Floor Statements

Mr. President, I appreciate the comments from the chairman, and commend his leadership on this issue. I am familiar with the successes that this program has enjoyed. Providing wheelchairs to the victims of overseas conflicts is an important program, and I encourage our Federal agencies to support this program.

war related illnesses

The committee bill seeks to improve pay and benefits for our military personnel and makes considerable improvements in medical care that our men and women in uniform and their families receive. In addition, funding has been included to fund a Peer Reviewed Medical Research Program that addresses a wide array of important medical programs.

No objection.

I move to lay that motion on the table.

The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

I move to lay that motion on the table.

The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Amendment No. 1896

I move to lay that motion on the table.

The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

I move to lay that motion on the table.

The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

No objections.

I move to lay that motion on the table.

The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Amendment No. 1887

We support it.

I move to lay that motion on the table.

The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Amendment No. 1895

No objection.

I move to lay that motion on the table.

The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Amendment No. 2017

No objection.

I move to lay that motion on the table.

The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Amendment No. 1925

No objection.

I move to lay that motion on the table.

The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Amendment No. 1889

No objection.

No objection.

I move to lay that motion on the table.

The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

I move to lay that motion on the table.

The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, much as I would prefer to have amity and comity on this floor and be able to accommodate the concerns of my dear friend from Virginia, I must say that I fully agree with my chairman, Mr. Stevens of Alaska. This procedure will set a terrible precedent, one that we will regret in the years to come.

If you look at it very carefully, it will take away some of the rights of people with minority views. So I would hope that another step be taken--I do not know what it is--where we can resolve this matter. I would hope the leadership of the Senate realizes the seriousness of what we are confronting at this moment. It affects the future of this land, and I am not being dramatic.

Thank you, Mr. President.

Mr. President, I ask that the pending amendment be set aside.

Mr. President, in behalf of the Senator from New Jersey, Mr. Lautenberg, I send to the desk an amendment.

I thank the Chair.

Amendment No. 2016

I move to lay that motion on the table.

The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

I move to lay that motion on the table.

The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

amendment no. 1979

I move to lay that motion on the table.

The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Amendments Nos. 1989, as Modified; 1911, as Modified; 2027, as Modified; 2010; 1947, as Modified; 2030, as Modified, and 2012, En Bloc

I move to lay that motion on the table.

The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Amendments Nos. 1991, as Modified; 1964, as Modified; 1948; 2029, as

Modified; 1927, as Modified, En Bloc

Mr. President, like all proud Americans, I share my colleague's concern for the safety and well being of our troops. IED attacks are a very real threat to our troops and it is our responsibility as Members of Congress to help protect our brave men and women fighting overseas. I will work in conference to ensure that we can maintain the Senate's funding level to purchase CROWS for our troops.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that a legislative fellow, Mike Powers, on the staff of Senator Dayton, be granted the privilege of the floor during the consideration of the Defense appropriations bill.

I ask unanimous consent the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. President, on amendment No. 1903 to H.R. 2863, submitted by the Senator from Colorado, Mr. Salazar, on behalf of the chairman of the committee, Mr. Stevens, and the ranking member, we are ready to accept it.

I urge its approval.

Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.

Mr. President, I rise today to offer my strong endorsement of H.R. 2863, the fiscal year 2006 Defense appropriations bill. As the chairman noted, this bill was unanimously approved by the Appropriations Committee. It is a bipartisan bill which was crafted by Chairman Stevens with the full involvement of the minority.

In compliance with the committee allocations, this bill is $7 billion lower than the amount requested by the administration. As such, the committee had to make several difficult decisions to meet the reduced level. Even under these conditions, I can assure my colleagues that this is a very good bill which will meet our national security needs for the coming year.

The top priority of this measure is to ensure that we provide for the well-being of our men and women in uniform and their families. The bill includes a 3.1-percent pay raise, and it provides $19.3 billion to run our military hospitals and pay for the other day-to-day health care costs for our forces.

Not counting the costs of operations in Afghanistan and Iraq, this measure includes nearly $125 billion to safeguard military readiness and pay for other routine operations of the Department of Defense.

