Floor Statements

Mr. President, I rise to introduce a bill to reauthorize Title VIII of the Native American Housing Assistance and Self- Determination Act. Senator Akaka joins me in sponsoring this measure. Title VIII provides authority for the appropriation of funds for the construction of low-income housing for Native Hawaiians and further provides authority for access to loan guarantees associated with the construction of housing to serve Native Hawaiians.

Three studies have documented the acute housing needs of Native Hawaiians--which include the highest rates of overcrowding and homelessness in the State of Hawaii. Those same studies indicate that inadequate housing rates for Native Hawaiians are amongst the highest in the Nation.

The reauthorization of Title VIII will support the continuation of efforts to assure that the native people of Hawaii may one day have access to housing opportunities that are comparable to those now enjoyed by other Americans.

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

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the privilege of the floor be provided to Melissa Porter and Rich Swazey, two detailees assigned to the Commerce Committee, during consideration of S. 184 and S. 4.

Mr. President, for the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, I report favorably the following nomination lists which were printed in the Record on the dates indicated, and ask unanimous consent, to save the expense of reprinting on the Executive Calendar that these nominations lie at the Secretary's desk for the information of Senators.

Mr. President, it is my great privilege to pay tribute to Alexander McGregor Dao Doane as he celebrates his first birthday on February 17, 2007, with his parents, W. Allen and Christina Doane. This is the couple's first child, born at 11:44 a.m. at the Queen's Medical Center in Honolulu. At birth, Alexander was 7 pounds 9\1/2\ ounces and 20 inches long.

In addition to being happy and fulfilled parents, the Doanes are pillars in Hawaii's corporate leadership circle. Allen is chairman of the board and chief executive officer of Alexander and Baldwin. Founded in 1870, it is one of the oldest and most prestigious companies operating in Hawaii, with its primary focus in real estate development, ocean cargo carriage and sugar production. Christina was born in Saigon, Vietnam, and immigrated to Hawaii as a child where she would earn her bachelor's degree from the University of Hawaii, a master's in business administration from Hawaii Pacific University, and enter the field of corporate marketing. She is presently enjoying the full-time joys of motherhood.

To give you some sense of the depth of the Doanes' commitment to our community, 8 days after Alex's birth, on February 25, 2006, as the event cochairs, Allen and Christina, hosted the American Heart Association's Heart Ball. With more than 1,200 guests in attendance, $792,000 was raised for this worthy charity. They never skipped a beat. I am very proud to call Allen and Christina, and now Alex, my constituents from the great State of Hawaii.

Alexander is named for one of the founders of Alexander and Baldwin, Samuel Thomas Alexander. He was described as ``outgoing and adventurous, the idea man.'' Who knows what the future will hold for Alexander McGregor Dao Doane. It is no happenstance that Alexander and Baldwin's common stock is traded on the NASDAQ Stock Market under the symbol ALEX. Happy Birthday.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Aviation Security Improvement Act with Senators Stevens, Rockefeller, Lott, and Lautenberg, who are all original cosponsors of this legislation.

When the 9/11 Commission released its report in 2004, the Commission expressed continuing concern over the state of air cargo security, the screening of passengers and baggage, access controls at airports, and the security of general aviation. Congress responded then and enacted measures to address inefficiencies highlighted by the Commission. However, implementation through the rulemaking process was slow, and as a result, significant shortfalls in our security regime remain.

In fact, a little more than year ago, the 9/11 Public Discourse project issued a scorecard that gave inadequate grades in those key areas where the Commission had advocated for improvements in aviation security. Checked Baggage and Cargo Screening received a ``D,'' Airline Passenger Explosive Screening received a ``C,'' and Airline Passenger Prescreenig received an ``F.''

Over the past year, the Transportation Security Administration, TSA, has continued working to significantly bolster air cargo security in the United States. While that is a good step in response to the report card, more must be done. The government must remain vigilant in its effort to provide security for our Nation, and the steps proposed in this bill will both improve our existing security system and give TSA the flexibility to combat new and emerging threats.

