Floor Statements

Mr. President, I rise today to speak of the life, leadership and the truly remarkable legacy of the 40th President of the United States, Ronald Reagan.

President Reagan was a great communicator with a powerful message. He preached the gospel of hope, freedom and opportunity not just for America but for the world. Reagan was a genuinely optimistic person who brought that spirit of optimism and hope to the American people and to enslaved peoples around the world. He was a man who took disappointment and moved on. He was a man of unfailing good humor, care and thoughtfulness. Even people who disagreed with his policies across the board could not help but like him.

In the U.S., his policies encouraged the return of more tax dollars to average Americans and unfettered entrepreneurship to create jobs and build the economy. Reagan's strong military opposition to the Soviet Union helped bring down the walls that harbored communism and tyranny throughout Eastern Europe and much of the world.

In a letter to the American people in 1994 Ronald Reagan announced he was one of the millions of Americans with Alzheimer's disease. One of the most courageous things Ronald and Nancy Reagan did was to announce publicly that he had Alzheimer's disease. Through their courage and commitment, the former President and his wife, Nancy, changed the face of Alzheimer's disease by increasing public awareness of the disease and of the need for research into its causes and prevention.

In honor of Ronald Reagan, today my colleague Senator Mikulski and I are introducing the Ronald Reagan Alzheimer's Breakthrough Act. This bill will increase research for Alzheimer's and increase assistance to Alzheimer patients and their families. This bill will serve as a living tribute to President Reagan and will: 1. Double funding for Alzheimer's Research at the National Institute of Health; 2. increase funding for the National Family Caregiver Support Program from $153 million to $250 million; 3. reauthorize the Alzheimer's Demonstration Grant Program that provides grants to states to fill in gaps in Alzheimer's services such as respite care, home health care, and day care; 4. authorize $1 million for the Safe Return Program to assist in the identification and safe, timely return of individuals with Alzheimer's disease and related dementias who wander off from their caregivers; 5. establish a public education campaign to educate members of the public about prevention techniques that can ``maintain their brain'' as they age, based on the current research being undertaken by NIH; 6. establish a $3,000 tax credit for caregivers to help with the high health costs of caring for a loved one at home; and 7. encourage families to prepare for their long term needs by providing an above-the-line tax deduction for the purchase of long term care insurance.

Ironically it was President Reagan who drew national attention to Alzheimer's for the very first time when he launched a national campaign against Alzheimer's disease some 22 years ago.

In 1983 President Reagan proclaimed November as National Alzheimer's Disease Month. In his proclamation President Reagan said ``the emotional, financial and social consequences of Alzheimer's disease are so devastating that it deserves special attention. Science and clinical medicine are striving to improve our understanding of what causes Alzheimer's disease and how to treat it successfully. Right now, research is the only hope for victims and families.''

Today, approximately 4.5 million Americans have Alzheimer's, with annual costs for this disease estimated to exceed $100 billion. Today there are more than 4.5 million people in the United States with Alzheimer's, and that number is expected to grow by 70 percent by 2030 as baby boomers age.

In my home State of Missouri, alone, there are over 110,000 people with Alzheimer's disease. Based on population growth, unless science finds a way to prevent or delay the onset of this disease, that number will increase to over 130,000 by 2025--that is an 18 percent increase.

In large part due to President Reagan, there has been enormous progress in Alzheimer research--95 percent of what we know we discovered during the past 15 years. There is real potential for major breakthroughs in the next 10 years. Baby boomers could be the first generation to face a future without Alzheimer's disease if we act now to achieve breakthroughs in science.

President and Mrs. Reagan have been leading advocates in the fight against Alzheimer's for more than 20 years, and millions of Americans have been helped by their dedication, compassion and effort to support caregivers, raise public awareness about Alzheimer's disease and increase of nation's commitment to Alzheimer's research.

This bill will serve as a living tribute to President Reagan and will offer hope to all those suffering from the disease today. As we celebrate the life and legacy of Ronald Reagan, we are inspired by his legendary optimism and hope, and today we move forward to confront this expanding public health crisis with renewed vigor, passion, and compassion.

Mr. President, I rise today to speak of the life, leadership and the truly remarkable legacy of the 40th President of the United States, Ronald Reagan.

President Reagan was a great communicator with a powerful message. He preached the gospel of hope, freedom and opportunity not just for America but for the world. Reagan was a genuinely optimistic person who brought that spirit of optimism and hope to the American people and to enslaved peoples around the world. He was a man who took disappointment and moved on. He was a man of unfailing good humor, care and thoughtfulness. Even people who disagreed with his policies across the board could not help but like him.

In the U.S., his policies encouraged the return of more tax dollars to average Americans and unfettered entrepreneurship to create jobs and build the economy. Reagan's strong military opposition to the Soviet Union helped bring down the walls that harbored communism and tyranny throughout Eastern Europe and much of the world.

In a letter to the American people in 1994 Ronald Reagan announced he was one of the millions of Americans with Alzheimer's disease. One of the most courageous things Ronald and Nancy Reagan did was to announce publicly that he had Alzheimer's disease. Through their courage and commitment, the former President and his wife, Nancy, changed the face of Alzheimer's disease by increasing public awareness of the disease and of the need for research into its causes and prevention.

In honor of Ronald Reagan, today my colleague Senator Mikulski and I are introducing the Ronald Reagan Alzheimer's Breakthrough Act. This bill will increase research for Alzheimer's and increase assistance to Alzheimer patients and their families. This bill will serve as a living tribute to President Reagan and will: 1. Double funding for Alzheimer's Research at the National Institute of Health; 2. increase funding for the National Family Caregiver Support Program from $153 million to $250 million; 3. reauthorize the Alzheimer's Demonstration Grant Program that provides grants to states to fill in gaps in Alzheimer's services such as respite care, home health care, and day care; 4. authorize $1 million for the Safe Return Program to assist in the identification and safe, timely return of individuals with Alzheimer's disease and related dementias who wander off from their caregivers; 5. establish a public education campaign to educate members of the public about prevention techniques that can ``maintain their brain'' as they age, based on the current research being undertaken by NIH; 6. establish a $3,000 tax credit for caregivers to help with the high health costs of caring for a loved one at home; and 7. encourage families to prepare for their long term needs by providing an above-the-line tax deduction for the purchase of long term care insurance.

Ironically it was President Reagan who drew national attention to Alzheimer's for the very first time when he launched a national campaign against Alzheimer's disease some 22 years ago.

In 1983 President Reagan proclaimed November as National Alzheimer's Disease Month. In his proclamation President Reagan said ``the emotional, financial and social consequences of Alzheimer's disease are so devastating that it deserves special attention. Science and clinical medicine are striving to improve our understanding of what causes Alzheimer's disease and how to treat it successfully. Right now, research is the only hope for victims and families.''

Today, approximately 4.5 million Americans have Alzheimer's, with annual costs for this disease estimated to exceed $100 billion. Today there are more than 4.5 million people in the United States with Alzheimer's, and that number is expected to grow by 70 percent by 2030 as baby boomers age.

In my home State of Missouri, alone, there are over 110,000 people with Alzheimer's disease. Based on population growth, unless science finds a way to prevent or delay the onset of this disease, that number will increase to over 130,000 by 2025--that is an 18 percent increase.

In large part due to President Reagan, there has been enormous progress in Alzheimer research--95 percent of what we know we discovered during the past 15 years. There is real potential for major breakthroughs in the next 10 years. Baby boomers could be the first generation to face a future without Alzheimer's disease if we act now to achieve breakthroughs in science.

President and Mrs. Reagan have been leading advocates in the fight against Alzheimer's for more than 20 years, and millions of Americans have been helped by their dedication, compassion and effort to support caregivers, raise public awareness about Alzheimer's disease and increase of nation's commitment to Alzheimer's research.

This bill will serve as a living tribute to President Reagan and will offer hope to all those suffering from the disease today. As we celebrate the life and legacy of Ronald Reagan, we are inspired by his legendary optimism and hope, and today we move forward to confront this expanding public health crisis with renewed vigor, passion, and compassion.

