Floor Statements

Mr. President, today I am introducing legislation to amend Title XVIII of the Social Security Act to correct discrepancies in the reimbursement of clinical social workers covered through Medicare, Part B. The three proposed changes contained in this legislation clarify the current payment process for clinical social workers and establish a reimbursement methodology for the profession that is similar to other health care professionals reimbursed through the Medicare program.

First, this legislation sets payment for clinical social worker services according to a fee schedule established by the Secretary. Second, it explicitly states that services and supplies furnished by a clinical social worker are a covered Medicare expense, just as these services are covered for other mental health professionals in Medicare. Third, the bill allows clinical social workers to be reimbursed for services provided to a client who is hospitalized.

Clinical social workers are valued members of our health care provider network. They are legally regulated in every State of the Nation and are recognized as independent providers of mental health care throughout the health care system. It is time to correct the disparate reimbursement treatment of this profession under Medicare.

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

Mr. President, today I introduce the Registered Nurse Safe Staffing Act. For over four decades I have been a committed supporter of nurses and the delivery of safe patient care. While enforceable regulations will help to ensure patient safety, the complexity and variability of today's hospitals require that staffing patterns

be determined at the hospital and unit level, with the professional input of registered nurses. More than a decade of research demonstrates that nurse staff levels and the skill mix of nursing staff directly affect the clinical outcomes of hospitalized patients. Studies show that when there are more registered nurses, there are lower mortality rates, shorter lengths of stay, reduced costs, and fewer complications.

A study published in the Journal of The American Medical Association found that the risks of patient mortality rose by 7 percent for every additional patient added to the average nurse's workload. In the midst of a nursing shortage and increasing financial pressures, hospitals often find it difficult to maintain adequate staffing. While nursing research indicates that adequate registered nurse staffing is vital to the health and safety of patients, there is no standardized public reporting mechanism, nor enforcement of adequate staffing plans. The only regulations addressing nursing staff exists vaguely in Medicare Conditions of Participation which states: ``The nursing service must have an adequate number of licensed registered nurses, licensed practice (vocational) nurse, and other personnel to provide nursing care to all patients as needed''.

This bill will require Medicare Participating Hospitals to develop and maintain reliable and valid systems to determine sufficient registered nurse staffing. Given the demands that the healthcare industry faces today, it is our responsibility to ensure that patients have access to adequate nursing care. However, we must ensure that the decisions by which care is provided are made by the clinical experts, the registered nurses caring for these patients. Support of this bill supports our nation's nurses during a critical shortage, but more importantly, works to ensure the safety of their patients.

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

Mr. President, I rise to recognize final passage of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Reauthorization Act of 2006 by both the Senate and the House this week, clearing the bill for Presidential approval. I am proud to have. developed this bill with my friend and colleague, Senator Ted Stevens.

The Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act is the primary Federal statute governing how we manage our Nation's fisheries and, as such, plays a vital role in our Nation's ability to achieve its overarching ocean policy goal. This bill reauthorizes the Magnuson- Stevens Act from fiscal year 2007 through fiscal year 2013 and takes steps to improve the act both by making it more effective and responsive to the needs of our fishing communities here at home and by taking important steps toward exporting our successful management approaches internationally.

After the Senate passed the bill earlier this year, Senator Stevens and I worked with the House on a bipartisan basis in order to reach consensus on a final version of the bill. I am pleased that these discussions have resulted in further improvements and additions to the bill that have motivated strong bicameral and bipartisan support for this important piece of conservation legislation.

The key to the success of the Magnuson-Stevens Act has always been its regional approach to management. Keeping with that regional approach, this bill strengthens the accountability of the Regional Fishery Management Councils by requiring training of new members to prepare them to comply with legal, scientific, economic, and conflict of interest requirements applicable to the fishery management process.

Our bill also aims to improve conservation performance in our fisheries by requiring all Councils to establish annual catch limits in each federal fishery management plan. The role science plays in this decisionmaking process will be strengthened by this bill as well, since requirements will now be in place for each council to adhere to the recommendations provided by their Science and Statistical Committee, SSC, or other peer review process to prevent overfishing and achieve rebuilding targets. In recognition of the SSC's increased role, we have strengthened the conflict of interest disclosure requirements to which each SSC member must comply.