The bill we are introducing today would require the screening of all cargo going on passenger aircraft within 3 years. We expect TSA to develop a robust screening program that improves upon current measures and ensures the security of all cargo transported in commercial passenger air carriers.

To improve our ability to detect explosives in checked baggage and at passenger screening checkpoints, the bill extends the Aviation Security Capital Fund and promotes the purchase and installation of advanced baggage screening systems that can be integrated into the daily workings of our Nation's air transportation system. This capital investment will improve security screening by permitting TSA employees to better focus on potential threats while reducing the high workplace injury rates.

The bill addresses airline passenger explosive screening in several ways:

1. By promoting advanced research and development for checkpoint technology;

2. By enhancing screener training to more clearly identify and address potential threats; and

3. By requiring the Administration to complete and implement a plan over the next year that thoroughly addresses the threat of and response to carry-on explosives.

Airline passenger prescreening also remains a primary concern of the Congress. Not enough progress has been made by the TSA to develop an advanced passenger prescreening system since it took on this task nearly 4 years ago. Too many passengers are inconvenienced each year by false positives when matched against passenger watchlists.

Our bill would ensure a system is in place to coordinate passenger redress matters, and that the TSA moves rapidly to develop a strategic plan to test and implement an advanced passenger prescreening system.

Our bill also takes steps to improve general aviation security, airport access issues for airline employees, screener staffing issues, and other issues where there have been consistent shortcomings over the past several years.

The 9/11 Commission's report and subsequent Public Discourse project helped keep Congress and the Administration focused on the need for aviation security. While they did not have all the answers for quick fixes, they did offer a vital blueprint, particularly in the areas of infrastructure and transportation system security.

My colleagues and I used that guideline in drafting the legislation we are introducing today. We believe that once this bill is enacted, it will significantly improve aviation security in the specific areas I have highlighted, and the aviation system as a whole. I look forward to working with my colleagues to move this bill quickly. We have had 5 years to consider what does and does not work. Now it is time to implement what we have learned.

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

Mr. President, I am pleased to congratulate Commander Leda Mei Li Chong upon the completion of her career of service in the U.S. Navy. Throughout her 20-year military career, Commander Chong served with distinction and dedication.

As the first member in her family to serve in the military, Commander Chong received her commission from the United States Navy in 1987. She went on to teach math, chemistry, materials, and radiological controls at the Naval Nuclear Power School in Orlando, FL. From there, Commander Chong served in various technical positions always providing vital operational and training support to the naval fleet. Highlights include having been the Department of Defense military satellite communications liaison to the U.S. Coast Guard where she provided expert technical and policy guidance on ultra high frequency satellite capabilities. She was also deputy J6 to the commander, Iceland Defense Force where she provided critical command, control, and communications in support of NATO defense. Commander Chong volunteered as a White House social aide where she provided support to the President of the United States during important State events. Her most recent assignments were as a Navy congressional liaison to the Senate and House Armed Services Committees as well as to the Senate and House Defense Appropriations subcommittees. As a congressional liaison, her straightforward approach and complete grasp of all facets concerning C4ISR, information technology, and space programs have been of great benefit to my staff, the U.S. Congress and our national security. Commander Chong ensured that the U.S. congress had the information necessary to determine how to best equip, maintain and support the U.S. Navy.

Her family and her fellow shipmates can be proud of her distinguished service. Her parents Paul and Su and her husband Kevin have given her strong support during her naval career. As she departs the Pentagon to start her second career, I call upon my colleagues to wish Commander Chong and her family every success, and the traditional Navy ``fair winds and following seas.''

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce a bill to reauthorize the Native Hawaiian Health Care Improvement Act. Senator Akaka joins me in sponsoring this measure.

The Native Hawaiian Health Care Improvement Act was enacted into law in 1988, and has been reauthorized several times throughout the years.

The Act provides authority for a range of programs and services designed to improve the health care status of the native people of Hawaii.

With the enactment of the Native Hawaiian Health Care Improvement Act and the establishment of Native Hawaiian health care systems on most of the islands that make up the State of Hawaii, we have witnessed significant improvements in the health status of Native Hawaiians, but as the findings of unmet needs and health disparities set forth in this bill make clear, we still have a long way to go.