Mr. President, I thank the distinguished chairman of the Agriculture Committee for allowing me this time.

I rise today as cochairman of the beef caucus to speak against Senate Joint Resolution 4, which seeks to condemn the U.S. Department of Agriculture plan to reopen the Canadian border to live cattle.

I concur with the sentiments already expressed by the chairman of the Agriculture Committee and the distinguished agriculturalist from Kansas, Senator Roberts. I also learned a great deal from the professional testimony of our Senator, Dr. Allard, from Colorado, about the safety and about the science that goes into the decision made by the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

I note also that this past week, a group of our scientists who visited Canada said their system of protecting the food supply and the beef was robust and certainly could be counted on. As a member of the agriculture posse, I have heard Secretary Johanns, the Secretary of Agriculture, describe the steps they were taking to ensure our beef supply is protected.

We just heard a defense of protectionism. Let me define what protectionism is. Protectionism is, in my view, the use of scare tactics, the use of unsound scientific information, in an attempt to protect our markets. In this case, I believe sound science dictates it is time to open the border. Were it not so, I would not be rising today in support of the Department of Agriculture.

The fact remains, as Senator Allard has pointed out, not only is this not based on sound science, the impact of the beef ban has been to create a feeding and slaughter operation in Canada, which is moving the production facilities and jobs out of the United States and into Canada, potentially putting a very harmful impact on our ability to raise, slaughter, and produce the beef we eat in the United States. Yes, beef is what was for dinner last night. Tonight it will be my dinner, and it will continue to be.

Every Member of this body and our constituents back home expect the U.S. Government to work to ensure we have the safest food supply possible. That is why we hire scientists. That is why we hire veterinarians. That is why we devote efforts to make sure it is safe. Unfortunately, all too often, the United States takes the abundance and safety of our food supply for granted. When we are faced with challenges to these expectations, like reports of BSE or mad cow disease in our cattle or our immediate neighbor's, the floodgates of demagoguery from so-called consumer advocates are opened, every mother is frightened into believing she may be jeopardizing her family at the next meal she serves, and markets react.

Statistics and science say the likelihood of you, me, or our children at home eating a BSE-tainted burger or steak not cooked hot enough to kill the pathogen is, on an order of magnitude, less of a threat than many of the other risks we accept in our everyday lives, such as driving our children to school and back.

The alarmism and subsequent waves of fear of BSE threats are seen as opportunities by many of our trading partners who seek to find any excuse to erect trade barriers to our products. These foreign buyers ignore the science, statistics, and history. The U.S. position in the world market is based on the very sound principle that good science should and must prevail. Whether our trade representatives are negotiating exports of genetically enhanced rice or soybeans, meat produced using the most advanced commercial technologies, or as we negotiate reopening of the Japanese beef markets to our own production, sound science is the best negotiating tool we have against the Luddites and naysayers in our potential foreign markets.

We cannot fall prey to the wonderful exuberance of populism in protecting our markets with false or pseudoscience-based claims while expecting the world to accept the products of U.S. farmers who feed the world largely due to our use of the latest technologies.

The Agriculture Department's amended final rule on resumption of beef and live cattle trade with Canada was developed based on the best science at hand and with broad input from the cattle industry. The amended rule restricts imports of beef animals older than 30 months. Also, Canada, as I said earlier, has implemented appropriate BSE prevention standards similar to our stringent domestic firewalls. As I said earlier, this has been confirmed by our scientists who have visited and inspected the operations in Canada. This includes the banning of all ruminant to ruminant feed and effective enforcement. This alone will drastically reduce further contamination in the Canadian beef herds. Sound science should prevail here and in all of our trade negotiations.

I would be remiss if I did not take the opportunity to encourage the USDA, our trade representatives in Japan, to apply sound science and to continue the move to reopening markets in Japan to our beef exports. Recently, I joined with several of my colleagues who also spoke today sending a letter to the Ambassador to Japan saying we would not stand for pseudoscience-based protectionism preventing the export of U.S. beef to Japan.

This past week, I had the opportunity to meet with representatives of the Japanese Diet, the legislative body of Japan. I told them of our interest in providing beef to the consumers of Japan. They assured me that American beef is a very high priority for those Japanese consumers. We said, OK, they want it, we have shown it is going to be safe, it is time to open your markets and provide a significant export opportunity which will serve and reward the U.S. cattle producers.

I hope we will reject this resolution and allow sound science to rule.

(The remarks of Mr. Bond pertaining to the introduction of S. 503 are located in today's Record under ``Statements on Introduced Bills and Joint Resolutions.'')

Mr. President, I introduced S. 503, the Education Begins At Home Act. It is at the desk. It is cosponsored by Senators Talent and DeWine. I invite my colleagues to look at it and join with me in this significant measure to improve early childhood education and development of our children.

Parents as Teachers has worked in Missouri. It is a program which involves training and assistance for parents of children from birth to 3 years of

age. We have had significant improvements in educational achievements. We have identified problems in children. We have solved problems and saved money by avoiding the necessary, expensive, and very difficult remedial efforts. It involves home visits. It involves bringing children of like age groups together. It works at home. It works for the poorest families. It works for very busy two-working-parent families. It works on our military installations.

This measure expands from currently 3,300 children whose parents are in the program nationally to potentially 2.7 million families with young children throughout the United States. The program is presently in all States, in the Union. This expands on it and makes sure we use our early education dollars to the maximum benefit. Get parents involved. Home visits work.

Research has clearly shown that the early years are critical in a child's development and lay the foundation for success in school and in life. The home is the first and most important learning environment for children, and parents are their child's first and most influential teacher.

Through parent education and family support, we can promote parents' ability to enhance their children's cognitive, language, social- emotional and physical development--thereby helping parents to prepare their children for success in school.

It only makes sense to equip parents with the skills they need to help maximize their child's health and development and this is exactly what the Parents at Teachers Program does.

The curriculum is designed to build the foundation of later learning, provide early detection of developmental delays as well as health, vision and hearing problems, prevent child abuse and neglect and increase children's school readiness and school success.

To achieve these goals, Parents as Teachers provides personalized home visits by trained parent educators, group meetings with other new parents and formal screening of vision and hearing.

Twenty-one years ago I pushed the Early Childhood Education Act through the Missouri legislature. During my second term as Governor I signed that ground breaking bill into law which mandated PAT in every school district in the state of Missouri. For me that was the culmination of 5 long years of work.

One might say I was on a mission. And I was. Because in 1981, I found myself in a similar situation to that of the Missouri's current Governor. I was about to be a new father myself.

PAT certainly made a positive difference in my family. PAT helped us through sleepless nights, teething, and learning the ABC's. My son, Sam, was probably one of the first babies to benefit from the Parents as Teachers materials in Missouri. And countless others have benefited since.

What began as an experiment in Missouri has expanded to more than 3,000 sites in all 50 states, and seven foreign countries. Communities all over the world are investing in PAT because the results are positive and the cost is low.

Anecdotally, I can tell you that parents in PAT know that it is a tremendous benefit to them and their children.

The scientifically sound research shows that: At age 3, PAT children are more advanced in language, social development, problem solving and other cognitive abilities, PAT children score higher on kindergarten readiness tests, Children who participate in PAT score higher on standardized measures of reading, math and language in first through fourth grades, parents who participate in PAT are more confident about their parenting and are more involved in their children's schooling--a key component of a child's success in school.

Recognizing that all parents need and deserve support in laying a strong foundation for their child's success I will be introducing the Education Begins at Home Act.

To date over 2 million families nationwide have received the education and support they need through PAT. While this is a tremendous accomplishment, there are more families that can be reached by this exceptional program.

The Education Begins at Home Act makes a bold federal investment in parents by establishing the first, dedicated federal funding stream to support the expansion of Parents as Teachers--or other home visitation programs--at the state and local level.

The $500 million in federal funds over 3 years included in this bill will expand services to over 2.7 million families nationwide.

Ten times more families will be served by PAT under this legislation.