The bill also requires limited access privilege programs, such as individual fishing quota systems, established in the future not only to contribute to a reduction of capacity in overcapitalized fisheries and improve fishermen's safety by ending the race for the fish but also to consider social and economic benefits to coastal communities. Senator Stevens' and my intent was to sustain thriving fishing communities and promote access to the fisheries by residents of our coastal communities in order to foster the independent, coastal community-based character of our Nation's fisheries. To achieve this aim, the bill sets forth a strong list of standards to ensure that any such program take into account the social and economic implications of the program. In addition, it authorizes the creation of voluntary regional fishery associations for the mutual benefit of fishery participants, including provisions to ensure we maintain free and open markets for fishermen to sell their catch.

The bill also requires a periodic review of each program's compliance with the goals of their program. Individual permits will be renewed automatically every 10 years, unless the permit holder fails to meet the requirements specified in the program as meriting modification, limitation, or revocation. The bill also contains grandfathering and transition rules to address the application of these new standards to existing and developing programs. I want to make clear that final Senate changes in these provisions were not intended to adversely affect or delay ongoing development of a proposal for a rationalization program for the Pacific trawl groundfish and whiting fisheries by the Pacific Fisheries Management Council. We intend that this process go forward and that adherence to the new standards not delay development of the plan called for in the bill.

In order to assist fishermen in helping to reduce bycatch and seabird interactions, H.R. 5946 establishes a regionally based Bycatch Reduction Engineering Program to develop technologies and methods to improve the ability of fishery participants to reduce bycatch and associated mortality, including post-release mortality. The provision includes an outreach mandate to encourage the adoption of new technologies and also encourages the adoption of bycatch reduction incentives in fishery management plans, such as bycatch quotas. Finally, it encourages the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to continue coordinating with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and other entities to reduce or mitigate seabird interactions in fisheries, a process that has had much success in the Western and North Pacific.

This comprehensive package not only addresses conservation and management within our Nation's waters but equally as important, strengthens controls on illegal, unreported, and unregulated IUU fishing in the high seas. IUU fishing, as well as expanding fleets and high bycatch levels, are threats to sustainable fisheries worldwide. The bill includes provisions to strengthen the ability of international fishery management organizations and the United States to ensure appropriate enforcement and compliance with conservation and management measures in high seas fisheries. The international component of this bill ensures other nations provide comparable protections to populations of living marine resources at risk from high seas fishing activities. These provisions help the U.S. fishing industry by both sustaining shared resources and leveling the playing field in terms of regulation and responsibility.

I am particularly pleased that the bill includes provisions crucial to the long-term sustainability of tuna and other high seas stocks so important to Hawaii and the Pacific Islands, as well as a program to help increase marine education and technical skills in the region. These provisions will not only help us work with other countries to conserve our shared marine resources but also reduce unfair conservation burdens on U.S. high seas fleets. The bill also contains long-awaited legislation to implement the Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Convention, a critical step in ending overfishing of bigeye and other tuna species in the Pacific. I am pleased that representatives of both the Western Pacific Council and the Pacific Council will be commissioners and that the territories will be provided representation in this important organization.

In addition, the bill contains provisions that promote marine education,

training, and assistance opportunities for Western Pacific communities and underrepresented groups. This training is critically important for communities that are so dependent upon the health and sustainability of our ocean resources.

Finally, the bill contains the text of the Tsunami Warning and Education Act, another bill that Senator Stevens and I developed early last year and then negotiated with the House Science Committee. This legislation, so critical to the Pacific region, will go far to strengthen and expand the existing tsunami warning and detection system, and I am grateful, on behalf of the people of Hawaii, for all the support the bill has gained in Congress.

Mr. President, I look forward to working with the administration on implementation of the many important provisions of this bill, and I thank my friend, Senator Stevens, as well as committee colleagues, particularly Senators Cantwell, Snowe, Boxer, Lott, and Lautenberg, for working so hard toward enactment.

Mr. President, I rise to pay tribute to a member of my staff who will be leaving the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation after more than 15 years working for this institution and more than 25 years of service to the American public. Sam Whitehorn has been my deputy staff director and general counsel on the Commerce Committee during the 109th Congress, but he has worked diligently for the committee's membership and many of our predecessors during more than a decade as senior counsel on the Aviation Subcommittee. I know Senators Jay Rockefeller, Fritz Hollings, and Wendell Ford hold Sam in the highest regard for his commitment to this institution and his efforts to pass legislation that established the United States as a world leader in aviation and transportation policy.

