Floor Statements

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Energy Tax Rebate Act of 2005 and I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Michigan families and families across America are being delivered a one-two punch when it comes to energy prices. First, they continue to be hit hard by high gasoline prices. Now they are facing home heating costs this winter that are expected to rise dramatically compared to last year.

We can do better than this for our families. So today I am introducing a bill that will provide families with an immediate $500 tax rebate to help them pay for rising energy costs. My legislation also includes important consumer protections to make sure Americans are not the victims of unfair market practices and consumer price gouging. Finally, my bill includes a Sense of the Senate that the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program, known as LIHEAP, should be fully funded to its authorized level of $5.1 billion. LIHEAP is a successful program that makes sure our most vulnerable families, those living on low incomes or fixed-incomes, are able to heat their homes during the cold winter months.

Filling our cars with gasoline to take our children to school and heating our homes in the winter are not luxuries. They are necessities. Energy is a necessity. Together we can do better and together we will do better.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Energy Tax Rebate Act of 2005 and I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Michigan families and families across America are being delivered a one-two punch when it comes to energy prices. First, they continue to be hit hard by high gasoline prices. Now they are facing home heating costs this winter that are expected to rise dramatically compared to last year.

We can do better than this for our families. So today I am introducing a bill that will provide families with an immediate $500 tax rebate to help them pay for rising energy costs. My legislation also includes important consumer protections to make sure Americans are not the victims of unfair market practices and consumer price gouging. Finally, my bill includes a Sense of the Senate that the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program, known as LIHEAP, should be fully funded to its authorized level of $5.1 billion. LIHEAP is a successful program that makes sure our most vulnerable families, those living on low incomes or fixed-incomes, are able to heat their homes during the cold winter months.

Filling our cars with gasoline to take our children to school and heating our homes in the winter are not luxuries. They are necessities. Energy is a necessity. Together we can do better and together we will do better.

Mr. President, I rise today to recognize the 75th anniversary of the Detroit Windsor Tunnel. Over the past 75 years, the tunnel has been an indispensable link between the United States and Canada.

In the years before the construction of the tunnel, cars and trucks crossed the Detroit River on ferries. During the winter, the river froze and made the ferry ride between Detroit and Windsor dangerous. On November 3, 1930, President Herbert Hoover ushered in a new era in U.S.-Canadian relations when he officially opened the Detroit Windsor Tunnel.

Not only has the tunnel been a vital commercial and cultural link between the United States and Canada, at the time of its construction it was an unparalleled engineering feat. The tunnel is approximately 1 mile long and reaches depths of 75 feet below the river. It is the only underwater international vehicular border crossing in the world. At full capacity, 2,400 vehicles can pass between Detroit and Windsor each hour through the tunnel.

During the tunnel's construction, there were as many as 600 workers simultaneously building the structure. One group of workers called the ``muckers'' dug a 32-foot hole in tight quarters through sand and clay deep below the Detroit River. As a tribute to the workers who built the Detroit Windsor Tunnel a year ahead of schedule, the first person to drive the distance of the tunnel and back was Joseph Zuccatto, a construction worker who earned 35 cents an hour.

The Detroit Windsor Tunnel is one of the cornerstones of the close economic relationship between the United States

and Canada. The United States and Canada trade $1.2 billion worth of goods and services each day that supports 5.2 million jobs. Trade between the United States and Canada is valued over $400 billion per year. Michigan's trade with Canada represents 19 percent of the United States land-based trade and supports 174,000 Michigan jobs.

The Detroit Windsor Tunnel is a crucial link between the U.S. and Canadian economies. The tunnel is one of the 15 busiest border crossings nationally, with more than 9 million vehicles passing through the tunnel each year. Additionally, at least 850 trucks and 5,000 commuters pass through the tunnel for business, entertainment, and shopping each day.

In recent years, all U.S. ports of entry have balanced increased border security requirements with the needs of tourists and business travelers to quickly enter and leave the United States. The Detroit Windsor Tunnel has enthusiastically responded to these challenges and worked with local, State and Federal officials to meet these urgent needs.

Mr. President, I commend the Detroit Windsor Tunnel on its 75th anniversary, for its service to the people of the United States and Canada, and for its continuous innovation to serve those who rely on it.

I second the motion.

Will the Senator yield?

I thank the Chair. I thank my colleague and esteemed leader, our ranking member on the Budget Committee.

I rise this evening to oppose the amendment of my friend from Oklahoma, as well as the entire budget resolution that is in front of us.

Together, America can do better than this budget and this amendment. Basically, what the amendment is saying is, if we want to invest in education so every child has the opportunity to succeed in America, we wish to create greater opportunity, it would take 67 votes. If we want to provide another tax cut for those most blessed in this country, those doing most well, the best of anyone in terms of their financial situation, that would take 51 votes. If we want to invest in science and new cures for Alzheimer's and Parkinson's and diabetes, it would take 67 votes. If we wish to give to those most blessed with resources in our country a tax cut, it would take 51 votes.