This bill will: provide $400 million over 3 years to states to expand access to PAT, encourage and foster more collaboration between PAT and Early Head Start Grantees, provide $50 million over 3 years to fund innovative ideas and partnerships at the local level to expand access to PAT in communities with limited English proficiency; and provide $50 million over 3 years to reach more military families by expanding access to PAT in schools and community organizations that serve military families.

All babies are born to learn and a parent is a child's first and most important teacher. Parents as Teachers better prepares children for success in school and life and helps parents become more active participants in their child's education.

The expansion of Parents as Teachers is a sound investment in the future of our children and families.

Mr. President, I introduced S. 503, the Education Begins At Home Act. It is at the desk. It is cosponsored by Senators Talent and DeWine. I invite my colleagues to look at it and join with me in this significant measure to improve early childhood education and development of our children.

Parents as Teachers has worked in Missouri. It is a program which involves training and assistance for parents of children from birth to 3 years of

age. We have had significant improvements in educational achievements. We have identified problems in children. We have solved problems and saved money by avoiding the necessary, expensive, and very difficult remedial efforts. It involves home visits. It involves bringing children of like age groups together. It works at home. It works for the poorest families. It works for very busy two-working-parent families. It works on our military installations.

This measure expands from currently 3,300 children whose parents are in the program nationally to potentially 2.7 million families with young children throughout the United States. The program is presently in all States, in the Union. This expands on it and makes sure we use our early education dollars to the maximum benefit. Get parents involved. Home visits work.

Research has clearly shown that the early years are critical in a child's development and lay the foundation for success in school and in life. The home is the first and most important learning environment for children, and parents are their child's first and most influential teacher.

Through parent education and family support, we can promote parents' ability to enhance their children's cognitive, language, social- emotional and physical development--thereby helping parents to prepare their children for success in school.

It only makes sense to equip parents with the skills they need to help maximize their child's health and development and this is exactly what the Parents at Teachers Program does.

The curriculum is designed to build the foundation of later learning, provide early detection of developmental delays as well as health, vision and hearing problems, prevent child abuse and neglect and increase children's school readiness and school success.

To achieve these goals, Parents as Teachers provides personalized home visits by trained parent educators, group meetings with other new parents and formal screening of vision and hearing.

Twenty-one years ago I pushed the Early Childhood Education Act through the Missouri legislature. During my second term as Governor I signed that ground breaking bill into law which mandated PAT in every school district in the state of Missouri. For me that was the culmination of 5 long years of work.

One might say I was on a mission. And I was. Because in 1981, I found myself in a similar situation to that of the Missouri's current Governor. I was about to be a new father myself.

PAT certainly made a positive difference in my family. PAT helped us through sleepless nights, teething, and learning the ABC's. My son, Sam, was probably one of the first babies to benefit from the Parents as Teachers materials in Missouri. And countless others have benefited since.

What began as an experiment in Missouri has expanded to more than 3,000 sites in all 50 states, and seven foreign countries. Communities all over the world are investing in PAT because the results are positive and the cost is low.

Anecdotally, I can tell you that parents in PAT know that it is a tremendous benefit to them and their children.

The scientifically sound research shows that: At age 3, PAT children are more advanced in language, social development, problem solving and other cognitive abilities, PAT children score higher on kindergarten readiness tests, Children who participate in PAT score higher on standardized measures of reading, math and language in first through fourth grades, parents who participate in PAT are more confident about their parenting and are more involved in their children's schooling--a key component of a child's success in school.

Recognizing that all parents need and deserve support in laying a strong foundation for their child's success I will be introducing the Education Begins at Home Act.

To date over 2 million families nationwide have received the education and support they need through PAT. While this is a tremendous accomplishment, there are more families that can be reached by this exceptional program.

The Education Begins at Home Act makes a bold federal investment in parents by establishing the first, dedicated federal funding stream to support the expansion of Parents as Teachers--or other home visitation programs--at the state and local level.

The $500 million in federal funds over 3 years included in this bill will expand services to over 2.7 million families nationwide.

Ten times more families will be served by PAT under this legislation.

This bill will: provide $400 million over 3 years to states to expand access to PAT, encourage and foster more collaboration between PAT and Early Head Start Grantees, provide $50 million over 3 years to fund innovative ideas and partnerships at the local level to expand access to PAT in communities with limited English proficiency; and provide $50 million over 3 years to reach more military families by expanding access to PAT in schools and community organizations that serve military families.

All babies are born to learn and a parent is a child's first and most important teacher. Parents as Teachers better prepares children for success in school and life and helps parents become more active participants in their child's education.

The expansion of Parents as Teachers is a sound investment in the future of our children and families.

I move to reconsider the vote.

Mr. President, today I would like to commend Mr. Harry T. Corbett, Postmaster of the Wentzville Post Office, for his 38- year tenure with the United States Postal Service. Mr. Corbett will retire from the U.S. Postal Service on March 3, 2005. Mr. Corbett began his career with the Postal Service in March of 1967 as a substitute city carrier for the Saint Ann, Missouri Post Office. In 1980, he was named Postmaster of the Wentzville Post Office.

In the 38 years between being a substitute city carrier and Postmaster, Mr. Corbett held several positions within the postal system. In 1968, he

became a full-time city carrier and was later promoted to the position of Window Distribution Clerk in Saint Ann, Missouri. Three years later, he was reassigned to the Florissant post office as a substitute carrier, then to full-time carrier and then to Distribution Clerk Letter Sorting Machines. In 1974, Mr. Corbett was reassigned to the Saint Louis Mail Processing Plant as a Mail Sorting Machine Clerk. Mr. Corbett obtained his first position of leadership when he was promoted to Foreman Mails EAS Level 15 in December of 1974. Three years later, he was promoted to Supervisor Mails Multi-Position LSM EAS 16. The following year he was promoted to General Foreman Mails EAS 17. Mr. Corbett became Postmaster EAS 18 of the Wentzville, Missouri, Post Office on June 14, 1980. In March 1988, he reached EAS 20 level.

Mr. Corbett is involved in several area organizations and charitable causes, such as the National Association of Postmasters of the United States, the Wentzville Rotary Club, and the Wentzville Chamber of Commerce. He is a member of St. Patrick Church and sits of the Developmental Disability Resource Board of St. Charles County. In addition, he is actively involved in the Crossroads Regional Medical Center Charitable Foundation.

Mr. Corbett has been married to Nancy K. Scott Corbett for 32 years and he has two sons, Bret and Jeff Corbett. Bret is married to Courtney Carrothers Corbett. Mr. Corbett has been blessed with four grandchildren: Mackenzie, Abigail, Emma, and Kaiya. Following his retirement from the United States Postal Service, Mr. Corbett looks forward to golfing, fishing, camping, and traveling. He also plans to spend quality time with his family.

Mr. President, I rise today to join with my colleague Senator McConnell in introducing the

Voter Protection Act of 2005. This legislation builds upon the progress made by the Help America Vote Act toward our goal of making it easier to vote and harder to cheat, while addressing some additional issues that came to light during the previous election.

This legislation will clarify the intent of our previous bill and try to alleviate some of the administrative burdens and misguided policies placed on dedicated, hard-working election workers by previous congressional intrusions into the State functioning of running elections.

Make no mistake about it, record numbers of Americans went to the polls in 2004. The overwhelming number of Americans were greeted by informed, dedicated, and properly trained election workers and were able to cast their ballot in a timely manner and in a secure environment. In Missouri, my home State, the elections were extremely well run. Large numbers of voters were accommodated at the polls in a timely fashion, and very few questions have been raised about administration or integrity.

I believe our recent enactment of HAVA, the Help American Vote Act, helped make it easier for States and localities to administer their elections.

I might add that once again Missouri voters voted on punch cards. Contrary to the bogeyman of hanging chads and other problems we heard about in the past, punch cards have served the voters of Missouri well, proving that trained poll workers, coupled with informed voters, can participate in clean and fair elections using punchcard voting machines.

I live in Audrain County, MO, which is a rural county with a wide diversity. It is very average and representative, although I think it is an outstanding county. I asked the county clerk: How many problems have you had with these punchcard voters? We have the whole range of voters, a very wide diversity. She told me in her memory and the memory of those in the county clerk's office, they had never had a single problem with hanging chads or punchcard machines.