As most of my colleagues are surely aware, recruiting has become a greater challenge in recent years. So I am pleased to note that this bill includes $622 million above the budgeted amount to improve recruiting tools so that we can maintain the highest quality in our military. Furthermore, a total of $146 billion is recommended in this bill for investing in much needed equipment for our forces today and our forces of the future.

We all know that the war in Iraq is controversial, on which many of our colleagues have very strong opinions. But I believe what we all agree upon is the need to support our troops who are now serving in harm's way. To that end, the bill provides an additional $50 billion for pay, operations, and equipment to support our fighting forces overseas. These funds are essential to support these brave men and women.

Today is September 29. The fiscal year ends tomorrow. It is imperative that we move this bill as quickly as possible. After Senate passage, the committee will still need to take this bill into conference. Because of that, I would urge my colleagues not to offer amendments to this bill which might be better suited for other legislation except to meet truly emergency requirements. I believe there will be plenty of time in the coming months to consider issues which are not relevant to this defense spending measure.

This is a good bill. I strongly support it and urge all of my colleagues to do so as well.

I move to lay that motion on the table.

The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that privilege of the floor be granted to Jonathan Epstein, a legislative fellow in the office of Senator Bingaman, during consideration of this H.R. 2863 appropriations for the Department of Defense for fiscal year 2006 and any votes thereupon.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Susan Ball be granted the privilege of the floor during consideration of the Defense appropriations bill.

Mr. President, I had the privilege and honor of meeting with Judge Roberts. I was impressed by his legal scholarship, but expressed a hope that he would be forthright and open with the American people as he progressed through the Senate confirmation process. Although I must regretfully conclude that there are still questions outstanding on Judge Roberts' record, in light of the urgency of ensuring that our Nation's Supreme Court has its full complement of Justices, I agree with my Democratic and Republican colleagues that his nomination should be given an up-or-down vote.

I have studied the development of the Supreme Court by our Founding Fathers, and it is apparent to me that our Nation's leaders did not want this group of citizens to be subjected to the political pressures of the day, so they provided for lifetime appointments, with no termination date. Further, candidates were not required to be lawyers, perhaps as a reminder that legal brilliance alone does not qualify a man or woman to sit on the bench of our highest court. Integrity, compassion, and wisdom are also required in equal--or perhaps greater-- measure.

Reconciling lifetime appointments with the demands of democratic elections, created understandable consternation. After much debate, our Founding Fathers provided that the executive and legislative branches of our Federal Government would employ every means available to them to make certain that the selection is a wise one, and one that a nation could live with for the lifetime of the judge. Today, we walk again the careful path laid out by the Founding Fathers to ensure for the American people that Judge Roberts is a man worthy of their trust.

Fully realizing that Judge Roberts will most certainly receive substantial support from the Senate, I will cast my vote against this appointment. I do not object to Judge Roberts' politics, nor do I object to his personal beliefs. Our democracy guarantees him both the freedom to think and speak as he chooses, and the opportunity to ascend to any position in our government for which he is qualified.

My concerns lie instead with the failure of the Department of Justice and the White House to honor the request of members of the Senate Judiciary Committee to make available certain documents relating to 16 cases Judge Roberts worked on when he served as Principal Deputy Solicitor General. These documents, written during Judge Roberts' tenure in his most senior executive branch position, are relevant to the Senate's evaluation of his fitness to serve as the Chief Justice of the highest court of this land.

I am not suggesting that these documents might contain dark shadows-- far from it. The refusal of the White House to allow the American people to see this corner of Judge Roberts' record, however, deviates from the careful road our Founding Fathers paved for us so many years ago, and leaves Americans wondering, ``Do those papers hide something I should know?''

Many groups have questioned Judge Roberts' position on civil rights. His early writings outline defiance toward review of civil rights violations by Federal courts, and many have asked how his views have evolved over the years. As one who has spent his life fighting against baseless prejudice and discrimination, I share these concerns. Would the papers withheld from our sight have answered these questions? We will never know.

Throughout my career I have supported a woman's right to choose. I have supported Roe v. Wade. I have also supported stem cell research. The responses Judge Roberts provided when questioned about these issues did not assure me that these questions would be seriously considered. I hope I am wrong. Perhaps the papers hidden from our sight would have allayed my fears.