That is the wrong set of priorities for our country. I support tax cuts certainly. I sponsored and worked with colleagues on both sides of the aisle to add a new tax cut for manufacturers so if they create jobs in the United States they have a lower tax rate than if the jobs and business go overseas. Certainly, we agree together that the alternative minimum tax needs to be fixed so middle-class families are not impacted by something that was put into play to affect only those who are the most wealthy from avoiding all taxes.

We could go down the list of things that we support on a bipartisan basis. But where we differ is where we have gone in this country under a failed set of values and priorities.

And this amendment only makes that worse. We can do better than that. Our Nation's budget is designed to reflect the values and priorities of our great country. It is essentially our country's values document. I believe this budget does not honor our Nation's values, and it has the wrong priorities for our country.

I believe this amendment does the same, again, saying if we wish to invest in the health of the country, if we wish to help manufacturers who, in my great State, desperately need our help by changing the way we finance health care in this country, that would take 67 votes. But if we wish, instead, to provide another round of tax cuts to those who are most blessed in this country, that takes 51 votes. That is the wrong set of values and the wrong set of priorities, and we can do better than that in America.

As Americans, we believe we should leave a better future for our children and our grandchildren. The American people expect us to make tough choices, just like they do around their kitchen tables every day, trying to balance the budget. In my home State people are not sure if they are going to have a job, what the pay is going to be, are they going to have their pension, are they going to have to pay more for health care. They are having to make the toughest decisions every day. They expect us to be responsible and make the tough decisions we need to make.

We do this because we don't want our children to have to pay for our debts. That is why we make tough decisions. Parents across the country work hard enough to build a nest egg for their children so they can have a better life than we have had as their parents. We want that. My great concern is that we are losing that for our children. I believe we are in a fight for our way of life in this country and nothing less. And the budget documents in front of us only make that worse, only add to the race to the bottom too many of our families are feeling.

This budget we are considering in two separate reconciliation bills will actually increase the deficit, not reduce it--increase it by $31 billion. America expects us to do better than that. Most Americans might wonder why are we increasing the deficit when we already have the largest deficit in the history of the country. We are fighting wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and we must help to pay for the rebuilding of the gulf coast for all of those who have lost so much. Since 2001 when we had the largest surplus in history, we have taken a fiscal U-turn, and now we have the largest deficit in history, putting us back in the days of gloomy fiscal policies in the 1980s and early 1990s.

It is important to know there was a choice at that point, as our leader and our side of the aisle has indicated. When I started in the Budget Committee in 2001, we had the largest budget surplus in the history of the country. We had two choices. We could do what we were proposing at the time: take a third of that for stimulating investment in jobs, take a third of that in tax cuts to spur the economy, a third of that for strategic investments to spur the economy through education, innovation, to also spur the economy, and a third of that we wanted to put aside to pay down the debt and to keep Social Security secure. Instead, what happened. Our Republican colleagues rejected our approach, and now we have the largest deficits in the Nation's history due to the fact that all of it was put into a supply-side economics tax cut geared to the wealthiest among us at the expense of all of the rest of America.

Mr. President, these deficits are not free lunches. We have to pay them year by year. And how are we paying for them? Well, we are borrowing billions of dollars from Japan and China. Right now, Japan and China hold almost $1 trillion, $1 trillion of our national debt. And it is growing each and every year. Not only do taxpayers have to pay interest to China and Japan, our Government has refused to crack down on unfair trade practices with these two countries because we are so far in debt to them. I can tell you, coming from the great State of Michigan, our administration's unwillingness to crack

down on trade violations, currency manipulation, counterfeit auto parts, and stealing our patents has had a profound impact on our losing jobs in Michigan. They are all related because of our policies in terms of the national debt affecting our inability to, in fact, enforce trade violations.

We can do better than that. Together, America can do better than this. We can get our fiscal house in order and get tough with our trading partners who are not playing by the rules. The reconciliation bill, unfortunately, though, will hurt working families in Michigan. For seniors who have worked hard their entire lives, they will see their most basic services cut. For some working single-parent families, they will see their health insurance cut. For hard-working family farmers, their livelihoods will be put in jeopardy.

With so many working families losing health insurance or paying more for less, is this a good time to be cutting Medicare and Medicaid, our Nation's health insurance programs for seniors and children? We can do better than that.

Also, given all the economic problems hurting our rural communities, including a terrible drought in Michigan, is this a good time to cut programs that help our farmers? Is now the time to force farmers who are struggling into bankruptcy? We can do better that.

This budget's priorities are so different than those of Michigan families. Michigan families want us to fight for good-paying jobs, for affordable health care, and for a secure pension. In essence, they want us to fight to preserve their way of life, the middle class of our country, where they can raise their kids, send them to college, get quality health care, retire with dignity after 30 or 40 years of hard work, and know that pension is going to be there along with Social Security.

Mr. President, America can do better than this document and this amendment. If we make the right budget choices, we can expand health insurance for working families and lower costs. We can create jobs, protect pensions, bring down the deficit if we make better budget choices.