For instance, Native Hawaiians have the highest cancer mortality rates in the State of Hawaii--rates that are 22 percent higher than the rate for the total State male population and 64 percent higher than the rate for the total State female population. Nationally, Native Hawaiians have the third highest mortality rate as a result of breast cancer.

With respect to diabetes, in 2004 Native Hawaiians had the highest mortality rate associated with diabetes in the State--a rate which is 119 percent higher than the statewide rate for all racial groups.

When it comes to heart disease, the mortality rate of Native Hawaiians associated with heart disease is 86 percent higher than the rate for the entire State, and the mortality rate for hypertension is 46 percent higher than that for the entire State.

These statistics on the health status of Native Hawaiians are but a small part of the long list of data that makes clear that our objective of assuring that the Native people of Hawaii attain some parity of good health comparable to that of the larger U.S. population has not yet been achieved.

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

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce a bill to reauthorize the Native Hawaiian Health Care Improvement Act. Senator Akaka joins me in sponsoring this measure.

The Native Hawaiian Health Care Improvement Act was enacted into law in 1988, and has been reauthorized several times throughout the years.

The Act provides authority for a range of programs and services designed to improve the health care status of the native people of Hawaii.

With the enactment of the Native Hawaiian Health Care Improvement Act and the establishment of Native Hawaiian health care systems on most of the islands that make up the State of Hawaii, we have witnessed significant improvements in the health status of Native Hawaiians, but as the findings of unmet needs and health disparities set forth in this bill make clear, we still have a long way to go.

For instance, Native Hawaiians have the highest cancer mortality rates in the State of Hawaii--rates that are 22 percent higher than the rate for the total State male population and 64 percent higher than the rate for the total State female population. Nationally, Native Hawaiians have the third highest mortality rate as a result of breast cancer.

With respect to diabetes, in 2004 Native Hawaiians had the highest mortality rate associated with diabetes in the State--a rate which is 119 percent higher than the statewide rate for all racial groups.

When it comes to heart disease, the mortality rate of Native Hawaiians associated with heart disease is 86 percent higher than the rate for the entire State, and the mortality rate for hypertension is 46 percent higher than that for the entire State.

These statistics on the health status of Native Hawaiians are but a small part of the long list of data that makes clear that our objective of assuring that the Native people of Hawaii attain some parity of good health comparable to that of the larger U.S. population has not yet been achieved.

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

Madam President, the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation adopted rules governing its procedures for the 110th Congress on January 24. Pursuant to rule XXVI, paragraph 2, of the Standing Rules of the Senate, on behalf of myself and Senator Stevens, I ask unanimous consent that the accompanying Rules from the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, I rise to speak in support of the Commission on Wartime Relocation and Internment of Latin Americans of Japanese Descent Act.

The story of U.S. citizens taken from their homes on the west coast and confined in camps is a story that was made known after a fact- finding study by a Commission that Congress authorized in 1980. That study was followed by a formal apology by President Reagan and a bill for reparations. Far less known, and indeed, I myself did not initially know, is the story of Latin Americans of Japanese descent taken from their homes in Latin America, stripped of their passports, brought to the U.S., and interned in American camps.

This is a story about the U.S. government's act of reaching its arm across international borders, into a community that did not pose an immediate threat to our Nation, in order to use them, devoid of passports or any other proof of citizenship, for hostage exchange with Japan. Between the years 1941 and 1945, our government, with the

help of Latin American officials, arbitrarily arrested persons of Japanese descent from streets, homes, and workplaces. Approximately 2,300 undocumented persons were brought to camp sites in the U.S., where they were held under armed watch, and then held in reserve for prisoner exchange. Those used in an exchange were sent to Japan, a foreign country that many had never set foot on since their ancestors' immigration to Latin America.