Sam's reputation as an expert and dogged proponent of aviation security, safety, and economic viability is known to everyone in the aviation community. His ability to negotiate and work in a bipartisan fashion has served the committee honorably, allowing aviation legislation to consistently move responsibly and timely. His accomplishments speak well of him: he has been involved in the passage of six Federal Aviation Administration Authorization, FAA, reauthorization bills during his tenure. While Sam has more recently expanded his reach to other major aspects of the Commerce Committee's agenda, aviation continues to have a special place in his heart.

This country and the aviation industry also have benefited from Sam's commitment to public service and his expertise on the issues during one of our most difficult times in modern history. After the horrible attacks of September 11, 2001, he helped lead the passage of the Aviation and Transportation Security Act, which established the Transportation Security Administration, TSA. That legislation was instrumental in restoring public confidence in our aviation system.

He also played a central role in the development of legislation that currently funds the aviation system, efforts to advance the modernization of the National Airspace System, NAS, and promoted workplace reforms at the FAA which have helped place the agency on a more economically viable path. To put it simply, Sam Whitehorn's name is synonymous with aviation safety, security, and viability.

Prior to working for the Senate Commerce Committee, Sam worked at the U.S. Department of Transportation, DOT, as a senior attorney in the Office of the General Counsel for Regulations and Enforcement where he represented the DOT on a host of aviation issues. Before that he was a staff attorney in the antitrust section of the Civil Aeronautics Board, CAB, the precursor to the FAA.

While Sam has a passion for aviation and has been truly devoted to the Senate Commerce Committee, nothing has been more important to him than his family. From his upbringing in New Hyde Park, NY, to the many years he has spent in his adopted hometown of Washington, DC, his close-knit family has been vital to his success. We have seen his dedication to his wife Carol, who has been extremely patient at times, and more recently saw him watch proudly as his son Michael and daughter Zoe went off to college. We greatly appreciate their willingness to share Sam with us for these many years.

As Sam retires from the Senate, we wish him nothing but the best. He will be missed, but his legacy will remain strong as we continue to tackle aviation issues in the future. I and this institution will miss him.

Mr. President, at the end of this year, a longtime employee of the Congress and the legislative branch will retire from Federal Service. On January 3, Anthony J. ``Tony'' Zagami will leave the U.S. Government Printing Office, having been the longest serving general counsel in the agencies history.

Tony Zagami began his career as a page in the U.S. Senate in the mid 1960s as I was completing my first term as a U.S. Senator from Hawaii. His late father, Dino, also served the U.S. Senate at that time as a member of the Official Reporters of Debates. I had the pleasure of knowing and working with both of the Zagami's during that period of time. Dino retired in 1972 as Tony's congressional career was just getting underway.

Tony held a number of positions on the Hill while pursuing an undergraduate and law degree. He spent a total of 25 years working for the Congress in positions ranging from Senate page to committee general counsel, before leaving in 1990 to become the general counsel for the Government Printing Office. As you know, the GPO is responsible for producing and distributing our Congressional Record and other vital Government documents on a daily basis.

After 40 years of dedicated Government service, Tony Zagami has decided to move on to the next chapter of his life. As he ends a distinguished career, I would like to take this opportunity to thank Tony Zagami for his many years of public service to our Nation and wish him and his family the very best in all future endeavors.

Mr. President, just 2 weeks ago, the Senate considered comprehensive legislation to address the transportation security needs of this country. That bill was not written overnight. It was the culmination of 2 years of bipartisan work within the Commerce Committee, the Banking Committee, the Finance Committee, and the Homeland Security Committee.

While we have had our jurisdictional debates during the past 2 years, this week we somberly observed the fifth anniversary of the attacks of September 11, 2001. We set aside those debates, and as a body, came together and passed a comprehensive bill improving security for all modes of transportation. The Senate passed that bill by a vote of 98 to 0, and we took a huge step toward making our Nation a safer place to live, work, and travel.

I had hoped that today I would be telling my colleagues that the House and Senate conferees had recognized they had the rare opportunity, for the first time in 5 years, to address transportation security in a comprehensive manner. I believed they would act in the same manner as we had here in the Senate just 2 weeks ago and would reach an agreement on the port security bill that truly reflects the best of our institution.