As my colleagues know, our Nation's largest auto parts manufacturer, Delphi, declared bankruptcy 3 weeks ago, threatening 13,000 jobs in Michigan and 35,000 jobs nationwide. Its workers may not only lose their jobs, they will lose their health care and their pension; in other words, everything they have worked for for their entire lives, everything they have earned, everything they are counting on for themselves and their families. Tragically, this budget package does nothing for them. It increases the deficit, which hurts our economy, gives Japan and China the upper hand in trade negotiations, cuts health care, and does nothing to protect people. That is why I intend to vote no on this budget and on the amendment. I will continue to fight for Michigan's families who are struggling every single day, and I believe it is not just Michigan families struggling now but American families all across our great country.

I worry about whether their way of life is going to continue to exist. They want a change. They know we can do better than this.

They know this budget debate really is a proxy for a larger philosophical debate, a larger choice on values and priorities.

The Republican approach to governing is that you are on your own--no matter what the issue.

We believe that all families need jobs, health care, quality schools and a secure pension.

The Republican approach is that you are on your own.

If you lose your job, you are on your own. If your Medicare premiums rise 13 percent, you are on your own. If your schools are not performing well, you get a school voucher. And if your pension is threatened, you can try to get some of it back from the PBGC.

Mr. President, America can do better. Together, we can create good jobs, maintain our middle class way of life and get our country back on track.

But this budget will take us in the wrong direction.

I urge my colleagues to oppose it.

Mr. President, if I might ask, before my very distinguished colleague and friend from West Virginia speaks, I wonder if I might simply make a statement for just a moment about a unanimous consent request that I had intended to offer. I understand there will be an objection to it, but with my colleague's consent, I appreciate having 2 minutes to be able to make a comment.

Mr. President, I wish to go on record this evening with my great disappointment at not being able to bring up under unanimous consent a version of the bill that would name a Federal office building in Detroit for Rosa Parks. This had originally been offered by my colleague, Congresswoman Carolyn C. Kilpatrick of Detroit, a longtime friend and colleague of Rosa Parks.

Originally, last evening, we passed my version of the bill along with an amendment, agreed to, of Senator Warner. This evening it is my desire to pass the House version of that with Senator Warner's amendment, the very same amendment that we have already passed last evening, but to place it into the House bill so we could then send it back to the House. It would be like the Senate bill that we passed.

To my understanding, there is an objection on the other side of the aisle to doing that. If not, I would proceed to do that. It is the very same thing we did last evening, but it would put it into the House bill.

My House colleague, who is the originator of the proposal on the Federal office building, would like very much to have us pass the House bill and have that be the bill that is sent on to the President. That is the bill that I was hoping we would pass here in the same form with the Warner amendment that we passed last evening.

Mr. President, if I might just respond to my distinguished colleague, notice was given. That is how I know there is an objection. So I am not rising to make the unanimous consent request. I understand there is an objection on the other side of the aisle. I am simply standing this evening to indicate my disappointment that we have not been able to resolve this here and be able to, in fact, include Senator Warner's amendment and be able to send it back to the House of Representatives.

Hopefully, we are going to be able to resolve it another way and be able to accomplish what we all wish to accomplish.

I support Senator Warner's desire and the gentleman he is wishing to honor with the naming of a building. Also, certainly it is my goal and the goal of my colleague in the House to be able, in fact, to pass a bill to send to the President, giving the great civil rights champion of our country and the world, Rosa Parks, the respect and honor she deserves. It is our hope to have that done prior to her funeral.

I will be happy to. This has been a confusing situation, I say through the Chair to the distinguished Senator from Virginia. After speaking with you, I spoke with the Congresswoman who was concerned about which bill would be going to the President's desk. So I was simply rising, not to offer a motion but just to express my concern about the dilemma that we are in at the moment.

That is correct.

That is correct.

Mr. President, if I might, in no way was this meant to show disrespect for the Senator from Virginia. We have worked very properly together. I was simply rising this evening to indicate that the original way to resolve this by including the Senator's amendment in the House bill is not something that is acceptable to

other colleagues. That was the desire of the Congresswoman whose idea it was to name the building in her district. She feels very strongly about this, and I was indicating that for the Record. I don't wish to have more confusion.

I very much appreciate the Senator from West Virginia allowing me a moment. But in no way was this meant to show disrespect for my colleague. We have worked very well together.

Mr. President, thank you for the courtesy. I am sure we will be able to move forward in a prompt way.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 260, S. 1285, a bill to designate the Federal building located at 333 Mt. Elliott Street in Detroit, MI, as the ``Rosa Parks Federal Building.'' Rosa Parks passed away this past Monday at the age of 92, one of the giants in American history. It is very fitting that we pass this bill naming this building. I ask that the bill be read three times, passed, and the motion to reconsider be laid on the table without intervening action or debate.

Yes, Mr. President. I ask unanimous consent to modify my request to include the Warner amendment.

Mr. President, I renew my request to pass the Rosa Parks Building designation. I renew my request to pass that. Rosa Parks is one of the great civil rights leaders of our time, a great heroine who has now passed away at the age of 92. She deserves this recognition. I very much hoped that we could have a unanimous vote in support of honoring this very important woman.

Yes, I did do that. There was an objection to that. So I renewed my unanimous consent request for the Rosa Parks Federal Building.

I will be happy to include a revised unanimous consent for Senator Warner.

Mr. President, I rise today in recognition of Veterans Day to pay tribute to the men and women that have served our country as members of the U.S. Armed Forces.

