benefits to their communities, Summer of Service projects would direct grantees to work on unmet human, educational, environmental and public safety needs and encourage all youth, regardless of age, income, or disability, to engage in community service. The program would also grant participants with an educational award of up to $500 which can later be used to pay for college.

Volunteerism not only brings support and services to communities in need, it also provides significant benefits to the students who participate. When young people participate in service activities they feel better able to control their lives in a positive way, avoiding risk

behaviors, strengthening their community connections and become more engaged in their studies. When service is tied to what students are learning in school, they often make gains on achievement tests, complete their homework more often, and increase their grade point average. Students who engage in service learning also improve their communication skills, gain increased awareness of career possibilities, and develop more positive workplace attitudes, setting the foundation for their place as America's future leaders. Studies also show that students who participate in community service are more likely to graduate high school and demonstrate interest in going to college.

We often hear today of the tremendous pressures our young people face at home, in school and in the afterschool hours. Summer of Service provides young people with the chance to be a positive change in their communities. For this reason, I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting the Summer of Service Act of 2007. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, today, Senator Bond and I are introducing the Vision Care for Kids Act of 2007. This legislation will provide follow-up vision care services for those children who have visual problems and are not covered under an insurance policy or under any Federal, or State health benefits program.

Why is this legislation needed? Let's look at the facts. According to the 2004 Vision Problems Action Plan, published by Prevent Blindness America, vision problems affect one in 20 preschoolers and 80 percent of children under age six are not screened for vision problems before entering public school.

Perhaps even more startling than the statistics I have just mentioned, is that 20 States do not require children to receive any vision care prior to entry or during their early school years. Thus, millions of children are at risk of having possible vision problems later in life.

I am pleased that my home State of Connecticut provides annual screenings to children in kindergarten through grade six. In addition, during the ninth grade, each student also receives a vision screening. Following the eye tests that are administered in Connecticut's schools, the local superintendent sends a note to the parent or guardian of each student who is found to have a problem.

Although Connecticut provides screenings in the early years, it is important to note that out of the 467,488 children in Connecticut, there are almost 70,000 who have untreated vision disorders, according to the most recent Census data. Nationwide, almost 6 million out of close to 40 million children have untreated vision disorders. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said that ``impaired vision can affect a child's cognitive, emotional, neurological, and physical development.''

With the introduction of the Vision Care for Kids Act, Senator Bond and I are seeking to improve the data I have outlined. When this legislation is enacted, the States will have the resources to pay for follow-up vision treatment for children who now do not have the financial means to undergo this much needed care.

Our initiative will enable Federal funding to complement existing State efforts in regard to: providing comprehensive eye examinations for children under age nine; furnishing the necessary treatment or services needed if an eye exam determines additional

care is needed; and developing educational materials for parents, teachers, and health care practitioners that will increase recognition of the signs of visual impairment in children. The Vision Care for Kids Act will serve as an incentive to States to provide eye care to those youngsters who are in need of treatment and are currently unable to access care.

This year, we are working on the reauthorization of the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP). SCHIP was created to provide health care to millions of children who were previously uninsured. Over the last ten years, we have seen the positive impact of this essential program. Passage of the Vision Care for Kids Act will be a key component of ensuring that we have a comprehensive children's health care delivery system in this country. I look forward to working with Senator Bond and my colleagues to see that this legislation is not only is not only passed by this body soon, but that it is signed into law.

Mr. President, today, Senator Bond and I are introducing the Vision Care for Kids Act of 2007. This legislation will provide follow-up vision care services for those children who have visual problems and are not covered under an insurance policy or under any Federal, or State health benefits program.

Why is this legislation needed? Let's look at the facts. According to the 2004 Vision Problems Action Plan, published by Prevent Blindness America, vision problems affect one in 20 preschoolers and 80 percent of children under age six are not screened for vision problems before entering public school.

Perhaps even more startling than the statistics I have just mentioned, is that 20 States do not require children to receive any vision care prior to entry or during their early school years. Thus, millions of children are at risk of having possible vision problems later in life.

I am pleased that my home State of Connecticut provides annual screenings to children in kindergarten through grade six. In addition, during the ninth grade, each student also receives a vision screening. Following the eye tests that are administered in Connecticut's schools, the local superintendent sends a note to the parent or guardian of each student who is found to have a problem.

Although Connecticut provides screenings in the early years, it is important to note that out of the 467,488 children in Connecticut, there are almost 70,000 who have untreated vision disorders, according to the most recent Census data. Nationwide, almost 6 million out of close to 40 million children have untreated vision disorders. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said that ``impaired vision can affect a child's cognitive, emotional, neurological, and physical development.''