Regrettably, that is not the case. Staff from the Senate and several House Committees sat down the past 2 weeks and went through hundreds of pages of text in what was suppose to be, and in fact, appeared to be a bipartisan, bicameral process. They did a good job, and the port security title reflects their hard work. However, several days ago, House leadership stymied our efforts to provide a real transportation security bill for America.

The House leadership effectively hijacked the work of the Senate and refused to include or even discuss anything but the port security provisions of the Senate's bill.

Despite this refusal, several of my colleagues came to last night's meeting of the conferees prepared to offer and debate amendments to restore the nonport related security provisions that had been included in the Senate-passed bill. As I stated then, while the port security provisions are sound and a big step in the right direction, we must take a comprehensive approach to securing our transportation infrastructure.

I was prepared to work into the evening on efforts to restore the other provisions. My colleagues should be aware that we did not have the text of the conference report when we met for the first, and what has now become apparent, the only meeting. During the round of opening statements on the conference report, the Chairman of the conference was repeatedly asked when we would be able to offer amendments.

In the end, the chairman indicated that we would reconvene in the morning when we had the text of the bill. Because of the chairman's assurances that we would meet again, and out of deference to the chairman's wishes, several of my colleagues agreed to not offer their amendments to restore the Senate provisions on rail and truck security.

Late last night, we were told there would be no more meetings of the conferees, denying my colleagues the ability to have their amendments debated and voted upon.

Last night's theater has ramifications for all of us today for three reasons. First, we have allowed a rare opportunity to enact comprehensive legislation that would improve the security of our transportation infrastructure to pass us by.

Our colleagues who opposed the inclusion of the other transportation modes claim that this is a port security bill only. The fact is, other modes of transportation are just as important and worthy of protection. Like the port security provisions, the rail, truck, and transit provisions reflect several years of committee hearings and full Senate action.

To pretend these provisions were written overnight is a disservice to the expert staff that have worked on these issues for years. It is also a disservice to our constituents who depend upon these modes of transportation for their livelihoods.

The American public deserves better from us. We have waited 5 years for this opportunity and have been fortunate that attacks like those in London and Madrid have not occurred here in the United States. We should act now to prevent an attack rather than waiting until a tragedy occurs.

Second, if we are to succeed as a democratic and open institution, our ability to work together and rely on the assurances of our colleagues is critical. My colleagues, particularly Senator Lautenberg, who has worked diligently on behalf of his constituents who rely on rail and transit and is an expert in the area of rail safety, deserve to be heard and be able to offer amendments.

To assure him the opportunity but deny him the reality is a disservice to the institution and to the millions of people who rely upon the rail and transit systems each day.

Third, it has come to my attention that the leadership has decided to include in the conference report provisions that are outside the scope of transportation security issues. These are provisions that our friends on the Armed Services conference refused to allow on their bill, and our friends on the Department of Homeland Security appropriations conference refused to allow on their bill.

It does not bode well for the American public that with the stroke of one pen we jettison fully vetted rail, truck, and transit security provisions that would have provided enhanced security for the American public. Yet with the stroke of another pen, we add provisions that are not related to security nor fully debated by the Senate and House as a whole.

Ultimately, the action of the last few days reflects a lack of leadership and a lack of vision about our responsibilities to the American people. As a result, what we have before this body today does so much less than what is possible and prudent to secure the Nation, as well as ignoring the will of both bodies. More importantly, it neglects the real needs of our transportation security.

We have missed a rare opportunity to make our transportation infrastructure more secure. We have missed a rare opportunity to follow through with the promises we made on the Senate floor just 14 days ago.

Mr. President, I rise to express my strong support for the conference report on H. R. 5631. This bill, as the chairman has noted, includes some $436.6 billion for the Department of Defense, including $70 billion to help offset the cost of war in Iraq and the global war on terrorism for the first several months of fiscal year 2007.

I want to remind my colleagues that the bill does not include funding, as noted by the chairman, for the Defense Health Program or for environmental and real property maintenance and related programs.

By agreement between the Appropriations Committees in both Houses, these amounts will be carried in the Military Construction bill which has not yet passed the Senate.

Accounting for this change, the bill is $9.3 billion higher than the bill which passed the Senate. Of this amount, approximately $4.7 billion is in emergency funding for the war on terror, and the balance is for regular appropriations.