I join my colleagues and those across Michigan and our country in reflecting upon the meaning of this day and the service of our fellow Americans.

I often have the pleasure of meeting with Michigan's proud community of veterans. I have also been privileged to welcome home members of our armed services and the Michigan National Guard and reserves serving in Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom. These men and women are a credit to our great State, their communities, and their families.

America's men and women in the military give their time, and in many cases life and limb, to serve our country. Today's soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines are tomorrow's veterans and we owe them our gratitude for their service.

One of the most fitting ways we can honor the service and sacrifice of America's veterans is to ensure that we honor the commitments we have made to them and their families. I am proud to be working with my colleagues from both political parties and with veterans' organizations from across the country, including the American Legion and VFW, in leading the fight to pass legislation guaranteeing that health care services for our veterans are funded. This law would eliminate the year-to-year uncertainty about funding for veterans health care by making this funding mandatory in the annual budget. As we reflect on this Veterans Day, I urge my colleagues to keep our promise to our Nation's veterans by supporting this important amendment.

I stand today in honor of all the men and women from Michigan and across our country who have given their lives while serving in Iraq and Afghanistan. We are all grateful for their sacrifice and offer our condolences to their families. On this Veterans Day, I join my colleagues and the wonderful men and women that have served our country in the Armed Forces--veterans young and old--in paying tribute to them and their service.

Mr. President, first, I appreciate the courtesies extended to me by the distinguished Senator from Pennsylvania and the distinguished Senator from Iowa.

I rise to pay tribute to one of the giants of American history. Today we honor the remarkable life and legacy of Rosa Parks, who died just last evening at the age of 92.

The Detroit News today says:

Courage in the face of oppression; resistance in the face

of injustice. That is the enduring legacy of Rosa Parks,

whose defiance on a racially segregated Montgomery, Ala., bus

lit the flame of the modern civil rights movement and

inspired freedom movements from South Africa to Poland.

The Detroit Free Press today:

When Rosa Parks refused to get up, an entire race of people

began to stand up for their rights as human beings. Her

refusal to give up her bus seat to a white man was a simple

act that took extraordinary courage in Montgomery, Ala., in

1955. It was a place where black people had no rights that

white people had to respect. It was a time when racial

discrimination was so common, many blacks never questioned

it. At least not out loud. But then came Rosa Louise Parks.

I am so proud Rosa Parks was a resident of Michigan. We have claimed her for many years and are so proud that she has left her legacy to all of us, particularly in Detroit, MI.

On December 1, 1955, Rosa Parks left work in her hometown of Montgomery, AL, and boarded a bus headed for home. When the bus became crowded, she was ordered by the bus driver to give up her seat to a white male passenger. She refused. Rosa Parks was arrested, and 4 days later the Montgomery bus boycott began. The boycott lasted for over a year until the Montgomery buses were officially desegregated in December of 1956.

Rosa Parks was a courageous woman who did what she believed was fair and right. She is a testament to the power of one individual willing to fight for their beliefs. Her actions set the civil rights movement in motion and set a precedent for protest without violence. We all owe a debt of gratitude to Rosa Parks for her contribution to freedom and justice for all men and women in this country. Truly, her actions changed the course of history.

Rosa Parks moved to Detroit in 1957 and it became home for her for nearly 50 years. In 1977, she and Elaine Easton Steele founded the Raymond and Rosa Parks Institute for Self-Development in Detroit to offer guidance to young African-Americans. The institute's many programs include the annual Pathways to Freedom bus tour that exposes young African Americans to landmarks of the civil rights era.

The people of Michigan take great pride in the fact that Rosa Parks became part of our community in our great State. She devoted her life to public service, to helping people, and to helping to serve as a role model for our children. She made such an impact on our country and on the people of the metro Detroit community that the actual bus where Rosa Parks made her defiant stand is now on display at the Henry Ford Museum in Dearborn, MI.

Children from all over the world have come to see the bus that became this symbol of the civil rights movement. Nicknamed the Mother of Civil Rights, President Clinton awarded Rosa Parks the Presidential Medal of Freedom in 1996, the highest civilian award this country can bestow. Mrs. Parks also received the Congressional Gold Medal in 1999. Earlier this year, Senator Levin and I introduced a bill to name a Federal building in Detroit after Mrs. Parks. We think it is important that we recognize her in this way to thank her in some small way for her incredible contribution to our country. It is an honor she richly deserves, and I believe it is important that we pass this bill this week in the Senate, just as the House has passed the bill, so that we can together, in a unanimous way, say: Thank you, Rosa Parks.

Madam President, I send an amendment to the desk and ask for its immediate consideration.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Madam President, I rise to thank both our distinguished chairman of this subcommittee, Senator Bond, and distinguished ranking member, Senator Murray, for their leadership on this important bill and for their words of support for my amendment.

This amendment addresses the need to make sure that we are enforcing our trade laws so that we have a level playing field for businesses and workers in America with all of our trading partners. It designates and authorizes a specific amount of money that would allow us to do that.

In my home State of Michigan, this is absolutely critical for us right now, as we see all of the challenges in the international marketplace. We need to make sure that we are giving every business, every worker, a level playing field, and we are doing everything we can to enforce our trade laws so that we have the opportunity to be exporting our products and not our jobs.