Similarly, my questions on Judge Roberts' thoughts on the death penalty, and habeas corpus review by the Federal courts will never be answered.

I am not against the person. As I noted, I am impressed by his legal scholarship. Although we seem to differ on the fundamental issues of the day, I respect his right to freely form and hold his own opinions. I do, however, object to the failure of the White House, the Department of Justice, and ultimately Judge Roberts himself, to make available documents from his past. The American people deserve a nominee unclouded by needless secrecy--and our democratic heritage demands that the President and the Congress work together to confirm the worthiness of any man or woman to sit as a Supreme Court Justice. To affirm my allegiance to these most American of principles, I will vote, ``no.''

Would the distinguished Senators from Utah and Wisconsin yield? I would like to discuss with you a program that addresses the very limited employment and high barriers to entry into sustainable agricultural enterprises on the Island of Molokai.

I thank my distinguished colleagues for yielding. In fiscal year 2005 and prior fiscal years, the subcommittee has included $250,000 for a program that provides training, business coaching, and cost share assistance to new agricultural businesses on the Island of Molokai, that have the promise of being sustainable and beneficial to this predominantly Native Hawaiian community. In 2004, the program allowed past grantees who had demonstrated success in their businesses to apply for expansion and enhancement funding. As a result, eight businesses were able to strengthen their operations through diversification, value added treatment, and improved marketing. As a result of the program, increased quantities and percentages of local produce and value added products are available in Molokai's grocery stores, farmers markets and other venues. In addition, the marketing of sweet potatoes and papayas has continued to expand to the Island of Maui and on the mainland. In the coming year, the emphasis will be on first-time farm businesses. Mini start-up grants will be instituted to prepare new applicants for possible

projects in the future. While this program is showing success in an economically depressed part of my State, the need for this program continues.

Despite the support by the Congress, no funds are provided for the program in fiscal year 2006. Accordingly, efforts to assist first-time farm businesses and to provide assistance and employment opportunities to the Island of Molokai will not continue without the continued support of the Congress and funding for the program. Would my colleagues consider including such support for the program during conference deliberations on the Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and related agencies appropriations bill?

I thank my colleagues for their consideration and support of the Molokai Agriculture Development program.

position transfer

Mr. President, today, I offer an amendment that would prohibit the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Services, APHIS, from using appropriated funds to demolish or dismantle the Hawaii Fruit Fly Production Facility in Waimanalo, HI.

This amendment, which is cosponsored by my dear friends, Senator Akaka and Senator Finstein, is in response to a recent decision made by APHIS to dismantle the Hawaii Fruit Fly Production Facility in Waimanalo, HI and would preclude the agency from carrying out this decision until other alternatives have been articulated and analyzed. In addition, this amendment would provide the agency and the many stakeholders with additional time to examine the issue, to seek a more creative solution, and to have the Secretary recommend a plan that is acceptable to the agricultural representatives of the State of Hawaii, California, and other impacted States.

Releases of sterile insects have played a prominent role in the success of most pest control or eradication programs. It is in this context that I have two main concerns with the agency's decision. First, relying solely on Guatemala as a source of sterile Mediterranean fruit flies places the United States at risk if the supply from Guatemala were curtailed for any reason. In these times of terrorist activities and civil unrest, disruption is much more than an academic debate. I have been assured by other states impacted by the APHIS decision that they share my concern.

Second, from a Hawaii perspective the permanent closure of the facility in Waimanalo does not bode well for the future of diversified agriculture in Hawaii. Unfortunately, Hawaii is infested with four fruit fly pest species--not just the Mediterranean fruit fly. Any hope of area wide control or eradication of these pests requires efficient rearing of all four species for sterile release programs. It is my intent to seek support for a multiple species rearing facility in Waimanalo to address this problem that is unique to Hawaii. While suppression of all four of the fruit fly species in Hawaii is of great benefit to our State, such activities may be among the best mechanisms for avoiding inadvertent fruit fly infestations in other states where these alien pests can survive.