Some people are saying the Help America Vote Act required getting rid of punchcard machines. It did not do that. Let's be clear, that is not required by the Help America Vote Act.

The smoothness leading up to the elections in Missouri was not the case everywhere. I continue to have concerns about the registration process and voter registration lists. Election officials are still laboring under an unnecessarily burdensome system heaped upon them by the motor voter bill. Motor voter required States to accept anonymous mail registration cards without supporting documents and voter registration cards from election drives. Motor voter prohibited authentication of registrations, making it extremely difficult for names to be removed from voter rolls, such as Mickey Mouse, the deceased, or those who had left the State years before. That is why to many of us, motor voter had become auto-fraudo, and we took steps in the Help America Vote Act to change that.

The evidence is still overwhelming that this poor policy continues to result in tremendous administrative burdens on our election officials, with registration lists being bloated and inaccurate but limited recourse for election officials to address the situation. All this makes it more difficult to run clean, fair, and accurate elections.

The Help America Vote Act required minimum identification for first- time voters who take advantage of the mail-in voter registration procedures. While the law is clear, some States chose to find ways around this reasonable requirement. This bill makes it clear that voters who do not register before a government official in person will have to provide the ID requirement. We heard reports of partisan election workers who brought in bundles of voter registration cards, and when they told the governmental election officials they had seen the voter ID, those cards were accepted. Anybody who would accept that ought to be buying the 14th Street bridge. To say somebody who is not a government official and is partisan is going to fulfill the governmental requirements is a stretch too far.

Furthermore, in some Federal elections, I think it is past time to go to a full ID provision. So this legislation requires voters in Federal elections to present identification at the polls while creating a program to ensure that all voters have access to an ID if they cannot afford one.

We now ask our citizens to provide a photo ID for so many tasks of everyday life. To provide it once more for election officials on election day seems a small request in order to help ensure our elections are fair and accurate.

If a person does not have a photo ID and cannot afford to procure one, our bill provides the requirement and the resources to ensure that one is provided.

Let's make sure every legal vote gets counted, and only the legal votes and only one vote per person, only one vote per human. No dogs, please.

The practice of dropping off registration cards in bulk at the registration deadline continues. It is proving to be a huge burden on election officials. The practice of submitting cards for fictitious people, deceased, and ineligible voters is alive and well, so to speak.

Also, a troubling practice by some voter registration groups has come to light--registrations not being delivered to the election authorities. Whether intentional, through oversight or neglect, this is simply unacceptable. Would-be voters place their faith in those conducting registration drives, and the States accept the registration drives will be conducted on the level. Sloppy practices can only result in people being denied the right to vote. So there must be oversight.

This legislation will bring some accountability to voter registration drives while relieving some of the burdens on election authorities by mass dumping of registrations.

I call on our law enforcement officials, the Department of Justice, and our U.S. attorneys to review the process and look at those areas where fraud has been suggested to find out if it is prosecutable, if Federal criminal procedure is required and warranted. I can tell you that we will pass all the laws in the world, but until we see some voter fraud proponents going to jail, spending time in the cells, we are not going to have the effect this bill and our previous bill anticipated.

We need to clean up the registration process by permitting States to use Social Security numbers. I think this bill brings some sense to voter rules by clarifying the provision in motor voter for name removal. The bill also includes a provision for dealing in a reasonable manner with registration cards that are incomplete.

We found in the past, if you did not specifically indicate you were a U.S. citizen, the courts refused to prosecute those knowing they were not eligible to vote because they were not citizens; they could not be prosecuted. Now there is a specific requirement that you indicate you are a U.S. citizen, eligible to vote. If you do not do that, the card should not be accepted, and if you falsely certify you are a U.S. citizen, you ought to be prosecuted.

As we expressed throughout the debates on Help America Vote Act, minimum standard requirements for elections are to be implemented by the State. On provisional voting, the language is explicit. Questions on the implementation of provisional balloting are for State legislators and election officials to decide. But as is too often the case in this country, what cannot be achieved through legislation will be pursued in the courtroom. Some 65 lawsuits were pursued to overturn decisions to preserve the precinct system used at the State level. This was a conscious effort to screw up the elections. Fortunately, the courts got it right. They overruled them 65 times. But there will be more litigation. Therefore, this legislation clarifies further the clear language of HAVA that the decision on the precinct system and decision on the proper polling place for voters is a State question.

The goal of the lawsuits, as I said, seemed to introduce complete chaos which would have ensued were voters allowed simply to vote anywhere they wanted. Additionally, those voters would not have been able to vote in local elections and balloting initiatives. The purpose of the suits did not make sense, but they were filed anyhow. The arguments for throwing out State law made less sense. It is simply the height of illogic to argue on one hand that States should permissively allow voters to cast ballots from anywhere in the State they chose, only to

complain later that the number of election machines at a polling place was inadequate.

Many people lodging this complaint also complained it rained on election day. Sorry, we cannot change that by law. So their concerns must be evaluated accordingly. Among other things, the precinct system allows election officials to plan for election day, assign voters to voting places in manageable numbers, and dispatch the proper level of resources.

Once again, after election day, the newspapers were filled with stories pointing out irregularities on election day. The election day problems have grown out of bloated and inaccurate voting lists and sloppy registration procedures. The stories clearly establish that sloppy laws, poor lists, and chaos at the polls invite efforts to cheat on election day. That is unacceptable to voters and to candidates and people who depend upon a free, fair system of democracy. If a voter has his or her vote canceled by a vote that should never have been cast, whether cast by fraud or ineligible voter, he or she has lost the civil right to be heard and to have the vote counted. It is a disenfranchisement of the voter. It also is a grave offense to the candidates who spend countless amounts of their time and their supporters' resources on elections.

Our goal should be elections that are free of suspicion, doubt, and cynicism about the results. There are steps that remain to be taken to ensure that elections are conducted in a sound and secure manner so that the integrity of the ballot box remains beyond doubt. These simple steps will begin to clean up the mess created in the registration process, while taking away the remains of enticements to game the system.

I look forward to the debate on the floor about these reasonable measures. I commend our deputy majority leader for his work on this effort, and look forward to discussing this and pursuing it with our colleagues.

Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I rise today to join with my colleague Senator McConnell in introducing the

Voter Protection Act of 2005. This legislation builds upon the progress made by the Help America Vote Act toward our goal of making it easier to vote and harder to cheat, while addressing some additional issues that came to light during the previous election.

This legislation will clarify the intent of our previous bill and try to alleviate some of the administrative burdens and misguided policies placed on dedicated, hard-working election workers by previous congressional intrusions into the State functioning of running elections.

Make no mistake about it, record numbers of Americans went to the polls in 2004. The overwhelming number of Americans were greeted by informed, dedicated, and properly trained election workers and were able to cast their ballot in a timely manner and in a secure environment. In Missouri, my home State, the elections were extremely well run. Large numbers of voters were accommodated at the polls in a timely fashion, and very few questions have been raised about administration or integrity.

I believe our recent enactment of HAVA, the Help American Vote Act, helped make it easier for States and localities to administer their elections.

I might add that once again Missouri voters voted on punch cards. Contrary to the bogeyman of hanging chads and other problems we heard about in the past, punch cards have served the voters of Missouri well, proving that trained poll workers, coupled with informed voters, can participate in clean and fair elections using punchcard voting machines.

I live in Audrain County, MO, which is a rural county with a wide diversity. It is very average and representative, although I think it is an outstanding county. I asked the county clerk: How many problems have you had with these punchcard voters? We have the whole range of voters, a very wide diversity. She told me in her memory and the memory of those in the county clerk's office, they had never had a single problem with hanging chads or punchcard machines.

Some people are saying the Help America Vote Act required getting rid of punchcard machines. It did not do that. Let's be clear, that is not required by the Help America Vote Act.