That should be the goal of all of us. I appreciate the fact that there is a willingness to support my amendment.

Madam President, if there is not someone else wishing to speak, I will expand on what is happening as it relates to Michigan now and why this is so important as an amendment.

I thank colleagues for working with us and helping us to modify the amendment and to accept it today.

What is important for all of us, but particularly in Michigan now, as we are the heart and soul of manufacturing, is, as we see our President, our

Secretary of Treasury, moving forward in discussions with China and Japan--the President is going next month to China and Japan--that we send with him the strongest possible support, which this amendment does, for us saying we need to enforce all of our trade laws. We need to make sure we are leveling the playing field, and we are giving every possible fair advantage to American workers and to businesses.

Unfortunately, we have our trading partners--some of our trading partners right now--who are, in fact, violating our trade laws which is costing us jobs at home, especially in the great State of Michigan. This amendment will send a very important message that we want things like illegal trade practices regarding currency manipulation to stop.

The President's upcoming trip is a very important time. Currently, Chinese and Japanese trade policies are costing us jobs, including our middle-class families, because of the fact that they peg their currency in a way that means it costs us more to sell to them than it costs them to sell to us. In my State, I have heard from so many businesses saying that the cost differential has made a huge difference in their being able to successfully compete on bids for contracts or to sell their products. We know that has been happening, and we need to stop it. We need to enforce our trade laws.

We also need to crack down on the counterfeiting of American manufactured goods. We need to stop the pirating of intellectual property. We have the great brainpower. We are developing all the new ideas and the new patents. It is not right--in fact, it is illegal--for other countries to be able to take that information and make products that compete and undercut us and cost us jobs.

Last week, Delphi, which is our Nation's largest autoparts supplier, declared bankruptcy, threatening 15,000 jobs in Michigan and more than 33,000 across the country. In terms of assets, this bankruptcy is the largest ever in the United States, surpassing the reorganizations of Kmart and WorldCom. The Delphi bankruptcy should serve as a wake-up call to all of us in the Congress, in the administration, and in the country, to the fact that we can no longer tolerate unfair trade practices and that we need to tackle the cost of health care and what is happening on pensions and make sure our workers do not lose their pensions in the process of all of this happening.

Unless we put a stop to the unfair trade practices, our economy will continue to spiral downward, and I believe we are in jeopardy of losing our way of life. I don't say that lightly. I don't say that to be melodramatic. But when we have people working at Delphi being told that now in order to compete internationally, they have to take possibly a 63-percent pay cut--that has been in the news, possibly a 63-percent pay cut--we are not talking about just cutting back on wages. We are talking about changing one's entire way of life. In the great State of Michigan we make things and we grow things, and we do it very well. We have been at the forefront of the economic engine of our country, just as all manufacturing has been. But if we are going to say it is acceptable now for people to make $10 an hour and that somehow we can't help it, we are going to lose manufacturing in this country, and we are not looking at what we can do to save our way of life.

We have to say that every trade agreement is one that creates a race up, not a race down, and that we are going to enforce every trade agreement. We are going to make sure other countries are not stealing our patents, are not creating counterfeit parts, are not manipulating their currency or doing other things that cause us to have a disadvantage in the marketplace and to lose jobs.

I believe so strongly about what needs to happen as it relates to manufacturers. I have concerns when I hear comments such as: We are not going to be able to manufacture anymore. We will have to do something else.

An economy has to be based on making things, creating things, not just a service economy. We have to have a foundation based on manufacturing. Has manufacturing changed? Of course, it has. I invite any colleague to come join me on any plant floor, and they will see something that is clean and quiet and computerized, with highly skilled workers. Of course, it has changed. Of course, it is high tech. But it is still there, and it needs to be there. If we are not serious about enforcing our trade laws, creating the right kind of trade laws, we are going to lose it and our way of life. That is not acceptable. That is why there is nothing more important to me than fighting for our jobs and our manufacturers and making sure that we maintain the high standard of living that has created this great country. That is what this is all about.

Let me mention one area that is so important to Delphi. That is the area of counterfeit autoparts. We know that right now, according to our auto suppliers nationally, we are losing $12 billion every year to counterfeit autoparts. That equates to about 200,000 jobs. We need to say in the strongest possible terms that we expect that to stop. It is a jobs issue. It is a safety issue. It needs to stop. We can do that. We are not in a weak or hopeless situation. We have the ability to stand up, to say to our trading partners: It is not acceptable. We will use every tool possible to stop counterfeit autoparts. We will use every tool possible to stop currency manipulation, to stop the stealing of our patents.

That is what my amendment addresses, sending that word and--not just a word--creating an action. We are beyond just talk. We have to have action because every day we do not have action, the great people in my State are under the threat of losing their jobs, their pension, and their way of life.

I thank my colleagues again for supporting this amendment. We are at a place in time, in the history of the country where we have to take very seriously what is happening to our great industries that have created the ability for folks to have a good standard of living, to have the home and the car, in my great State the cottage up north, the boat, to send the kids to college, and pay into a pension all their life and know it is going to be there.