Given these concerns, I urge my colleagues to support my amendment that would prohibit APHIS from implementing its demolition decision and to provide additional time for the agency to work with all stakeholders in exploring and implementing a sound public policy on this issue of great importance to the State of Hawaii.

Mr. President, will the distinguished Senators from Utah and Wisconsin yield? I would like to discuss

with them the tremendous potential of open ocean cage culture as a sustainable source of high protein seafood for the United States and the world, and the issues associated with advancing open ocean cage culture.

I thank my distinguished colleagues for yielding. Along with the increased demand for seafood, we have also witnessed the decline in natural fisheries. While we have, as a Nation, made great advances with land-based aquaculture to address the widening gap between seafood demand and supply, we are beginning to see the emerging potential of open ocean cage culture as a way to bolster supply without detrimental impacts on the marine environment. With the development of a viable open ocean cage aquaculture industry, we will have a valuable tool to assist our efforts to manage wild fisheries and ensure that United States consumers will have access to a range of high quality, environmentally responsible seafood products. I am proud to say that producers and the marine aquaculture research community in my State of Hawaii are among the leaders in the development of this new industry. To date, growers in Hawaii have demonstrated the commercial viability of open ocean cage culture for Hawaiian finfish and have small scale ventures that supply Hawaii as well as some mainland markets.

To move open ocean cage culture to the next level requires the refinement and transfer of finfish hatchery technology to the industry. The Oceanic Institute in Hawaii has been the leader in developing this technology but recently has encountered problems in scaling hatchery technology to a commercial level. To overcome these problems, this research organization has recently expressed a need to remove the nutritional and other constraints in the raising of finfish fingerlings destined for open ocean cages. This will involve some redirection of funds provided by this committee for the Oceanic Institute of Hawaii for a comprehensive aquaculture development research program. Specifically, there is a need to shift funds from more general feed issues to the myriad problems associated with raising fingerlings on a commercial scale for open ocean cages. I support such changes in the use of funds appropriated for the Oceanic Institute of Hawaii and seek your concurrence.

I thank my colleagues.

Mr. President, on the occasion of the 33rd annual convention of the National Association of Foreign-Trade Zones, NAFTZ, which is meeting this week in my home State of Hawaii, I rise today to pay tribute to the cofounder of the NAFTZ, my good friend, Homer A. Maxey, Jr., who I have known for more than a quarter century.

The NAFTZ was conceived in November of 1972, at an informal meeting of foreign-trade zone representatives from various States. At that meeting, Homer A. Maxey, Jr., was selected chairman of a committee to develop the organizational framework for a formal association representing FTZ grantees and operators in the U.S. During a conference of FTZ managers in Washington, DC, on May 8, 1973, the NAFTZ was officially launched and Homer was elected to serve as the first President of this Association from 1973 to 1975. Homer was elected, by unanimous vote of the members, as the first Honorary Life Member at the NAFTZ Annual Conference in 1979. He has served on many different Committees of the NAFTZ including: the Oil Refinery Sub-Zone Task Force, ORSTF, the Operations Committee, Nominations Committee, the Long Range Planning Committee, and several task forces. Today the NAFTZ represents over 800 members comprised of State and local government agencies, public entities, individuals and corporations involved in the Foreign-Trade Zone program. The NAFTZ plays an important role in facilitating international trade and U.S. competitiveness through the promotion and support of the Foreign-Trade Zones Program.

The Foreign-Trade Zones Program was created by an act of Congress in 1934. Its purpose is to encourage domestic warehousing, manufacturing and processing activity. States and local governments use foreign-trade zones as part of their overall economic development strategy and to improve the international business sector in their communities. FTZs contribute to the enhancement of the U.S. investment climate for commerce and industry. The FTZ program encourages capital investment in the U.S. rather than abroad and secures American jobs. The benefit occurs only if the activity takes place in the U.S. It substitutes U.S.-produced merchandise and labor for foreign imports. Today there are 260 approved general-purpose zones and 534 subzones located in all 50 States and Puerto Rico. According to the latest available annual report of the Foreign-Trade Zones Board, the total value of merchandise received at foreign-trade zones annually exceeds $200 billion. Over 2,200 firms in the U.S. utilize foreign-trade zones and employment at these facilities exceeds 300,000.