The smoothness leading up to the elections in Missouri was not the case everywhere. I continue to have concerns about the registration process and voter registration lists. Election officials are still laboring under an unnecessarily burdensome system heaped upon them by the motor voter bill. Motor voter required States to accept anonymous mail registration cards without supporting documents and voter registration cards from election drives. Motor voter prohibited authentication of registrations, making it extremely difficult for names to be removed from voter rolls, such as Mickey Mouse, the deceased, or those who had left the State years before. That is why to many of us, motor voter had become auto-fraudo, and we took steps in the Help America Vote Act to change that.

The evidence is still overwhelming that this poor policy continues to result in tremendous administrative burdens on our election officials, with registration lists being bloated and inaccurate but limited recourse for election officials to address the situation. All this makes it more difficult to run clean, fair, and accurate elections.

The Help America Vote Act required minimum identification for first- time voters who take advantage of the mail-in voter registration procedures. While the law is clear, some States chose to find ways around this reasonable requirement. This bill makes it clear that voters who do not register before a government official in person will have to provide the ID requirement. We heard reports of partisan election workers who brought in bundles of voter registration cards, and when they told the governmental election officials they had seen the voter ID, those cards were accepted. Anybody who would accept that ought to be buying the 14th Street bridge. To say somebody who is not a government official and is partisan is going to fulfill the governmental requirements is a stretch too far.

Furthermore, in some Federal elections, I think it is past time to go to a full ID provision. So this legislation requires voters in Federal elections to present identification at the polls while creating a program to ensure that all voters have access to an ID if they cannot afford one.

We now ask our citizens to provide a photo ID for so many tasks of everyday life. To provide it once more for election officials on election day seems a small request in order to help ensure our elections are fair and accurate.

If a person does not have a photo ID and cannot afford to procure one, our bill provides the requirement and the resources to ensure that one is provided.

Let's make sure every legal vote gets counted, and only the legal votes and only one vote per person, only one vote per human. No dogs, please.

The practice of dropping off registration cards in bulk at the registration deadline continues. It is proving to be a huge burden on election officials. The practice of submitting cards for fictitious people, deceased, and ineligible voters is alive and well, so to speak.

Also, a troubling practice by some voter registration groups has come to light--registrations not being delivered to the election authorities. Whether intentional, through oversight or neglect, this is simply unacceptable. Would-be voters place their faith in those conducting registration drives, and the States accept the registration drives will be conducted on the level. Sloppy practices can only result in people being denied the right to vote. So there must be oversight.

This legislation will bring some accountability to voter registration drives while relieving some of the burdens on election authorities by mass dumping of registrations.

I call on our law enforcement officials, the Department of Justice, and our U.S. attorneys to review the process and look at those areas where fraud has been suggested to find out if it is prosecutable, if Federal criminal procedure is required and warranted. I can tell you that we will pass all the laws in the world, but until we see some voter fraud proponents going to jail, spending time in the cells, we are not going to have the effect this bill and our previous bill anticipated.

We need to clean up the registration process by permitting States to use Social Security numbers. I think this bill brings some sense to voter rules by clarifying the provision in motor voter for name removal. The bill also includes a provision for dealing in a reasonable manner with registration cards that are incomplete.

We found in the past, if you did not specifically indicate you were a U.S. citizen, the courts refused to prosecute those knowing they were not eligible to vote because they were not citizens; they could not be prosecuted. Now there is a specific requirement that you indicate you are a U.S. citizen, eligible to vote. If you do not do that, the card should not be accepted, and if you falsely certify you are a U.S. citizen, you ought to be prosecuted.

As we expressed throughout the debates on Help America Vote Act, minimum standard requirements for elections are to be implemented by the State. On provisional voting, the language is explicit. Questions on the implementation of provisional balloting are for State legislators and election officials to decide. But as is too often the case in this country, what cannot be achieved through legislation will be pursued in the courtroom. Some 65 lawsuits were pursued to overturn decisions to preserve the precinct system used at the State level. This was a conscious effort to screw up the elections. Fortunately, the courts got it right. They overruled them 65 times. But there will be more litigation. Therefore, this legislation clarifies further the clear language of HAVA that the decision on the precinct system and decision on the proper polling place for voters is a State question.

The goal of the lawsuits, as I said, seemed to introduce complete chaos which would have ensued were voters allowed simply to vote anywhere they wanted. Additionally, those voters would not have been able to vote in local elections and balloting initiatives. The purpose of the suits did not make sense, but they were filed anyhow. The arguments for throwing out State law made less sense. It is simply the height of illogic to argue on one hand that States should permissively allow voters to cast ballots from anywhere in the State they chose, only to

complain later that the number of election machines at a polling place was inadequate.

Many people lodging this complaint also complained it rained on election day. Sorry, we cannot change that by law. So their concerns must be evaluated accordingly. Among other things, the precinct system allows election officials to plan for election day, assign voters to voting places in manageable numbers, and dispatch the proper level of resources.

Once again, after election day, the newspapers were filled with stories pointing out irregularities on election day. The election day problems have grown out of bloated and inaccurate voting lists and sloppy registration procedures. The stories clearly establish that sloppy laws, poor lists, and chaos at the polls invite efforts to cheat on election day. That is unacceptable to voters and to candidates and people who depend upon a free, fair system of democracy. If a voter has his or her vote canceled by a vote that should never have been cast, whether cast by fraud or ineligible voter, he or she has lost the civil right to be heard and to have the vote counted. It is a disenfranchisement of the voter. It also is a grave offense to the candidates who spend countless amounts of their time and their supporters' resources on elections.

Our goal should be elections that are free of suspicion, doubt, and cynicism about the results. There are steps that remain to be taken to ensure that elections are conducted in a sound and secure manner so that the integrity of the ballot box remains beyond doubt. These simple steps will begin to clean up the mess created in the registration process, while taking away the remains of enticements to game the system.

I look forward to the debate on the floor about these reasonable measures. I commend our deputy majority leader for his work on this effort, and look forward to discussing this and pursuing it with our colleagues.

Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. President, with approximately 45 million uninsured Americans, expanding access to quality, affordable health care should be a top priority for the Senate. We hear about the cost explosion that insurance companies are imposing on small businesses and how small business owners are now finding it virtually impossible to provide the health insurance coverage that they, as well as their employees, need. No one is harder hit by large premium increases than small business-- studies indicate more than 60 percent of these uninsured Americans either work for a small business or are dependent upon someone who does. As health care costs skyrocket and place more and more small business employees in jeopardy of losing their health benefits, it becomes more important that Congress turn its attention to the uninsured and act in a swift and bipartisan manner to address this problem.

Today we are here to offer hope to the millions of uninsured. Today we are here to talk about a solution that can help millions of small business employees access the same type of health care that their counterparts in large corporations and unions already enjoy.

The solution to this problem is to allow small businesses across the country to pool together and access health insurance through their membership with a bona fide trade or professional organization. This will provide small businesses the same opportunities as other large insurance purchasers. These Association Health Plans, AHPs, would reduce costs through greater economies of scale to spread costs and risk, increase group bargaining power with large insurance companies, and generate more insurance options for small businesses.

AHPs are not a new idea. They have been talked about, bandied about, argued about and compromised about for almost a decade. And during that period, what was once thought to be a manageable problem--became the crisis that we have today. Had we passed AHP legislation, we would not be seeing the problems we see today for small business.

The principle underpinning AHPs is simple. This is the same principle that makes it cheaper to buy your soda by the case instead of by individual cans. Bulk purchasing is why large companies and unions can get better rates for their employees than small businesses and it is about time that we bring Fortune 500 style health benefits to the Nation's Main Street small businesses and their employees.

In the words of President Bush, ``It makes no sense in America, to isolate small businesses as little health care islands unto themselves.'' AHPs will mean more coverage for the employees of these companies, especially their families and children.

It is time that we take control and find a way to curtail the explosive costs of health care. Small businesses deserve a chance to channel these funds toward other needs, such as expanding and creating more jobs for the

economy. Association Health Plans will level the playing field and break down the barriers that prevent small businesses from providing health insurance.

I commend Senator Snowe for taking the lead on this critical issue and for using her position as chairwomen of the Small Business Committee to advance the number one health care priority of the small business community. With the support of President Bush, the Department of Labor, the Small Business Administration, and a broad and diverse coalition of over 100 groups, I hope that this bill will more quickly.