That is what is threatened today in our country by policies that don't get it. We have to have trade policies that work for American jobs and American workers. We have to have enforcement of those trade policies. We have to tackle the cost of health care and change the way we do it to get it off the backs of our businesses. And we have to make sure that people who have worked all their lives and pay into a pension will be able to have that when they retire.

I thank my colleagues, again, and I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I rise to engage in a colloquy with the chairman and ranking member of the Transportation-HUD Appropriations Subcommittee. There has already been much discussion about the critical role of the section 8 program in providing millions of Americans with affordable, safe housing. As my colleagues know, the 2005 funding year budget is based on a ``snapshot'' of verified VMS leasing and cost data averaged for the months of May, June, and July of 2004. I commend the chairman and ranking member for including a setaside of $45 million in the Senate bill to adjust the allocations of the housing agencies whose snapshot did not accurately reflect the real leasing levels and costs for 2004.

Unfortunately, the provision as drafted does not take into account reduced leasing levels resulting from the public housing agency: One, following HUD directives to not reissue turnover vouchers, two, accepting 1,000 or more additional vouchers through Housing Conversion Actions or enhanced vouchers, or three, accepting assigned vouchers/ voucher portfolios from other public housing authorities. Without these additional criteria, many public housing agencies, including the Michigan State Housing Development Authority, will be unfair1y denied any of the setaside funding that is provided under this bill to make them whole. I urge the chairman and ranking member to improve this provision in conference to provide for a fairer distribution of this setaside funding.

I thank the distinguished chairman and ranking member of the subcommittee.

judicial resources for the u.s. district court for the district of new

mexico

Mr. President, I rise today in support of the Transportation/Treasury/HUD appropriations bill and my trade amendment that was adopted by unanimous consent this morning. This amendment will send a strong signal to our major Asian trading partners that we are no longer going to tolerate their trade violations that are costing us jobs here at home--especially in my State of Michigan.

As my colleagues may know, Treasury Secretary Snow has been traveling in China for the last week to advance a trip that President Bush is taking to China and Japan in November. Unfortunately, he seems to be making little progress in our attempt to get China to stop its illegal trade practices like currency manipulation.

The President's upcoming trip could not come at a more important time. Currently, Chinese and Japanese trade policies are literally destroying U.S. industries, costing us jobs and hurting our middle- class families.

In order to help President Bush as he pushes China and Japan to stop their currency manipulation, to crack down on the counterfeiting of American manufactured goods, and to cease the pirating of intellectual property, I believe the Senate should go on record to show that our Government is united in opposition to these illegal trade practices.

Just last week, Delphi, our Nation's largest auto parts supplier, declared bankruptcy, threatening 15,000 jobs in Michigan and more than 33,000 across the country.

In terms of assets, this bankruptcy is the largest ever in the United States, surpassing the reorganizations of K-Mart and Worldcom.

The Delphi bankruptcy should serve as a wake up call to the Congress and the administration that we can no longer tolerate unfair trade practices. Unless we put a stop to them, our economic spiral downward will continue and the American middle class way of life will be in jeopardy.

In Michigan, we are experts at many things, but we excel at making things and growing things.

Whether it is cars or office furniture, apples or cherries, we lead the way in manufacturing innovation and efficiency.

And manufacturing jobs are the life blood of almost every community in Michigan.

Even though Michigan has growing, cutting-edge industries, such as biotechnology and nanotechnology, it still has one of the highest unemployment rates in the country because of our troubled manufacturing sector.

Our current economy is moving through a period of great uncertainty. It would be easy to blame this on a particularly bad business cycle--a business cycle that will eventually correct itself. But, to do so would require us to overlook a very real threat to our economy and our way of life.

That threat is the lack of a level playing field for American businesses and workers in the global marketplace.

As my colleagues know, China currently exports to the United States some $160 billion more than it takes in.

A significant portion of this deficit is driven by consumer demand here in the United States, but a shockingly large portion of it is due to illegal trade practices, namely currency manipulation, counterfeiting and the theft of intellectual property.

Since 1995 China has pegged its currency and has not allowed it to ``float.''

The impact of this illegal action is clear. It gives a distinct advantage to Chinese companies that export into the United States and diminishes our ability to export to the Chinese market--therefore, China is effectively giving its exporters an exchange rate subsidy.

This manipulation increases the price of our goods while making their goods appear cheaper here at home.

For example, a mid-sized American car sold in China or Japan is $2,000 more expensive than it should be because of currency manipulation. This really hurts our automobile industry.

Earlier this year, I spoke with employees of a large auto parts supplier who told me they had recently lost a parts contract to a Chinese company despite the fact that they were the lowest bidder.

The reason: when you factored in the impact of the artificially low yuan, the Chinese company had a cheaper bid.

As we all know, such currency manipulation is illegal under the terms of China's International Monetary Fund and World Trade Organization membership.

Some economists have calculated that this price differential may amount to as much as 40 percent. It is simply devastating our manufacturers in Michigan and it is costing us jobs everyday.

In July, China announced that it would stop pegging its currency, but after rising 2 percent on July 21, the yuan has barely budged.

This is an unacceptable situation that calls for immediate action.