During his involvement with the NAFTZ, Homer Maxey has played an instrumental role in the growth and development of the U.S. Foreign- Trade Zones Program. For instance, he was instrumental in a number of issues, challenges, and accomplishments of the program, including spearheading customs regulations to limit customs duties on merchandise manufactured in FTZs to foreign material only; streamlining FTZ inventory recordkeeping; creating uniform FTZ management practices nationally; securing weekly entry for manufacturing; eliminating activation and annual fees on foreign-trade zones; allowing users of foreign-trade zones to defer entry and payment of duty on foreign production machinery used in FTZs until such time that the equipment goes into commercial production, and eliminating the merchandise processing fee on domestic materials shipped from FTZs.

At the same time Homer Maxey directed General Purpose Foreign-Trade Zone No. 9 in Hawaii, which was established in February 1965. Homer was the Administrator for the State of Hawaii's Foreign-Trade Zone project from 1965 through 1993. During his management of the zone, the first FTZ oil refinery was established on Oahu. Thereafter, the program in Hawaii grew under his direction to include today five General-Purpose Zone sites and five Subzones handling $2.04 billion worth of merchandise from 341 firms, with exports of $290,980,773 and employing a total of 2,683 people in zone-related activities. From its modest beginnings with 40,000 square feet originally approved, the General Purpose Zone project grew to involve 15 percent of the designated industrial lands on the Island of Oahu.

After attending the University of Hawaii in Honolulu, Mr. Maxey was employed by Hawaiian Airlines. He served in the U.S. Air Force during the early 1950s. He was employed by Matson Lines, 1955-1965, in passenger sales, freight traffic and marine operations. He has also been active in the Hawaii/Pacific Export Council, the Propeller Club of the Port of Honolulu, and the Chamber of Commerce of Hawaii. Mr. Maxey has also been a consultant to the State of Hawaii, the County of Hawaii, and Foreign-Trade Zone No. 9.

It is my honor to recognize the lifelong contributions of Homer Maxey to the U.S. Foreign-Trade Zones Program and the State of Hawaii. I wish Homer and his wife, Mahina, all the best in the future.

Mr. President, I rise to support the passage of the conference report for H.R. 3, SAFETEA-LU, the reauthorization of our Federal surface transportation programs. During my 42 years in the Senate, it has been the rare occasion when we pass a piece of legislation that is guaranteed to save lives. But the safety provisions authored by the Senate Commerce Committee in this transportation reauthorization bill will save thousands of lives, and prevent thousands of serious injuries, for generations.

I want to thank Chairman Stevens, Chairman Lott, Senators Pryor, Rockefeller, Burns, Dorgan, Lautenberg, and Boxer of the Senate Commerce Committee for working so closely with me to develop a consensus, bipartisan safety bill in the Senate. Likewise, Chairman Young, Chairman Petri, Chairman Barton, and Ranking Members Oberstar, DeFazio, and Dingell from the House Transportation and Infrastructure and Energy and Commerce Committees for their efforts in merging our bills into a truly landmark conference report.

In crafting our bill and conference report, we have incorporated many of the administration's recommendations and provisions from our similar effort that passed the Senate last year covering auto, truck, rail safety, and hazardous materials transportation safety. The bill also strengthens consumer protections for those who entrust their belongings to a moving company, provides more robust, predictable funding for boating safety and sport fish restoration programs, and provides additional financing options.

In the 1970s, we required that seatbelts be standard equipment in all automobiles. We then followed in the 1980s with airbags and other safety features. Now a new generation of technology has opened the door to even greater automobile safety. With Chairman Stevens and Senator Lott, we undertook a bipartisan mission in the Commerce Committee to use these new technologies to reduce injuries and save lives of automobile drivers and passengers.

The development of electronic stability control by America's brilliant engineers is the most promising vehicle safety technology of our generation. Rollovers represent one-third of all traffic safety fatalities, so our safety bill requires that electronic stability control become standard equipment on all passenger cars and trucks in 5 years. It is also cost effective since it uses existing anti-lock brakes to correct the course of a vehicle before a potential rollover.