This bill provides for the essential requirements of the Department of Defense and is a fair compromise between

the priorities of the House and the Senate.

To my colleagues on the democratic side, I would say this is a good bill.

It was fashioned in a bi-partisan manner and it funds our critical defense needs.

Several items which were added to this bill by democratic amendments are addressed favorably in this conference report.

The agreement urges the President to report his plans in the event of increased sectarian violence in Iraq. It urges the director of national intelligence to assess many elements of the potential for civil war in Iraq.

It includes an additional $100 million to help eradicate poppies in Afghanistan and it addresses concerns raised in the Senate about increasing funding to find the leaders of al-Qaida.

I point out to the Senate that all the members of the conference on both sides of the aisle supported this agreement.

I fully support the bill that the Chairman is recommending, and I urge my colleagues to support the measure as well.

Mr. President, this year marks the 60th anniversary of Philippine-United States diplomatic relations and friendship. The partnership of our two nations is bound by several battles dating back to World War II, and continues today with the war on terrorism. Those who continue to pay the ultimate sacrifices do so in the defense of freedom and the democratic way of life.

During World War II, Filipinos fought side by side with Americans in defense of Bataan and Corregidor, fighting a common enemy. Today, we face a different battle--the war on terrorism--a battle being fought and won in the Philippines. At this moment in many parts of the world, little children, innocent children are crying in pain. Many of these children are being killed from mines and explosives mainly because older men do not know how to discuss peace. They know only how to discuss war, hatred, and death.

A month ago, together with the senior officers of the Republic of Philippines Armed Forces, I flew to Zamboanga on the Island of Mindanao. The main element of the mission was to inspect the joint Philippine and United States Armed Forces, and to receive a report on their activities. However, the event that impressed me most was the simple ceremony celebrating the presentation of 185 electrification projects to governors, chieftains, and leaders of various villages and towns in the many islands of Mindanao.

These island villages and towns never had electricity. Children had to study by candlelight. For the first time, these communities have electricity in their homes. Children can spend more time learning. Parents can use sewing machines and other power tools to make products to bring to market. And, communities can use computers to surf the Web and connect to the world.

The ceremony began with Asalamalaykum, and a prayer thanking Allah, recited by the Imam of Zamboanga. He was followed by a Christian minister, who read scripture from the Bible. Thereafter, children performed their traditional Muslim dance, welcoming us with such warmth, joy, and tranquility. While Christians and Muslims in other parts of the world are killing each other, to see the scene in Zamboanga, where Muslims and Christians are sitting together, breaking bread together, was a deep inspiration. It demonstrates to me that under proper leadership, miracles can happen, and miracles do happen.

In Mindanao, there is a demonstration of hope. The joint military forces of our two nations have demonstrated that while you need an iron fist to combat terrorism, you also need to extend a hand of friendship to win their hearts and minds. When you work together, when you cooperate, when you consult, when you speak of peace and hope, miracles can happen. If the rest of the world did the same thing, children would not be screaming in pain.

Of all the aid that we provide the Republic of the Philippines, 60 percent is being spent in Mindanao to reinforce efforts to secure a lasting peace, and to build a better life for the people of Mindanao. More than 22,000 former Moro National Liberation Front combatants are now small-scale commercial farmers, earning incomes through farming corn, rice, and seaweed. An additional 6,500 former combatants have been trained to produce high-value crops, such as finfish and bananas. In partnership with the private sector, 6,500 households in 227 remote communities are now equipped with solar-powered, renewable energy systems.

The ties that bind our two nations are based on the foundations of freedom and democracy. The work conducted today along with the economic opportunities and education provided by the Government of the Republic of the Philippines and in conjunction with the United States Government continues to pave the way toward a better quality of life and stability for the children and region of Mindanao.

Mr. President, I commend to my colleagues the text of an August 2006 paper entitled ``Securing Peace in Mindanao through Diplomacy, Development, and Defense,'' written by the American Embassy in Manila.

Mr. President, I am proud to join my colleagues from the Commerce, Energy, and Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committees in introducing the National Innovation Investment Act. This bill represents the culmination of nearly a year's work by three Committees. We examined the Nation's civilian research and education enterprises and their contributions to innovation and economic competitiveness.