With the introduction of the Vision Care for Kids Act, Senator Bond and I are seeking to improve the data I have outlined. When this legislation is enacted, the States will have the resources to pay for follow-up vision treatment for children who now do not have the financial means to undergo this much needed care.

Our initiative will enable Federal funding to complement existing State efforts in regard to: providing comprehensive eye examinations for children under age nine; furnishing the necessary treatment or services needed if an eye exam determines additional

care is needed; and developing educational materials for parents, teachers, and health care practitioners that will increase recognition of the signs of visual impairment in children. The Vision Care for Kids Act will serve as an incentive to States to provide eye care to those youngsters who are in need of treatment and are currently unable to access care.

This year, we are working on the reauthorization of the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP). SCHIP was created to provide health care to millions of children who were previously uninsured. Over the last ten years, we have seen the positive impact of this essential program. Passage of the Vision Care for Kids Act will be a key component of ensuring that we have a comprehensive children's health care delivery system in this country. I look forward to working with Senator Bond and my colleagues to see that this legislation is not only is not only passed by this body soon, but that it is signed into law.

Mr. President, I rise today in support of the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act. In the coming hours, the Senate will vote to pass this bill like it did last year and unlock the door for researchers across the country to use embryonic stem cells to better understand diseases like Parkinson's and juvenile diabetes so that we may one day find a cure. With each day that has passed since the President vetoed this legislation, nearly 4,100 Americans were diagnosed with diabetes, 3,800 were diagnosed with cancer, and 160 were diagnosed with Parkinson's. What we are talking about here is research that may one day provide relief to the more than 100 million Americans suffering from Parkinson's, diabetes, spinal cord injury, ALS, cancer, and many other devastating conditions for which there is still no cure.

The legislation we are about to vote on would expand the number of embryonic stem cell lines available for federally funded research by allowing the use of stem cells derived through embryos from in vitro fertilization clinics that would otherwise be discarded. Strict ethical requirements apply to the use of these stem cell lines. In fact, I believe these ethical requirements are one of the most essential provisions of the bill. Since the HELP Committee first began consideration of the President's policy toward embryonic stem cell research in 2001, I have maintained that the pursuit of scientific research that may benefit millions of Americans and their families was as important as ensuring that science did not outpace ethics.

Under this legislation, the only embryonic stem cells that can be used for federally funded research are those that were derived through embryos from in vitro fertilization clinics that were created for fertility treatment purposes and were donated for research with the written, informed consent of the individuals seeking that treatment. Any financial or other inducements to make this donation are prohibited. These embryos will never be implanted in a woman and would otherwise have been discarded. The ethical requirements contained in this bill are stronger than current law. In fact, it is possible that some of the 21 stem cell lines approved for Federal funding, the so- called ``NIH-approved lines,'' may not meet the strict ethical criteria contained in this bill.

I have heard some of my colleagues who oppose this legislation argue that this legislation allows, even encourages, taxpayer-funded destruction of human embryos. That is totally false. There is a provision called the Dickey amendment which is attached to every annual Labor-HHS appropriations bill prohibiting any Federal funds from being used to destroy human embryos. This provision is not affected by the embryonic stem cell legislation before the Senate today. Federal funds can be used to study stem cell lines that were derived from human embryos that meet the ethical requirements I just laid out, but the derivation process itself cannot be paid for with Federal money.

I have also heard some of my colleagues who oppose this legislation argue that embryonic stem cell research is unnecessary given the advances in adult stem cell research. There is no question that adult stem cells such as those found in bone marrow and cord blood have led to great advances in patients suffering from leukemia, Hodgkin's disease, sickle cell anemia, among others. I was a coauthor, along with Senator Hatch and others, of a bill that is now law to advance bone marrow and cord blood stem cell collection for use in adult stem cell transplantation, and I believe it is essential that we arm researchers and physicians with every possible therapeutic weapon in their medical arsenal. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting full funding for this important law, which passed unanimously in the Senate, in the upcoming Labor-HHS-Education appropriations bill.

The fact remains that there will always be limits to the use of adult stem cells when compared with embryonic stem cells, and that is why the legislation before us is so important. Our Nation's best scientists, including many Nobel laureates, believe that embryonic stem cell research has a unique potential to ease human suffering and that is because embryonic stem cells, unlike adult stem cells, can become any cell in the body. Embryonic stem cells can become heart cells, lung cells, brain tissue, and that property--called pluripotency--is unique to their embryonic state.