For the sake of small businesses throughout this country, their employees, and their families we must pass AHP legislation. We must bring fortune 500 health care to small business. The time to act is now. I thank Senators Snowe and Talent for their leadership, dedication and commitment on behalf of small business, and I look forward to working with them to pass Association Health Plans legislation in the Senate.

Mr. President, with approximately 45 million uninsured Americans, expanding access to quality, affordable health care should be a top priority for the Senate. We hear about the cost explosion that insurance companies are imposing on small businesses and how small business owners are now finding it virtually impossible to provide the health insurance coverage that they, as well as their employees, need. No one is harder hit by large premium increases than small business-- studies indicate more than 60 percent of these uninsured Americans either work for a small business or are dependent upon someone who does. As health care costs skyrocket and place more and more small business employees in jeopardy of losing their health benefits, it becomes more important that Congress turn its attention to the uninsured and act in a swift and bipartisan manner to address this problem.

Today we are here to offer hope to the millions of uninsured. Today we are here to talk about a solution that can help millions of small business employees access the same type of health care that their counterparts in large corporations and unions already enjoy.

The solution to this problem is to allow small businesses across the country to pool together and access health insurance through their membership with a bona fide trade or professional organization. This will provide small businesses the same opportunities as other large insurance purchasers. These Association Health Plans, AHPs, would reduce costs through greater economies of scale to spread costs and risk, increase group bargaining power with large insurance companies, and generate more insurance options for small businesses.

AHPs are not a new idea. They have been talked about, bandied about, argued about and compromised about for almost a decade. And during that period, what was once thought to be a manageable problem--became the crisis that we have today. Had we passed AHP legislation, we would not be seeing the problems we see today for small business.

The principle underpinning AHPs is simple. This is the same principle that makes it cheaper to buy your soda by the case instead of by individual cans. Bulk purchasing is why large companies and unions can get better rates for their employees than small businesses and it is about time that we bring Fortune 500 style health benefits to the Nation's Main Street small businesses and their employees.

In the words of President Bush, ``It makes no sense in America, to isolate small businesses as little health care islands unto themselves.'' AHPs will mean more coverage for the employees of these companies, especially their families and children.

It is time that we take control and find a way to curtail the explosive costs of health care. Small businesses deserve a chance to channel these funds toward other needs, such as expanding and creating more jobs for the

economy. Association Health Plans will level the playing field and break down the barriers that prevent small businesses from providing health insurance.

I commend Senator Snowe for taking the lead on this critical issue and for using her position as chairwomen of the Small Business Committee to advance the number one health care priority of the small business community. With the support of President Bush, the Department of Labor, the Small Business Administration, and a broad and diverse coalition of over 100 groups, I hope that this bill will more quickly.

For the sake of small businesses throughout this country, their employees, and their families we must pass AHP legislation. We must bring fortune 500 health care to small business. The time to act is now. I thank Senators Snowe and Talent for their leadership, dedication and commitment on behalf of small business, and I look forward to working with them to pass Association Health Plans legislation in the Senate.

I move to lay that motion on the table.

The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

I am agreeable.

Amendment No. 2

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent I may be permitted to speak as in morning business for up to 10 minutes.

Mr. President, 2 weeks ago when I talked about relief for the victims of the tsunami in Indonesia and what we are doing there, I said there was much more I wanted to call to the attention of my colleagues and the people of the United States. One area that is extremely important is the enormous effort that is underway in Indonesia's mainstream, moderate Muslim population to promote a moderate, pluralistic, democratic Islam, both in Indonesia and throughout the region.

Unlike the Middle East, in Indonesia and Southeast Asia, Islam and Muslim organizations have been at the forefront of the country's struggle for a democratic society.

And Muslim groups and leaders in Indonesia have been among the world's pioneers in driving inter-faith dialogues.

During my recent visit to Indonesia, I met Yenny Zannuba Wahid, one of the latest leaders in this movement. Yenny is the daughter of His Excellency Abdurraham Wahid; a Muslim cleric, a leader in promoting religious tolerance in Indonesia and one of Indonesia's first democratically elected presidents.

Yenny has founded the Wahid Institute, an organization dedicated ``to bringing justice and peace to the world by espousing a moderate and tolerant view of Islam and working for the welfare of all.''

As Yenny noted in a recent speech, Islamist parties gained a sizable vote in the 1999 and 2004 Indonesian elections; these developments present the question of what role Islamic forces will play in setting the direction of social and political evolution in today's Indonesia. Will Indonesia, a democracy with Muslim population of over 200 million, remain on the path of a moderate, pluralistic democracy or will a small but increasingly influential minority of fundamentalistic Islamists steadily gain ground with the masses?

Through the creation of the Wahid Institute, Yenny has chosen not to allow these currents to flow without resistence. To be precise, the goal of the WI is to expand on the intellectual principles of Gus Dur to development of moderate Islamic thought that will promote democratic reform, religious pluralism, multiculturalism and tolerance amongst Muslims both in Indonesia and around the world. The institute has set out to create a dialogue between the highest spiritual and political leaders in the West and Muslim world.

The Wahid Institute has embarked on an impressive agenda of programs, including an effort to facilitate communication between Muslim and non- Muslim scholars on Islam and Muslim society and on the subjects of Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism and Buddhism; through conferences, discussions, publications and its website--wahidinstitute.org.

The Wahid Institute has plans to build a Muslim library, to serve scholars, researchers, activists, built on the library and life work of President Wahid. It is also planning to link Muslim NGOs and committed individuals to build a network of individuals and groups dedicated to promoting these ideals.

Just an importantly, the Wahid Institute will focus on the education of young people, supporting opportunities for promising young men and women in Indonesia to focus on progressive and tolerant Muslim thinking.

But the Wahid Institute is the latest of the groups committed to promoting moderate Islam. The Liberal Islam Network and International Center for Islam and Pluralism have been hard at work at promoting a peaceful and progressive Islam for sometime. I encourage all to become familiar with these groups.

In neighboring Malaysia, a country with a majority Muslim population of 18 million Muslims, recently elected Prime Minister, Abdullah Badawi, has emerged as a strong voice in promoting ethnic and religious tolerance and equality for women.

His own country struggled through times of violent race riots and has made ethnic and religious tolerance an

objective. Malaysia has been an economic success story and U.S. businesses consider it a great place to invest and do business. But the growing strains of fundamentalist Islam have emerged as a challenge. The new Prime Minister has confronted them.

As noted in an excellent opinion piece in the Asian Wall Street Journal written by Diana Lady Dougan, ``with senior positions held by women in his government and a strong personal commitment to religious and ethnic tolerance, . . . Prime Minister Abdullah walks the talk. If he can combine his strong and vocal advocacy of Islam Hadhari with continued progress in Malaysia's economic development based on a rule- of-law government and market-based economies, he is well positioned to become an inspiration far beyond the borders of Malaysia''.

I ask unanimous consent that a copy of Ambassador Dougan's op-ed be printed in the Record at the end of my speech.

Mr. President, in fact, the Prime Minister speaks eloquently about Hadhari Islam, meaning ``civilisation Islam,'' meaning religion should be directed toward good, toward progress and toward development--all consistent with the Tenets of Islam.

The Prime Minister recently took this message in a powerful address before the World Council of Churches.

I will quote a couple of topics in his speech.

He said:

Islam Hadhari is an approach that emphasises development,

consistent with the tenets of Islam, and focuses on enhancing

the quality of life. It aims to achieve this via the mastery

of knowledge; the development of the individual and the

nation; the implementation of a dynamic economic, trading and

financial system; and the pursuit of integrated and balanced

development to develop pious and capable people, with care

for the environment and protection of the weak and

disadvantaged.

Further, he said:

Malaysia's experience and our promotion of Islam Hadhari

also clearly demonstrate a progressive attitude towards

relations with non-Muslim minorities and between gender. Our

approach does not threaten the rights of non-Muslims. In

fact, we celebrate the diversity of our respective cultures

and heritage. Those of other faiths in Malaysia, although a

minority, have never been persecuted and there is no

tolerance in my administration for discrimination and

prejudice against any religious group. I am a Muslim, but I

am also a leader of all Malaysians--whatever their faith.