By the broadest definition, the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation is responsible for the economic and commercial health of the country. We have expertise that touches on multiple fields of industry from telecommunications to transportation; from the safety of the home to the security of the homeland; and from marine containers to marine mammals.

At the end of the day, our middle name is ``science,'' and we brought that perspective to this bipartisan effort to use technology and innovation to address emerging challenges to our national economic competitiveness.

The lynchpin of continued innovation that will lead to economic competitiveness will be educating and inspiring young people to be educated and employed in science- and technology-related disciplines. This bill uses educational programs to inspire students from kindergarten through graduate school to pursue math and science. It also ensures that the Nation's enterprise research is well-funded and focused on the needs of the Nation.

This bill includes a 5-year authorization that would double funding for the National Science Foundation, NSF, and significantly increase funding for the National Institute of Standards and Technology, NIST. The Congress has increased funding for NSF before. This time, with the help of my colleagues and the administration, I hope we can actually provide those dollars to NSF, NIST, and the other priority agencies outlined in the bill.

I am pleased that the Commerce Committee and this group were able to include several provisions related to ocean and atmospheric research and education. The ocean truly is the last frontier on Earth and ocean research and technology may have broad implications for improving health and understanding our environment.

The U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy recognized this potential in their final report and dedicated three chapters to recommendations on ways to improve ocean education, basic research, and technological innovation. Recognizing the allure that the oceans hold for many young people, the Commission viewed ocean education as a tool that could be used to increase general science and math literacy in the U.S., and we have incorporated that notion into this bill.

The United States can and must remain strong and competitive in the face of emerging challenges from the rest of the world. This bill is not the final answer, but it is a starting point. We will begin by strengthening science research and improving education to generate the ideas that U.S. companies can transform into the next breakthrough product.

I would be remiss if I did not mention that this bill contains input from the leadership, the Chairs and ranking members of three major committees, Senators Dominici, Bingaman, Stevens, Enzi, Kennedy, and myself, as well as Senators Ensign, Lieberman, Alexander, Mikulski, Hutchison, and Bill Nelson.

However, the Senate, at large, also must be involved in the process of considering and improving the bill. From the beginning, we have been assured that the bill would be considered in an open process. I support the bill and look forward to its thorough consideration by the Senate.

Mr. President, I am proud to join my colleagues from the Commerce, Energy, and Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committees in introducing the National Innovation Investment Act. This bill represents the culmination of nearly a year's work by three Committees. We examined the Nation's civilian research and education enterprises and their contributions to innovation and economic competitiveness.

By the broadest definition, the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation is responsible for the economic and commercial health of the country. We have expertise that touches on multiple fields of industry from telecommunications to transportation; from the safety of the home to the security of the homeland; and from marine containers to marine mammals.

At the end of the day, our middle name is ``science,'' and we brought that perspective to this bipartisan effort to use technology and innovation to address emerging challenges to our national economic competitiveness.

The lynchpin of continued innovation that will lead to economic competitiveness will be educating and inspiring young people to be educated and employed in science- and technology-related disciplines. This bill uses educational programs to inspire students from kindergarten through graduate school to pursue math and science. It also ensures that the Nation's enterprise research is well-funded and focused on the needs of the Nation.

This bill includes a 5-year authorization that would double funding for the National Science Foundation, NSF, and significantly increase funding for the National Institute of Standards and Technology, NIST. The Congress has increased funding for NSF before. This time, with the help of my colleagues and the administration, I hope we can actually provide those dollars to NSF, NIST, and the other priority agencies outlined in the bill.

I am pleased that the Commerce Committee and this group were able to include several provisions related to ocean and atmospheric research and education. The ocean truly is the last frontier on Earth and ocean research and technology may have broad implications for improving health and understanding our environment.

The U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy recognized this potential in their final report and dedicated three chapters to recommendations on ways to improve ocean education, basic research, and technological innovation. Recognizing the allure that the oceans hold for many young people, the Commission viewed ocean education as a tool that could be used to increase general science and math literacy in the U.S., and we have incorporated that notion into this bill.

The United States can and must remain strong and competitive in the face of emerging challenges from the rest of the world. This bill is not the final answer, but it is a starting point. We will begin by strengthening science research and improving education to generate the ideas that U.S. companies can transform into the next breakthrough product.