The expansion of embryonic stem cell research may one day unlock the mysteries behind so many deadly and debilitating diseases that afflict millions of Americans and their families. I urge the President to reconsider his position on this legislation and not stand in the way of our Nation's scientists who simply want to find the key that will ease the burden of suffering.

Mr. President, I rise today to pay my respects to Private First Class Orlando E. Gonzalez, who last month lost his life in the service of our country.

On the morning of Sunday, March 25, Private First Class Gonzalez was handing out candy to Iraqi children in the province of Diyala when a suicide

bomber killed him and three other soldiers. Private First Class Gonzalez was only 21 years old.

Born in Bridgeport, CT, Orlando is being remembered today for his dedication to the U.S. Army, and for his warm and giving nature. ``He always had a smile on his face,'' said his high school principal, Brian Cashman. ``He was kind of a handful, but you couldn't help but like him.''

Private First Class Gonzalez rose above what his principal described as a ``rough'' background to find purpose and discipline: first at a faith-based camp for students, and then as an American soldier.

``We just loved him around here,'' said Patrick LeBlanc, director of Summit Grove Camp. The first thing that came to LeBlanc's mind on hearing of Orlando's death was his infectious playfulness. LeBlanc recalled seeing a wild rabbit on the camp grounds, and telling Orlando he was fast enough to catch it. Orlando only nodded--and a few hours later, knocked on LeBlanc's door, petting the rabbit and beaming.

But it was in the Army that Private First Class Gonzalez found, as so many have found before him, meaning and a second home. ``I think the Army is what he needed,'' said Principal Cashman. Patrick LeBlanc agreed: ``It was the second happiest place I'd seen him, other than camp here. . . . He was doing what he wanted to do.''

As a scout javelin gunner for the 82nd Airborne Division, 3rd Brigade Combat Team, 5th Squadron, 73rd Cavalry Regiment, Private First Class Gonzalez immediately distinguished himself. ``On a daily basis, Private First Class Gonzalez displayed courage, honor, and selfless service in the struggle to keep America safe and improve the nation of Iraq,'' said Captain John Carson of the 73rd Cavalry. Private First Class Gonzalez was already highly decorated at the time of his death, and we can only wonder what an outstanding career might have been waiting for him.

Instead, Private First Class Gonzalez leaves behind two grieving parents, Orlando G. Gonzalez of Bridgeport, and Carmen Diaz of New Freedom, PA. But he leaves behind, as well, an example of dedication that won't soon be dimmed.

``This hero will be sorely missed and will forever live in our memories,'' said Captain Carson.

Orlando, though, might have used other words. ``Call him a hero and he would get mad,'' Orlando's friend and pastor, the Reverend Paul Juchniewich, said in a funeral sermon. ``He would just say he was doing his duty to rescue those who are in peril. He did not die in a conventional battle, but rather a battle for the hearts and minds of the future generation.''

The struggle's outcome is still uncertain. But we will keep fresh the memory of one man who advanced it with all his strength, Private First Class Orlando E. Gonzalez, whose last act on this Earth was to give.

Mr. President, I rise today to humbly honor a Bridgeport, CT, soldier who lost his life in the service of our country: Private First Class Stephen K. Richardson.

On Tuesday, March 20, the 22-year-old Private First Class Richardson and another soldier were killed when a roadside bomb exploded near their vehicle in Baghdad. Now Stephen is being remembered for his spirit of service, for his devotion to his country, and for his love of his family.

Stephen served with the 1st Battalion, 28th Infantry, 4th Brigade, 1st Infantry Division, which has been charged with securing Baghdad. Private First Class Richardson took on that mission willingly: ``He wanted to be part of America's protection,'' said his grandmother, Ina Jackson. ``He wanted to help resolve the problems in Iraq.'' Like nearly every other soldier who has enlisted since the start of the Iraq war, Private First Class Richardson knew exactly where he was going and exactly what risks he'd be facing which makes his sacrifice all the more admirable.

Those who were close to Stephen know just what a fine young life has been cut off. Edward Geist, a professor at the University of Bridgeport, remembers teaching him. ``He was older than my other students he took the work more seriously,'' said Professor Geist. He still remembers an essay Private First Class Richardson wrote about his future plans returning to his family's home in Jamaica and starting a business to help improve living conditions. ``It was much more reflective and serious than what we normally get,'' Stephen's professor said. I think that seriousness of purpose was exactly what drove Private First Class Richardson to serve his country and a glimpse of the bright future he might have had in store.