During a rollover, we need to keep occupants inside the car where they are better protected. Therefore, the bill also requires stronger doors and door locks. The third critical change is to mandate stronger roofs that are less likely to crush occupants during a rollover.

This highway safety bill goes even further: side-impact crash standards that likely will result in side-curtain airbags in every automobile; new rules to make 15-passenger vans subject to the same safety tests as automobiles; a prohibition on sales of new 15-passenger vans to schools for use in carrying children; and new power-window switches that will reduce strangulation deaths and injuries to children.

Cumulatively, these improved vehicle safety standards will save thousands of lives.

We also dramatically increase funding for programs to reduce drunk driving and increase seatbelt use. I am especially proud that our bill gives States large incentives to crack down on hard-core drunk drivers, those who have the audacity to drive drunk again after a prior conviction. We also provide $29 million annually for national advertising and safety enforcement campaigns, which research data shows has had a significant effect on saving lives. In other words, everyone will see more commercials during the holidays about drunk driving and seatbelt use, and there will be more police on patrol during those times.

There is a final issue that is very important to me, highway safety on Indian lands. While the rate of highway deaths and injuries has declined across the Nation, the death and injury rate on Indian lands has actually increased.

Since 1982, 65 percent of fatal crashes that occurred on Indian lands were alcohol related. That compares to the national alcohol-related death rate of 47 percent of all fatal crashes.

The percentage of fatal crashes on Indian reservations that involves a single vehicle is 26 percent higher than in the rest of the Nation. These single-vehicle accidents are the most preventable, and where we can save the most lives per dollar spent on traffic safety outreach and enforcement.

Therefore, from the funding pool for the basic safety grant in this bill, we more than doubled the proportion of basic safety grant money sent to the Bureau of Indian Affairs. BIA distributes this money to Indian tribes that apply for funds to reduce drunk driving, increase seatbelt use, and enact other safety strategies. This was a provision in the original Senate bill, and we convinced our colleagues on the conference committee to include it in the final report. This extra funding will make a tremendous difference in the lives of our Native Americans, whose families suffer the tragedy of highway deaths more severely than any other part of our country.

To improve the safety of trucks and buses operating on our Nation's roads, we have reauthorized the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration's safety programs FMCSA and strengthened their efforts to improve truck safety through strong enforcement and cooperation with the trucking industry. The conference report also reauthorizes the Motor Carrier Safety Assistance Program, MCSAP, for the years 2006 through 2009 at an average annual funding level nearing $200 million, more than double the TEA 21 level, and consistent with the administration's proposal.

The conference report also provides $128 million over the life of the reauthorization to improve States' Commercial Driver's License programs and modernize the Commercial Driver's License Information System, CDLIS. The conference report updates the medical program for commercial drivers by establishing a Medical Review Board to recommend standards for the physical examinations of commercial drivers and a registry for qualified medical examiners to ensure medical examiners have received proper training.

The conference report also improves the maintenance and safety of intermodal truck chassis are the current Single State Registration System for truck registration, SSRS, with a new system that requires truckers to only register in one State, while preserving State revenues collected through the current system.

To improve the safety and security of the transportation of hazardous materials, the conference report reauthorizes the hazardous materials, HAZMAT, transportation safety programs at an average of $30 million annually, now administered by the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, PHMSA, for the first time in over 10 years.

The conference report provides $21,800,000 annually for community HAZMAT planning and training grants and allows States to use some of their planning money to training programs as needed. Additionally, the bill provides $4 million annually for HAZMAT ``train the trainer'' grants, and allows these funds to be used to train HAZMAT employees directly.

The conference report also increases civil penalties to up to $100,000 for HAZMAT violations that result in severe injury or death and raises the minimum penalties for violations related to training. The conference report requires Mexican and Canadian commercial motor vehicle operators transporting HAZMAT in the U.S. to undergo a background check similar to those for U.S. HAZMAT drivers.

Additionally, the conference report streamlines Federal responsibilities for ensuring the safety of food shipment by transferring primary responsibility of food transportation safety from the Department of Transportation to the Department of Health and Human Services, HHS, which would set practices to be followed by shippers, carriers, and others engaged in food transportation.