I would be remiss if I did not mention that this bill contains input from the leadership, the Chairs and ranking members of three major committees, Senators Dominici, Bingaman, Stevens, Enzi, Kennedy, and myself, as well as Senators Ensign, Lieberman, Alexander, Mikulski, Hutchison, and Bill Nelson.

However, the Senate, at large, also must be involved in the process of considering and improving the bill. From the beginning, we have been assured that the bill would be considered in an open process. I support the bill and look forward to its thorough consideration by the Senate.

The Senator is correct that his amendment will be the position of the Senate. I can assure the Senator I will work to protect the Senate position in conference.

Mr. DeMINT I thank my colleagues for working with me on this amendment and look forward to the port security bill's passage.

Mr. President, this is a bipartisan measure. I am proud to support this bill. I believe all that has to be said has been said. But I would like to thank those on our side who have been helpful: Dabney Hegg and her baby, Sam Whitehorn, Lila Helms, Gael Sullivan, Stephen Gardner, James Assey, and Margaret Cummisky. Without their help, we would still be here.

Mr. President, I ask the Senator from Washington I be added as a cosponsor of her amendment.

I thank Senator Murray for her efforts to reconcile what we believe to be the most glaring vulnerability of this bill--how to pay for it.

As I noted in my opening statement, authorizing security programs for our ports and supply chain is the first step. We also must provide the actual funding to implement these new initiatives. While we have rushed to debate this security bill this week as the country remembers those who lost their lives 5 years ago, the Homeland Security Appropriations Subcommittee is in conference struggling to find the necessary funds to pay for existing programs. The security enhancements we are debating this week provide our constituents no benefit if we do not give the agencies we have tasked with these new responsibilities the necessary funds to do their job.

Despite a vulnerable maritime system and a very real threat to the physical and economic security of all Americans, the President has provided little support to help secure our Nation's ports from terrorist attacks. Even though the Congress has enacted two port security laws, the White House has included limited port security funding in their annual budget requests, proving their support for port security has been all talk and no action.

In 2003, when the President's budget failed to provide a fraction of the funding necessary for port security programs, Democrats offered an amendment to the Budget Resolution to provide $1 billion per year for 2 years to help ports meet the new security mandates. The amendment closely followed the Coast Guard's estimates on the immediate, first year costs for ports to meet the mandates. The amendment received unanimous approval in the Senate. During the conference committee's consideration of the budget resolution, the Republican leadership eliminated the provision.

Recognizing this inadequacy and lost opportunity to deliver funds to the ports quickly, the Democrats offered an amendment to add $1 billion to the 2003 supplemental again to help ports meet the new security mandates. Despite unanimous approval in the Senate 3 weeks earlier, when it came time to put the real dollars behind the budget commitment, the amendment was opposed by the administration and defeated on the Senate floor on a party-line vote.

Unfortunately, this year we saw history repeat itself. A Democratic amendment offered by Senator Byrd to increase funds for port security programs by $648 million was offered and agreed to by unanimous consent during committee consideration of the fiscal year 2006 supplemental appropriations bill. Yet again when it came time to put real dollars behind their commitment to port security programs to make them a reality, the additional funds were opposed by the administration and were eliminated in conference.

If history is any guide, the additional funding provided by the Senate in the fiscal year 2007 Department of Homeland Security Appropriations bill is likely to be eliminated again during this ongoing conference.

It has become evident that only by identifying a revenue source other than appropriated funds to pay for the new initiatives authorized in this Port Security Improvement Act can we truly overcome this cycle of all talk and no action. And that is exactly what the Murray amendment does.

The Murray amendment raises $2.5 billion by extending customs fees. It goes a long way toward covering the costs for the $3.2 billion authorized in this legislation. This is a tremendous step in the right direction to pay for more than 78 percent of the authorized levels in the underlying bill. I hope my colleagues will join with me in supporting this amendment.

Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I yield to the Senator from Colorado.

Amendment No. 4935

Mr. President, the managers on this side unanimously approve this measure and seek its support.

Mr. President, the managers on this side are very pleased to support this bipartisan amendment and urge its immediate adoption.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Amber Mace and Heather Ludemann, legislative fellows with the Commerce Committee, be accorded the privilege of the floor during consideration of H.R. 4954, the Security and Accountability For Every Port Act or the SAFE Port Act.

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

Mr. President, what is the pending business?