Instead, his death leaves a father and mother to bury their son; a fatherless daughter, Iyanna; and a widowed and pregnant wife, Katana. Their memories of Stephen are bright and indelible: Stephen planting tomatoes, spinach, and string beans in the backyard garden with his grandmother; Stephen giving a pony ride to his 7-year-old cousin; Stephen watching ``Bugs Bunny'' with infant Iyanna. Today, I imagine that each of those memories comes back with a stab of grief to those who loved Stephen; but I pray that time will turn them into a wellspring of comfort.

This war leaves behind more anguish than we can easily bear. At 4 a.m. on Tuesday morning, Stephen's mother, Jacqueline Hamilton-Carby, started out of bed in Jamaica and sat down to write him a letter: ``It has been 43 days, that is 1,032 hours or 61,920 minutes, better yet 3,715,200 seconds, since I heard your voice. That is a long, l-o-n-g time but whereas I was worried before, I have placed you in the hand of God.'' On the same day, her son was killed.

But she has no doubt that he is in that hand still. ``I'm not angry with anyone,'' said Ms. Hamilton-Carby. ``I just view it as the work of God.''

May she find comfort, and all who loved Stephen, and all who are bereaved. I add my voice to their prayers, and I pledge my highest respect to an American soldier who died in our service, Private First Class Stephen K. Richardson.

Mr. President, the emergency supplemental appropriations legislation which passed the Senate today, the U.S. Troop Readiness, Veterans' Health, and Iraq Accountability Act of 2007, provides $625 million in security funding to better protect the millions of Americans who ride public transportation. I thank Senator Shelby, who as both the ranking member on the Banking Committee and a member of the Appropriations Committee has been a tireless advocate on behalf of mass transit and specifically on the issue of transit security. I commend Senators Byrd and Cochran who serve, respectively, as both chairman and ranking member of the full Appropriations Committee and the Homeland Security Subcommittee. They were instrumental in deciding to increase our investment in securing our public transportation systems. The issue of transit security requires coordination between both homeland security agencies and committees and those transportation agencies and committees. Thus, I also commend Senators Murray and Bond who serve as chair and ranking member on the Appropriations Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies Subcommittee.

Our Nation's public transit systems are inadequately prepared to minimize the threat and impact of potential terrorist attacks. Since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, the Federal Government has invested nearly $24 billion in aviation security--protecting the 1.8 million people who fly on an average day. At the same time, our National Government has invested only $386 million, before the 110th Congress began, in transit security to protect the 14 million people who ride transit on an average workday. Put another way, since 2001, our Nation has spent over $7.50 per passenger on aviation security, but less than one penny per transit rider on transit security. I am not suggesting that we ought to be investing equally, but clearly this is not the appropriate balance.

As chairman of the Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee, I have made improving our national security a top priority. The very first hearing that I held as chairman focused on increasing the security of our Nation's 14 million daily transit passengers. The very first legislation that the committee considered during my Chairmanship was the Public Transit Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007, which was passed by the Banking Committee unanimously on February 8. The legislation authorizes the distribution of $3.5 billion in security funds, over the next 3 fiscal years, on the basis of risk directly to transit agencies.

The Public Transit Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007 was included as title XV of the 9/11 bill, which the Senate passed on March 13. Senator Shelby and I worked with Senator Byrd and Senator Cochran to include language in the legislation to allow for such sums as necessary to be appropriated in this fiscal year to address the critical needs of our Nation's transit systems. The $625 million included in this appropriations act is a significant investment towards our goal of better securing our Nation's rail and transit systems. This investment builds on the $175 million that was included in the fiscal year 2007 continuing resolution. Combined, these investments are greater than all of the investments that were made between the terrorist attacks of September 11 and the beginning of this new Congress.

We must make sure that we use these funds wisely. It is my desire that the Congress quickly reconcile both the transit security legislation and the supplemental funding that has passed each Chamber so that this supplemental funding will be distributed in accordance with the new authorization. I once again thank all of the members of the Banking and Appropriations Committees who have worked so hard to advance us to where we are today.

Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the National Liberty Memorial Act along with my colleagues, Senators Charles E. Grassley and Sen. Barack Obama. Representatives Donald M. Payne, William Lacy Clay, Steve Cohen, Sheila Jackson-Lee, Henry C. ``Hank'' Johnson, Jr., Nita M. Lowey, Albio Sires, and Betty Sutton have introduced companion language in the House.