I think it is important to note, though, this is not just a China problem. This is a pan-Asian problem that includes Japan among the offenders.

Unfortunately, currency manipulation is not the only illegal trade practice we need to address.

Chinese counterfeiting and Intellectual property theft are enormous problems for manufacturing in my home State of Michigan.

Let me give two examples of the problem that we in Michigan currently face with regard to this unfair competition.

Counterfeit automotive products not only kill American jobs, they have the potential to kill American families--when shoddy counterfeit automotive products replace legitimate ones of higher-quality our manufacturers lose, and our consumers are put at risk.

The Federal Trade Commission estimates that the automotive parts and components industry loses an estimated $12 billion annually in sales on a global basis to counterfeiting.

It is estimated that if these losses were eliminated, and those sales were brought into legitimate companies, the automotive industry could hire 200,000 additional workers.

And we don't even keep statistics on the potential loss of life--when shoddy counterfeit auto parts fail and cause car accidents.

We should understand that, if left unchecked, penetration by counterfeit automotive products, as well as other manufactured goods, has the potential to undermine the public's confidence and trust in what they are buying. We can't let that happen.

The second example I want to share involves a small manufacturer located in western Michigan.

Peter Perez is the president of Carter Products Company located in Grand Rapids. He is also the national president of the Wood Machinery Manufacturers of America.

Carter Products employs 15 people and holds numerous patents--one of which belongs to this small piece of equipment--the Carter Stabilizer Guide.

It is used to support a band saw blade in such a way as to allow for a wood worker to make nearly any type of angled cut.

Shortly after introducing the Stabilizer--the product, its installation instructions, and instruction photos were copied by a Chinese company and resold into the American market.

Under normal circumstances, the Stabilizer would cost a retail customer about $70. The pirated product was being sold for less than $10--which is far below the cost of the raw materials necessary to create the product.

Carter Products had to launch a case at its own expense to stop this illegal trade violation. After spending more than $20,000 the company was able to keep the illegal product out of the U.S. market by stopping its distribution in markets covered by the company's patents.

But what company can ever be sure that they have achieved victory against this type of illegal behavior if the country of origin--in this case China--is not going to abide by their obligations under the WTO?

Second only to our human resources, intellectual property is our Nation's most valuable asset. As the United States freely trades with the world's nations, we are discovering new opportunities and new challenges.

International rules and institutions have been set up to protect intellectual property, but China falls short when it comes to following those rules and keeping their commitments.

They are seeking to gain an advantage over American companies and American workers by breaking the rules. In April, I proposed bipartisan legislation to strengthen our Government's ability to protect the rights of American companies and American workers in world markets; that includes protection of our intellectual property rights. The Chief Trade Prosecutor Act should be passed into law immediately so we may defend our companies and workers from those who seek to gain an advantage by breaking the rules.

It is time to send a message to the Chinese and Japanese governments. It is time to say we are fed up and we will not take it anymore. Let's give them a shot across the bow. Let's make it loud and clear that they will have to change now--not later--or we will take real action against them.

Workers across the country are losing their job. For their sake and for those who are clinging to their jobs, let's stand up to the Chinese and Japanese governments and stand up for our working families.

Mr. President, today I am introducing the ``Keep the Promise of Medicare Act'' of 2006, and am pleased to be joined by my colleagues Senators Kennedy, Harkin, Lautenberg, Dayton, and Corzine.

Retirees will see an average monthly cost-of-living-adjustment increase of $39 in their Social Security checks next year. Although this increase is welcome news, one-fourth of the COLA will be eaten up by rising Medicare Part B premiums, which will increase yet again by double-digits. And the premium for Medicare's new prescription drug benefit could eat up the remainder of the Social Security increase.

As William D. Novelli, chief executive of AARP, said: ``A record increase would usually be welcome news for America's Social Security beneficiaries. But this cost-of-living adjustment is being eaten up by rising gasoline and heating costs, another double-digit increase in the monthly Medicare Part B premium and escalating health care bills.''

This dramatic increase could have been avoided. CMS Administrator McClellan has acknowledged after last year's record 17.5 percent increase that provisions included in the 2003 Medicare law designed to privatize the program directly contributed to the premium increase.

My legislation will limit the 2006 Part B premium increase to the same level as the Social Security COLA. Without this legislation, the Medicare Part B premium will rise by 13 percent to more than $10, to $88.50 a month, in 2006.

``Social Security's COLA will simply not be enough to cover the increasing costs of living as an older person in America,'' said George J. Kourpias, president of the Alliance for Retired Americans.

Adjusting the current premium is a first step, and one we must take immediately. Older Americans have been struggling for too long under the relentless increases in the cost of their health care and prescription drugs. Additionally, we should use this year to revise an outdated law that has led to record increase in Medicare premiums in the last four years. The promise of Medicare must include protection from dramatic increases in the Part B premium.

I urge my colleagues to join me on this important piece of legislation.

Mr. President, today I am introducing the ``Keep the Promise of Medicare Act'' of 2006, and am pleased to be joined by my colleagues Senators Kennedy, Harkin, Lautenberg, Dayton, and Corzine.