Despite their involuntary arrival, Latin American internees of Japanese descent were considered by the Immigration and Naturalization Service as illegal entrants. By the end of the war, some Japanese Latin Americans had been sent to Japan. Those who were not used in a prisoner exchange were cast out into a new and English-speaking country, and subject to deportation proceedings. Some returned to Latin America. Others remained in the U.S., where their Latin American country of origin refused their re-entry because they were unable to present a passport.

When I first learned of the wartime experiences of Japanese Latin Americans, it seemed unbelievable, but indeed, it happened. It is a part of our national history, and it is a part of the living histories of the many families whose lives are forever tied to internment camps in our country.

The outline of this story was sketched out in a book published by the Commission on Wartime Relocation and Internment of Civilians formed in 1980. This Commission had set out to learn about Japanese Americans. Towards the close of their investigations, the Commissioners stumbled upon this extraordinary effort by the U.S. government to relocate, intern, and deport Japanese persons formerly living in Latin America. Because this finding surfaced late in its study, the Commission was unable to fully uncover the facts, but found them significant enough to include in its published study, urging a deeper investigation.

I rise today to introduce the Commission on Wartime Relocation and Internment of Latin Americans of Japanese Descent Act, which would establish a fact-finding Commission to extend the study of the 1980 Commission. This Commission's task would be to determine facts surrounding the U.S. government's actions in regards to Japanese Latin Americans subject to a program of relocation, interment, and deportation. I believe that examining this extraordinary program would give finality to, and complete the account of Federal actions to detain and intern civilians of Japanese ancestry.

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

Mr. President, I rise today to call attention to an important issue that the Congress has not adequately addressed since the painful events of September 11, 2001.

That issue is the inability of our first responders to speak to each other, a problem especially troubling during an emergency, when the ability to quickly and effectively communicate saves lives.

This is why I, with the cosponsorship of my colleagues, Senators Stevens, Kerry, Smith and Snowe, are introducing the Interoperable Emergency Communications Act.

After September 11, 2001, we heard heartbreaking stories of firefighters and police officers who went into harm's way because they lacked adequate information. These brave men and women were unable to reach victims because their systems could not communicate with one another.

At that time, the Congress began devoting greater attention to why many of our first responders lacked this ability to communicate with each other in the field. We asked what it would take to ensure communications equipment and facilities could withstand a natural disaster. We asked which equipment would be worthy of our investment.

Then Hurricane Katrina struck in August, 2006, and we found that our first responders faced the same communications failures. This is an unnecessary frustration that prevents our first responders from effectively doing their jobs.

Our bill provides needed direction to the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) regarding its administration of the $1 billion grant program for interoperable communications systems for first responders, which was created by the Senate Commerce Committee early last year. It will be funded by money from the Digital Transition and Public Safety Fund and administered by the NTIA.

The bill designates grants for regional or statewide communications systems that will allow first responders to talk to one another during an emergency. It also sets aside funding for a technology reserve for immediate deployment of communications equipment in the event of an emergency or disaster.

To ensure a fair distribution of funds, the money will be distributed in accordance with guidelines outlined in the Patriot Act to ensure a fair distribution of funds, and grant allocations will be prioritized based on an ``all hazards'' approach that will take into account threat and risk factors associated with natural disasters--such as hurricanes, tsunamis, earthquakes, and tornadoes--as well as risks associated with terrorist attacks.

Every day we hear about potential threats against our Nation and it will not be long until we are again in the midst of hurricane season. I hope that history will not repeat itself and that the Congress can act quickly in directing the NTIA to give our first responders the tools they need to effectively do their jobs. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, I rise to speak in support of the Commission on Wartime Relocation and Internment of Latin Americans of Japanese Descent Act.

The story of U.S. citizens taken from their homes on the west coast and confined in camps is a story that was made known after a fact- finding study by a Commission that Congress authorized in 1980. That study was followed by a formal apology by President Reagan and a bill for reparations. Far less known, and indeed, I myself did not initially know, is the story of Latin Americans of Japanese descent taken from their homes in Latin America, stripped of their passports, brought to the U.S., and interned in American camps.