Similarly, we have tried to ensure that the rights of women

are protected and that they fulfil their potential without

having to face artificial barriers constructed in the name of

Islam. We know Islam to be just and fair, and that it honours

the position and rights of women. But there are clear

instances of prejudices being cloaked in religious teachings

in the Muslim world, aimed at passing off gender

discrimination as the accepted norm. This will simply not do.

Finally, Singapore, which lies between two great nations with majority Muslim populations, should be commended for the valuable role is has assumed in promoting a continental dialogue over these critical issues.

Singapore Senior Minister, Goh Chok Tong, is leading the way to the creation of the Asia-Middle East Dialogue. Bourne out of an extensive trip to the Middle East, where he observed in many Middle East countries a mainstream society both diverse and inclusive, the first Asia-Middle East Dialogue, AMED, will be held June 2005 in Singapore.

An event of great ambition, AMED will bring together officials, academics, religious leaders and opinion makers for some 50 countries in the Middle East and Asia. As was noted to me, this is not a government-to-government meeting, this is a meeting best described as people to people.

Among many the goals: forging closer political, economic, and security ties; a critical one is to improve the socio-cultural relations between the peoples of the two regions. The platform will provide a framework for the two regions to engage, to highlight to reformist elements and give a voice to the changes taking place in the Middle East.

The growth in economic engagement and the inter-regional linkages will hopefully yield economic opportunities to push further the reform and liberalization of the economies of the Middle East.

I think there is value in that approach.

Above all, AMED will provide a platform for moderate Muslim countries to speak up and challenge the extremist strain of Islam. The threat presented by global terrorism stems from a militant, extremist ideology that uses religion to foment divisions between and within societies, to foster terrorist acts and murders of innocent civilians, government officials, and other leaders. The forum, among others, will elevate elements to counter this movement.

In an encouraging sign, the Egyptian Government has offered to host the next AMED. I commend the Senior Minister. I commend Prime Minister Abdullah. I commend Yenny Zannuba Wahid, as well as the people of Singapore, for this important effort, which will have, I think, long- range benefits not only for the people of Islam and the people of Islamic countries, but all of us who are concerned about the rise of religious fanaticism misusing the peaceful religion of Islam.

I thank the Chair and my colleagues.

I yield the floor.

Exhibit 1

[From the Asian Wall Street Journal, Nov. 19, 2004]

Malaysia's Shadow Is Lifting

(By Diana Lady Dougan)

This week's very public reunion between Malaysia's new

Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi and former Deputy Prime

Minister Anwar Ibrahim may be cause for cautious celebration.

It is now six years since then Prime Minister Mahathir

Mohamad sacked Mr. Anwar at the height of the Asian financial

crisis, replacing him with Mr. Abdullah. Six years in which

the headlines generated by the controversial legal process

surrounding Mr. Anwar's conviction for corruption and sodomy

have cast a shadow over Malaysia's reputation as a rising

star among industrializing nations.

Now that shadow is starting to lift. The first step came in

September, when Malaysia's Federal Court overturned Mr.

Anwar's sodomy conviction, a step viewed by many as a signal

that Malaysia is back on the all-too-short list of ``rule of

law'' countries in the Islamic world. This week saw another

highly symbolic step. Mr. Anwar joined the head table of a

high-profile banquet hosted by Mr. Abdullah to celebrate the

end of Ramadan, the first meeting between the two men since

his jailing six years ago.

This signaled Mr. Abdullah's emergence from Mr. Mahathir's

shadow. Mr. Abdullah is secure in his position as prime

minister of one of the largest secular Islamic countries. A

leader of particular importance to the West because of his

unequivocal denouncement of terrorism and the hate mongering

of Islamic fundamentalists.

Despite many years in Mr. Mahathir's cabinet, including

five as deputy prime minister, Mr. Abdullah was a largely

unknown quantity when he quietly stepped into the departing

prime minister's shoes last year. When he assumed the role in

Oct. 2003, Mr. Abdullah did not wait long to lay the

groundwork for governmental reforms. Initially, his efforts

to tackle corruption, liberalize Malaysia's capital market

and increase business transparency were dismissed in some

quarters as predictable political posturing. But in the year

since Mr. Abdullah became prime minister, even Moodys and

Standard & Poor's have acknowledged Malaysia's efforts to

improve its economic fundamentals. Malaysia has jumped to

15th place this year from 23rd place in 2003 in the ranking

of attractive places for foreign direct investment among the

65 countries listed in the FDI Conference Index, according to

a recent report from management consultants A.T. Kearney.

Malaysia and its new prime minister have a lot going for

them. The Malaysian Central Bank reports a 7.6% growth rate

during the first half of this year, following growth of 5.2%

in 2003. Its foreign reserves leapt to a record high of 221.1

billion ringgits ($58.2 billion) in October.

Malaysla also has oil reserves. But unlike many oil

producing countries in the Muslin world, Malaysia has a large

and stable middle class. An enviable 82% of its population

live above the poverty line.

Nonethless Malaysia is often stigmatized as a Muslin

society where Islam is constitutionally enshrined as the

national religion. Although led by pragmatic and progressive

leaders today, the country has historically had its share of

radical Muslim activists. Indeed few Westerners recall that

Mr. Anwar got his political start as a Muslim firebrand

activist. And during his six years in jail, the former deputy

prime minister has deftly orchestrated the creation of a new

splinter party headed by Wan Azizah Wan Ismail, his

conservatively shrouded ophthalmologist wife and mother of

six. However since his September release, little had been

seen of Mr. Anwar until this week. And it remains to be seen

how much of the support for his political party will survive

now that Mr. Anwar is no longer a folk hero in prison.

Although not as colorful as Messrs. Mahathir or Anwar, Mr.

Abdullah has long enjoyed a personal reputation untainted by

scandal. He is a devout Muslim with a university degree in

Islamic studies reinforced by a father who taught the Koran

and a

grandfather who ran a madrassa religious school.

Ironically Mr. Abdullah's reputation as a respected scholar

of the Koran has worked to Mr. Anwar's advantage in the past,

and the two men have ties that go back far beyond this week's

reunion. In 1980, when Mr. Anwar eloped to Thailand with his

now wife, his father-in-law dramatically refused to

acknowledge the marriage and disowned his daughter. The young

couple recruited Mr. Abdullah as intermediary who was

credited with using quotes from the Koran to successfully

intercede on Mr. Anwar's behalf and convince his

fundamentalist father-in-law to accept the marriage.

Armed with ethnically Arab heritage as well as Arabic

language fluency (the name ``Badawi'' means ``Bedouin'' in

Arabic), Abdullah Badawi comes with a credibility in the

terror-plagued Middle East that Asian Muslims seldom have.

And as a well-respected expert on the Koran, he cannot easily

be yanked around nor intimidated by fundamentalist zealots

who are distorting the Islamic faith and the world view.

Mr. Abdullah is starting to gain attention in the Arab

world for his vocal and eloquent championing of ``Islam

Hadhari.'' Roughly translated as ``Civilizational Islam,''

Islam Hadhari is not a new religion. Rather it is a rallying

point for progressive Muslims in Malaysia. Islam Hadhari is

committed to promoting ethnic and religious tolerance,

equality for women, protecting the religious as well as

political rights of minorities, and pursuing economic

development based on education and fairness.

With many senior positions held by women in his government

and a strong personal commitment to religious and ethnic

tolerance embedded in his Chinese, Arab and Malay heritage,

Prime Minister Abdullah walks the talk. If he can combine his

strong and vocal advocacy of Islam Hadhari with continued

progress in Malaysia's economic development based on rule-of-

law government and market-based economics, he is well

positioned to become an inspiration far beyond the borders of

Malaysia.

As chair of both the 118 country Non Aligned Movement and

the 57 country Organization of the Islamic Conference until

2006, Malaysia under Mr. Abdullah's leadership can command an

international spotlight--especially in the Muslim world.