The depth and breadth of patriotic contributions by African Americans in the Revolutionary War have gone practically unacknowledged. Historians are now beginning to uncover their forgotten heroism, and estimate that 5,000 slaves and free blacks fought in the army, navy, and militia during that harrowing time. They served and struggled in major battles from Lexington and Concord to Yorktown and made significant contributions to the revolutionary effort. More than 400 hailed from my State of Connecticut.

More than twenty years ago, Congress authorized a memorial to black Revolutionary War soldiers and sailors, those who provided civilian assistance, and the many slaves who fled slavery or filed petitions to courts or legislatures for their freedom. A site was selected in Constitution Gardens, fittingly near the 56 Signers of the Declaration of Independence Memorial and the great war memorials. Unfortunately, the group originally authorized to raise funds for and build the memorial was unable to conclude its task, and the site sits empty today.

A group of committed citizens has formed the National Mall Liberty Fund DC, ``Liberty Fund D.C.'', to carry out the vision of Congress. Last year, the National Capital Memorial Advisory Commission concluded that there are no legal impediments that would preclude the Liberty Fund DC from assuming the prior group's site approvals on the Mall. The legislation that we offer today would amend the 1986 enactment to authorize the Liberty Fund to raise money for and build this valuable memorial.

The time has come to recognize the sacrifice and the impact of the African Americans who fought for the birth of our country. I urge my colleagues to support the National Liberty Memorial Act.

Mr. President, I rise today with Senators Kerry, Durbin, and Feingold to introduce the Medical Education Affordability Act, MEAA. The purpose of this bill is to make medical and dental education more affordable.

Upon graduation from college, students who can demonstrate economic hardship are eligible to extend their student loan deferment for up to 3 additional years. Using the economic hardship deferment, a formula that takes into account earnings and debt level, the majority of medical and dental residents defer repayment of their student loans until the end of their residency period. Unfortunately, for those specialties that require a residency of more than 3 years--OB/GYN, psychiatry, general surgery, and oral maxillofacial dentistry to name a few--student loan repayment begins before a resident's medical or dental education is completed. This situation creates an enormous financial burden for residents who have, in most cases, incurred significant debt. In 2006, the average indebtedness for graduating medical students was $130,000, for graduating dental students it was $145,465. While lenders are currently required to offer forbearance to medical and dental students, this is an expensive option as interest continues to accrue and may be capitalized more.often.

The Medical Education Affordability Act would solve this problem by extending the economic hardship deferment to cover the entire length of a medical or dental residency. By altering the definition we are removing a significant financial obstacle facing students with residency periods longer than 3 years. I want to stress again, residents will still have to demonstrate economic hardship--MEAA only extends the deferment for borrowers that continue to meet the debt-to- income requirements of the economic hardship deferment.

Mr. President, I hope my colleagues will join me in support of medical education by signing onto this bill. By working together, I believe that the Senate as a body can act to ensure that more individuals are able to pursue a full range of medical specialties. I ask unanimous request that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the National Liberty Memorial Act along with my colleagues, Senators Charles E. Grassley and Sen. Barack Obama. Representatives Donald M. Payne, William Lacy Clay, Steve Cohen, Sheila Jackson-Lee, Henry C. ``Hank'' Johnson, Jr., Nita M. Lowey, Albio Sires, and Betty Sutton have introduced companion language in the House.

The depth and breadth of patriotic contributions by African Americans in the Revolutionary War have gone practically unacknowledged. Historians are now beginning to uncover their forgotten heroism, and estimate that 5,000 slaves and free blacks fought in the army, navy, and militia during that harrowing time. They served and struggled in major battles from Lexington and Concord to Yorktown and made significant contributions to the revolutionary effort. More than 400 hailed from my State of Connecticut.

More than twenty years ago, Congress authorized a memorial to black Revolutionary War soldiers and sailors, those who provided civilian assistance, and the many slaves who fled slavery or filed petitions to courts or legislatures for their freedom. A site was selected in Constitution Gardens, fittingly near the 56 Signers of the Declaration of Independence Memorial and the great war memorials. Unfortunately, the group originally authorized to raise funds for and build the memorial was unable to conclude its task, and the site sits empty today.

A group of committed citizens has formed the National Mall Liberty Fund DC, ``Liberty Fund D.C.'', to carry out the vision of Congress. Last year, the National Capital Memorial Advisory Commission concluded that there are no legal impediments that would preclude the Liberty Fund DC from assuming the prior group's site approvals on the Mall. The legislation that we offer today would amend the 1986 enactment to authorize the Liberty Fund to raise money for and build this valuable memorial.

The time has come to recognize the sacrifice and the impact of the African Americans who fought for the birth of our country. I urge my colleagues to support the National Liberty Memorial Act.