This is a story about the U.S. government's act of reaching its arm across international borders, into a community that did not pose an immediate threat to our Nation, in order to use them, devoid of passports or any other proof of citizenship, for hostage exchange with Japan. Between the years 1941 and 1945, our government, with the

help of Latin American officials, arbitrarily arrested persons of Japanese descent from streets, homes, and workplaces. Approximately 2,300 undocumented persons were brought to camp sites in the U.S., where they were held under armed watch, and then held in reserve for prisoner exchange. Those used in an exchange were sent to Japan, a foreign country that many had never set foot on since their ancestors' immigration to Latin America.

Despite their involuntary arrival, Latin American internees of Japanese descent were considered by the Immigration and Naturalization Service as illegal entrants. By the end of the war, some Japanese Latin Americans had been sent to Japan. Those who were not used in a prisoner exchange were cast out into a new and English-speaking country, and subject to deportation proceedings. Some returned to Latin America. Others remained in the U.S., where their Latin American country of origin refused their re-entry because they were unable to present a passport.

When I first learned of the wartime experiences of Japanese Latin Americans, it seemed unbelievable, but indeed, it happened. It is a part of our national history, and it is a part of the living histories of the many families whose lives are forever tied to internment camps in our country.

The outline of this story was sketched out in a book published by the Commission on Wartime Relocation and Internment of Civilians formed in 1980. This Commission had set out to learn about Japanese Americans. Towards the close of their investigations, the Commissioners stumbled upon this extraordinary effort by the U.S. government to relocate, intern, and deport Japanese persons formerly living in Latin America. Because this finding surfaced late in its study, the Commission was unable to fully uncover the facts, but found them significant enough to include in its published study, urging a deeper investigation.

I rise today to introduce the Commission on Wartime Relocation and Internment of Latin Americans of Japanese Descent Act, which would establish a fact-finding Commission to extend the study of the 1980 Commission. This Commission's task would be to determine facts surrounding the U.S. government's actions in regards to Japanese Latin Americans subject to a program of relocation, interment, and deportation. I believe that examining this extraordinary program would give finality to, and complete the account of Federal actions to detain and intern civilians of Japanese ancestry.

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

Mr. President, I rise today to call attention to an important issue that the Congress has not adequately addressed since the painful events of September 11, 2001.

That issue is the inability of our first responders to speak to each other, a problem especially troubling during an emergency, when the ability to quickly and effectively communicate saves lives.

This is why I, with the cosponsorship of my colleagues, Senators Stevens, Kerry, Smith and Snowe, are introducing the Interoperable Emergency Communications Act.

After September 11, 2001, we heard heartbreaking stories of firefighters and police officers who went into harm's way because they lacked adequate information. These brave men and women were unable to reach victims because their systems could not communicate with one another.

At that time, the Congress began devoting greater attention to why many of our first responders lacked this ability to communicate with each other in the field. We asked what it would take to ensure communications equipment and facilities could withstand a natural disaster. We asked which equipment would be worthy of our investment.

Then Hurricane Katrina struck in August, 2006, and we found that our first responders faced the same communications failures. This is an unnecessary frustration that prevents our first responders from effectively doing their jobs.

Our bill provides needed direction to the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) regarding its administration of the $1 billion grant program for interoperable communications systems for first responders, which was created by the Senate Commerce Committee early last year. It will be funded by money from the Digital Transition and Public Safety Fund and administered by the NTIA.

The bill designates grants for regional or statewide communications systems that will allow first responders to talk to one another during an emergency. It also sets aside funding for a technology reserve for immediate deployment of communications equipment in the event of an emergency or disaster.

To ensure a fair distribution of funds, the money will be distributed in accordance with guidelines outlined in the Patriot Act to ensure a fair distribution of funds, and grant allocations will be prioritized based on an ``all hazards'' approach that will take into account threat and risk factors associated with natural disasters--such as hurricanes, tsunamis, earthquakes, and tornadoes--as well as risks associated with terrorist attacks.