Clearly no single person can single-handedly defeat the

distorted logic and deadly forces being unleashed in the name

of Allah around the world, much less the debilitating

economics that plague much of the Muslim world. But Mr.

Abdullah is clearly working to turn the tide in the most

important battle we are facing. For all our sakes, let's hope

both Malaysia and its new prime minister take advantage of

their unique opportunities.

Mr. President, I wish to recognize the 100th anniversary of Southwest Missouri State University. The university was founded March 17, 1905, in Springfield as Missouri State Normal School, Fourth District, and has ``Dared to Excel'' for the past 100 years.

The Southwest Missouri State University System, including its campuses in West Plains and Mountain Grove, are celebrating their centennial year from July 1, 2004, through June 30, 2005.

The ``Dare to Excel'' theme is most appropriate for this university that has never rested on its laurels. To quote SMS President John H. Kaiser, ``Over the first 100 years of its existence, the institution has changed dramatically. But one thing has remained the same: SMS has opened the door of opportunity for young people from Springfield, the region, the state, the nation and now, world. The Centennial year will be one of celebration, but it also will be one of reflection and re- dedication to that noble purpose. The result will be the new long-range plan, Daring to Excel, which will take the institution from 2005 to 2010.''

Southwest Missouri State University has ``opened the door of opportunity'' for students the past century. Its faculty, staff, and students have distinguished themselves in academics, in research, in public service, and in cocurricular activities. Offering more than 150 undergraduate and 43 graduate academic programs, SMS is committed to helping students succeed in their own lives and as active citizens.

During its 100 years, the university has had four names--Missouri State Normal School, Fourth District; Southwest Missouri State Teachers College; Southwest Missouri State College; and Southwest Missouri State University--changed each time to more accurately reflect what the institution has become.

There have been significant changes at the institution over the past 100 years. Since its founding, it has seen its student population grow from 173 to over 20,000. The full-time faculty has increased from 8 to 718, and the academic programs have grown from one to nearly 200. In 1006 there was one building, but now there are 61.

Since 1995, Southwest Missouri State University has been further distinguished by its statewide public affairs mission and has had a profound effect on Springfield, southwest Missouri, the entire State, the Nation, and the world. It has contributed to the economic development of the region and the State, impacting the area economy by nearly $2 million per day.

It is fitting that March 17, 2005, be proclaimed ``Southwest Missouri State University Founders Day,'' with sincere appreciation and appropriate celebration of the significant contributions the institution has made to the citizens of Missouri and the nation over the past 100 years.

Southwest Missouri State University was founded March 17, 1905, in Springfield as Missouri State Normal School, Fourth District, and has ``Dared to Excel'' for the past 100 years. The Southwest Missouri State University System, including its campuses in West Plains and Mountain Grove, are celebrating the centennial year from July 1, 2004, through June 30, 2005; and

During its 100 years, the institution has successfully operated under four names: Missouri State Normal School, Fourth District; Southwest Missouri State Teachers College; Southwest Missouri State College; and Southwest Missouri State University.

The institution has ``opened the door of opportunity'' for students for the past century; and its faculty, staff, and students have distinguished themselves in academics, in research, in public service, and in cocurricular activities.

Since 1995, SMS has been further distinguished by its statewide public affairs mission and has had a profound effect on Springfield, southwest Missouri, the entire State, the Nation, and the world. It has contributed to the economic development of the region and the State, impacting the area economy by nearly $2 million per day.

Southwest Missouri State University has improved the quality of life for citizens in Springfield, the region, and the State and the future is bright for the 21st century.

I am proud to request that Thursday, March 17, 2005, be proclaimed ``Southwest Missouri State University Founders Day,'' with sincere appreciation and appropriate celebration of the significant contributions the institution has made to the citizens of Missouri and the nation over the past 100 years.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation concerning a critical issue that affects many States--disaster assistance. Last year was one of the worst hurricane seasons that Florida had seen in recent years. The Sunshine State was battered by four hurricanes in a six week period. Many residents of Florida had to evacuate more than three times during last year's hurricane season only to return home and find their homes leveled, their crops uprooted, their neighborhoods flooded, and their dreams shattered.

In my home State of Missouri, we are no strangers to natural disasters. Located smack in the middle of Tornado Alley, Missouri has been hit by some of the largest storms in U.S. history. In May of 2003, a string of tornadoes ripped through the western part of the state causing major damage and devastation.

With two big rivers--the Mississippi and the Missouri--we have also seen our fair share of flooding through the years, including flash flooding. I will never forget when the Mississippi River breached its banks in 1993--one of the most devastating floods in U.S. history. Of the nine Midwestern States affected, the State of Missouri was the hardest hit and State officials estimate that damages totaled $3 billion.

One specific example of the benefits of disaster mitigation in flash- flood situations comes to mind when I think of the City of Union, located about 45 minutes from St. Louis, where many of the residents suffered tremendous damage from a severe flash flood in May of 2000. After the flood, the City of Union applied to the State of Missouri Emergency Management Agency to seek help in a demolition and acquisition project. With the mitigation grant money, 17 properties were acquired in residential areas with substantial damage. These properties are now deed restricted for ``open space,'' which will prevent future development and the potential for flash flood related deaths in that area because many of the homes and people will no longer be in harm's way. This is an excellent example of the value of disaster and mitigation money invested by the Federal, State and local governments.

The disaster mitigation program has also been used to provide grant money to an individual, as opposed to a municipality. In some instances, these homeowners may be located in areas highly susceptible to tornadoes. Often

times, disaster mitigation grants have been issued to individual homeowners enabling them to build storm shelters underneath their homes, ultimately saving lives.

Over the years, the State of Missouri has worked with the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to build structures that prevent flooding and other damage from occurring when natural disasters strike. Time and time again, FEMA has come to the rescue by establishing funding for disaster relief and mitigation activities within the State of Missouri and in other states across the country.

Having served as the Chairman of the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on VA, HUD, and Independent Agencies, which until recently oversaw FEMA, I know first hand the value of the agency's disaster mitigation grant programs--the Hazards Mitigation Grant Program (HGMP), the Pre-Disaster Mitigation program (PDM), and the Flood Mitigation Assistance (FMA) program. Designed to manage future emergencies, these programs have been essential to countless communities, and without them, thousands of lives would be in jeopardy.

Last Congress, some very disturbing news was brought to my attention. According to a June 2004 legal memorandum issued by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), FEMA mitigation grants may be subject to income taxation. While some may argue that this is merely the IRS's interpretation of the statute, it is clearly the position the IRS intends to take against American taxpayers whose only recourse will be to fight the agency in court.

Let me tell you what this means for the American taxpayer. In my example of Union, Missouri, it is the individuals whose homes have been purchased by the city who ultimately will be forced to pay taxes on the proceeds of the buyout. For the homeowner building a storm shelter with grant money, he or she might be taxed upon receipt of the grant.

I must say that I am absolutely stunned by this determination by the IRS!! How in the world could the IRS possibly think that Congress intended to tax these types of grants to prevent natural disasters, especially when we went out of our way to ensure that disaster-relief payments to individuals recovering from a hurricane, flood, tornado or other natural disaster are not subject to income taxes?

Today, I am offering a bill that will stop the IRS in its tracks and prevent the taxation of disaster mitigation grants. This language will ensure that any federal grants to construct or modify property to mitigate future disaster damage will not be deemed to be income by the IRS's tortured reasoning. This bill will ensure that any grants currently out there, especially in light of the current hurricanes that have happened, are not subject to tax. In addition, there should be no inference by this legislation that Congress intended such grants to be taxable prior to the effective date of this legislation.

Why is this important? Why am I out here today? Because the Missouri and Mississippi Rivers rise, because tornadoes will ravage through the state once again, and because flash flooding can decimate an entire community. The last thing Americans who are working to prevent such potential destruction need is for government-grant funding to be subject to tax. My bill ensures that such taxes do not see the light of day.

I thank the original cosponsors of this bill, Senators Talent, Inhofe, Vitter, Conrad, Landrieu, and Nelson, for their support, and I urge my other colleagues to join us. Finally, Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the bill and a letter from the Stafford Act Coalition be printed in the Record.