To provide greater protection to consumers entrusting their belongings to a moving company, the conference report allows a state authority that enforces State consumer protection laws and State attorney general to enforce Federal laws and regulations governing the transportation of household goods in interstate commerce. Additionally, the conference report imposes new penalties for fraudulent activities perpetrated by movers and imposes new registration requirements on household goods carriers to protect consumers.

This conference report also reauthorizes activities funded by two of the Nation's most effective ``user-pay, user-benefit'' programs--the sport fish restoration fund, administered by the Fish and Wildlife Service, and the recreational boating safety fund, administered by the U.S. Coast Guard. These programs constitute the ``Wallop-Breaux'' program, which is funded through the aquatic resources trust fund.

The reauthorization will allow continued funding of programs that benefit boating safety, sportfish, and wetland restoration, as well as Clean Vessel Act grants that help to keep our waterways clean. I am pleased to report that this provision is supported by a large coalition of recreational and boating groups who are members of the American League of Anglers and Boaters.

The changes made include: (1) renaming the trust fund the sport fish restoration and boating trust fund, and eliminating the separate boating safety account; (2) reauthorizing the marine sanitary devices pump-out program, the Boating Infrastructure Grant Program, and outreach programs; and (3) funding most of the programs on a percentage basis, which provides both simplicity and fairness. Conforming changes to the Internal Revenue Code are also included.

The growing popularity of recreational boating and fishing has created safety, environmental, and access needs that have been successfully addressed by the Recreational Boating Safety and Sport Fish Restoration Programs. The trust fund program reauthorizations and funding adjustments contained in the conference report are important for the safety of boaters, the continued enjoyment of fishermen, and improvement of our coastal areas and waterways.

Finally, the conference report streamlines the Federal Railroad Administration's Railroad Rehabilitation and Improvement Financing Loan Program and increases the amount of loans for railroad infrastructure improvements. The conference report creates a new program to fund the relocation of rail lines and other projects that help alleviate congestion, noise, and other impacts from railroads on communities and provides additional funds for highspeed rail planning and development efforts.

As the title of this bill implies, increasing the safety of our highways and surface transportation system is one of our Nation's top priorities, and I am proud to say that this conference report will bring us closer to the goal of having the safest transportation system in the world.

Mr. President, today I introduce the ``Medicaid Advanced Practice Nurse and Physician Assistants Access Act of 2005.'' This legislation would change Federal law to expand fee-for-service Medicaid to include direct payment for services provided by all nurse practitioners, clinical nurse specialists, and physician assistants. It would ensure all nurse practitioners, certified nurse midwives, and physician assistants are recognized as primary care case managers, and require Medicaid panels to include advanced practice nurses on their managed care panels.

Advanced practice nurses are registered nurses who have attained additional expertise in the clinical management of health conditions. Typically, an advanced practice nurse holds a master's degree with didactic and clinical preparation beyond that of the registered nurse. They are employed in clinics, hospitals, and private practices. While there are many titles given to these advanced practice nurses, such as pediatric nurse practitioners, family nurse practitioners, certified nurse midwives, certified registered nurse anesthetists, and clinical nurse specialists, our current Medicaid law has not kept up with the multiple specialties and titles of these advanced practitioners, nor has it recognized the critical role physician assistants play in the delivery of primary care.

I have been a long-time advocate of advanced practice nurses and their ability to extend health care services to our most rural and underserved communities. They have improved access to health care in Hawaii and throughout the United States by their willingness to practice in what some providers might see as undesirable locations--the extremely rural, frontier, or urban areas. This legislation ensures they are recognized and reimbursed for providing the necessary health care services patients need, and it gives those patients the choice of selecting advanced practice nurses and physician assistants as their primary care providers.

In 1986, the Congressional Office of Technology Assessment released a report requested by the Senate Appropriations Committee. This report, ``Nurse Practitioners, Physician Assistants, and Certified Nurse Midwives: A Policy Analysis,'' found the quality of nurse practitioner care to be as good as or better than care provided by physicians. By passing this legislation, we honor the commitment of these frontline health care professionals by ensuring they receive the respect and reimbursement they have earned.

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