Every day we hear about potential threats against our Nation and it will not be long until we are again in the midst of hurricane season. I hope that history will not repeat itself and that the Congress can act quickly in directing the NTIA to give our first responders the tools they need to effectively do their jobs. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. President: I rise today to join my colleague Senator Feinstein in introducing probably one of the most important bills we can consider this Congress in terms of energy, economic, and environmental security: the Ten-In-Ten Fuel Economy Act of 2007. Simply put, this bill would raise the average fuel economy standards for all passenger cars and light trucks from 25 miles per gallon to 35 miles per gallon by the year 2019.

While Senator Feinstein and I have taken the lead on this issue, the bill we are introducing today is the product of considerable input and expertise provided by our colleagues Senators Snowe, Durbin, and Cantwell.

I also want to thank Senators Kerry, Boxer, Bill Nelson, Lautenberg, Lieberman, Menendez, and Collins for joining us in this effort.

This bill is a win-win for the American public. It will substantially reduce America's dependence on foreign oil from unstable governments, as well as decrease the amount of harmful emissions coming from our nation's passenger vehicles. At the same time, it will save American families money by reducing their fuel costs.

According to the Union of Concerned Scientists, this bill, if enacted, would save 6 billion gallons of gas--equating to $12 billion in fuel cost savings for motorists in this country--within 6 years of the first model year requiring improvement.

That $12 billion in fuel cost savings also translates into a reduction of 65 million metric tons of carbon dioxide emissions--one of the largest contributors to global warming. This level of savings after only 6 years would be accomplished before the full contribution of the bill is achieved.

By 2025, assuming today's price for a gallon of gas, enactment of this bill would effectively reduce consumption of foreign oil by 2.1 million barrels a day by saving over 35 billion gallons of gasoline annually. It would provide motorists with $64 billion in fuel cost savings, and reduce emissions of carbon dioxide by 358 million metric tons. This decrease in carbon dioxide emissions would be the equivalent of taking 52 million cars and trucks off the road. This incredible savings is achieved by simply raising the fuel economy standard from 25 miles per gallon to 35 miles per gallon in a 10 year period.

Some of our colleagues may question whether this proposed standard can be achieved. Let me just note that the Commerce Committee helped establish the first CAFE standards in 1975, against the cries of critics then. History, however, shows that Congress' action then was largely responsible for the Nation's decreased demand for oil during the 1980s necessitated by the Arab Oil Embargo. Since the 1980s, however, the fuel economy average for cars and light trucks combined has remained essentially flat even though advances in technology have continued. It is time to update CAFE standards. The benefits gained from undertaking this endeavor are many, and too long overdue.

Mr. President: I rise today to join my colleague Senator Feinstein in introducing probably one of the most important bills we can consider this Congress in terms of energy, economic, and environmental security: the Ten-In-Ten Fuel Economy Act of 2007. Simply put, this bill would raise the average fuel economy standards for all passenger cars and light trucks from 25 miles per gallon to 35 miles per gallon by the year 2019.

While Senator Feinstein and I have taken the lead on this issue, the bill we are introducing today is the product of considerable input and expertise provided by our colleagues Senators Snowe, Durbin, and Cantwell.

I also want to thank Senators Kerry, Boxer, Bill Nelson, Lautenberg, Lieberman, Menendez, and Collins for joining us in this effort.

This bill is a win-win for the American public. It will substantially reduce America's dependence on foreign oil from unstable governments, as well as decrease the amount of harmful emissions coming from our nation's passenger vehicles. At the same time, it will save American families money by reducing their fuel costs.

According to the Union of Concerned Scientists, this bill, if enacted, would save 6 billion gallons of gas--equating to $12 billion in fuel cost savings for motorists in this country--within 6 years of the first model year requiring improvement.

That $12 billion in fuel cost savings also translates into a reduction of 65 million metric tons of carbon dioxide emissions--one of the largest contributors to global warming. This level of savings after only 6 years would be accomplished before the full contribution of the bill is achieved.

By 2025, assuming today's price for a gallon of gas, enactment of this bill would effectively reduce consumption of foreign oil by 2.1 million barrels a day by saving over 35 billion gallons of gasoline annually. It would provide motorists with $64 billion in fuel cost savings, and reduce emissions of carbon dioxide by 358 million metric tons. This decrease in carbon dioxide emissions would be the equivalent of taking 52 million cars and trucks off the road. This incredible savings is achieved by simply raising the fuel economy standard from 25 miles per gallon to 35 miles per gallon in a 10 year period.

Some of our colleagues may question whether this proposed standard can be achieved. Let me just note that the Commerce Committee helped establish the first CAFE standards in 1975, against the cries of critics then. History, however, shows that Congress' action then was largely responsible for the Nation's decreased demand for oil during the 1980s necessitated by the Arab Oil Embargo. Since the 1980s, however, the fuel economy average for cars and light trucks combined has remained essentially flat even though advances in technology have continued. It is time to update CAFE standards. The benefits gained from undertaking this endeavor are many, and too long overdue.

Mr. President, I am pleased to join my colleague, Senator Akaka, as a cosponsor of the Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act of 2007.

During the 109th Congress, the Administration expressed concerns with this legislation that stem from its experience with Indian tribes. The history of the Native Hawaiians and their treatment by the United States is similar to that of Indian tribes and Alaska Natives. I want to commend the Administration for devoting staff to work with us to achieve consensus on mutually agreeable language. I am confident that this measure not only addresses the Administration's concerns but also the concerns of some of our colleagues.

Having served on the Indian Affairs Committee for the past 28 years, I know that most of our colleagues are more familiar with conditions and circumstances in Indian country, and naturally, they bring their experience with Indian country to bear in considering this measure, which has been pending in the Senate for the past eight years.

Accordingly, I believe it is important that our colleagues understand what this bill seeks to accomplish as well as how it differs from legislation affecting Indian country.

It is a little known fact that beginning in 1910 and since that time, the Congress has passed and the President has signed into law over 160 Federal laws designed to address the conditions of Native Hawaiians.

Thus, Federal laws which authorize the provision of health care, education, housing, and job training and employment services, as well as programs to provide for the preservation of the Native Hawaiian language, Native language immersion, Native cultural and grave protections and repatriation of Native sacred objects have been in place for decades.

The Native Hawaiian programs do not draw upon funding that is appropriated for American Indians or Alaska Natives--there are separate authorizations for programs that are administered by different Federal agencies--not the Bureau of Indian Affairs or the Indian Health Service, for instance--and the Native Hawaiian program funds are not drawn from the Interior Appropriations Subcommittee account. Thus, they have no impact on the funding that is provided for the other indigenous, native people of the United States.

However, unlike the native people residing on the mainland, Native Hawaiians have not been able to exercise their rights as Native people to self-determination or self-governance because their government was overthrown on January 17, 1893.

This bill would provide a process for the reorganization of the Native Hawaiian government and the resumption of a political and legal relationship between that government and the government of the United States.

Because the Native Hawaiian government is not an Indian tribe, the body of Federal Indian law that would otherwise customarily apply when the United States extends Federal recognition to an Indian tribal group does not apply.

Thus, the bill provides authority for a process of negotiations amongst the United States, the State of Hawaii, and the reorganized Native Hawaiian government to address such matters as the exercise of civil and criminal jurisdiction by the respective governments, the transfer of land and natural resources and other assets, and the exercise of governmental authority over those lands, natural resources and other assets.

Upon reaching agreement, the U.S. Congress and the legislature of the State of Hawaii would have to enact legislation implementing the agreements of the three governments, including amendments that will necessarily have to be made to existing Federal law, such as the Hawaii Admissions Act and the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act, and to State law, including amendments to the Hawaii State Constitution, before any of the new governmental relationships and authorities can take effect.

That is why concerns which are premised on the manner in which Federal Indian law provides for the respective governmental authorities of the State governments and Indian tribal governments simply do not apply in Hawaii.

We have every confidence that consistent with the Federal policy for over 35 years, the restoration of the rights to self-determination and self-governance will enable the Native Hawaiian people, as the direct, lineal descendants of the aboriginal, indigenous native people of what has become our nation's fiftieth state, to take their rightful place in the family of governments that makes up our constitutional system of governance.