Retirees will see an average monthly cost-of-living-adjustment increase of $39 in their Social Security checks next year. Although this increase is welcome news, one-fourth of the COLA will be eaten up by rising Medicare Part B premiums, which will increase yet again by double-digits. And the premium for Medicare's new prescription drug benefit could eat up the remainder of the Social Security increase.

As William D. Novelli, chief executive of AARP, said: ``A record increase would usually be welcome news for America's Social Security beneficiaries. But this cost-of-living adjustment is being eaten up by rising gasoline and heating costs, another double-digit increase in the monthly Medicare Part B premium and escalating health care bills.''

This dramatic increase could have been avoided. CMS Administrator McClellan has acknowledged after last year's record 17.5 percent increase that provisions included in the 2003 Medicare law designed to privatize the program directly contributed to the premium increase.

My legislation will limit the 2006 Part B premium increase to the same level as the Social Security COLA. Without this legislation, the Medicare Part B premium will rise by 13 percent to more than $10, to $88.50 a month, in 2006.

``Social Security's COLA will simply not be enough to cover the increasing costs of living as an older person in America,'' said George J. Kourpias, president of the Alliance for Retired Americans.

Adjusting the current premium is a first step, and one we must take immediately. Older Americans have been struggling for too long under the relentless increases in the cost of their health care and prescription drugs. Additionally, we should use this year to revise an outdated law that has led to record increase in Medicare premiums in the last four years. The promise of Medicare must include protection from dramatic increases in the Part B premium.

I urge my colleagues to join me on this important piece of legislation.

I would agree with my friend from South Dakota. The Center for Chronic Pain and Fatigue Research at the University of Michigan is the national leader in the research of chronic multisymptom illnesses. Their recent research has used advanced functional brain imaging technology to demonstrate the similarity in dysfunctional pain processing between a group of veterans suffering from gulf war illnesses and a group of civilians diagnosed with fibromyalgia. The center's work has taken on added importance because of our Nation's current military deployments and deserves the continued support of Congress and the Department of Defense.

Mr. President, I rise today first to pay tribute to the senior Senator from Louisiana for her courage, her strength, and her resolve. I have been so amazed and impressed at the way she has been willing to continue to be on this floor, regardless of how tired she became, in order to fight for the people of Louisiana. I hope everyone in Louisiana understands what she is doing on their behalf and on behalf of all of those in the entire gulf region.

What is so disappointing for me is to see that this has not been a bipartisan effort. It seemed reasonable to me. I represent Michigan, and fortunately we have not been in a situation like my colleagues from New York or the gulf or California. So far--knock on wood--we have not had to face that kind of a catastrophe. But I found what the Senator from Louisiana was asking for very reasonable.

On a bipartisan basis, we have appropriated $61 billion to be used through FEMA. We assumed it would be already being used for the things the Senator

talked about. I was shocked to learn that those funds had not been released to help local communities, as we have been told, and that the process was not moving as it should when people are so desperately in need of support, whether it be the small businesses, the families, the seniors, the cities.

When the Senator from Louisiana asked us for a very modest request of allowing $1 billion of $61 billion to be used directly and immediately to help those who have been so devastated, we do not have bipartisan support for that. I was very disappointed that both Senators from Louisiana were not standing together for that, very surprised that instead what we see is an alternative that comes back that is not only less than what is needed but has restrictions that have not been put on other States and other communities. The caps being talked about being raised in terms of loans have been done before, but it is my understanding that no community has been asked before to guarantee a repayment on those loans. I do not know why anyone would support that kind of an effort for their State or their communities to be treated differently than other States or other communities.

If I were in that position, I would not want to say to my folks: I trust you less than I trust the folks in New York; I voted for a different set of rules for what happened in New York, what happened in relation to Washington, DC, and the Pentagon. I certainly would not want to be in a situation of saying that I would vote for rules that were penalizing my own people or saying we do not trust you as much as we trust people in other places. So I am surprised and disappointed, and I know the senior Senator from Louisiana, Ms. Landrieu, is as concerned, surprised, and deeply disappointed, certainly, as I am and more than I am because she is working on this every single day.

I just want to indicate that we could have done better, and I believe working together America can do better. I believe we can do better for the people of Louisiana and the gulf coast than what has been offered and passed here today. I know the senior Senator from Louisiana has worked very hard in order to put forward proposals that are better and that would do better than what has been achieved today.

I commend her once again and thank her on behalf of all of us who at any moment could find ourselves in the same situation, could find ourselves fighting for our people because of a devastating attack or natural disaster. I hope I would have the courage of conviction, the compassion, and the strength that the Senator from Louisiana has shown and I know will continue to show.

I yield back.

Mr. President, before my colleague and friend from Illinois leaves the floor, I want to thank him for his leadership on this very important issue, in fact, for so many people in our country. I also wish to thank Senator Enzi for indicating his desire to make this a priority within his committee.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to set aside the pending amendment.

Mr. President, I call up my amendment which is at the desk.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Senators Murray, Kerry, Kennedy, Dayton, and Biden be added as cosponsors of my amendment.

Mr. President, I rise to thank both the chairman and ranking member, Senator Inouye, for their leadership on this legislation. I am very supportive of the Defense appropriations bill. And I appreciate all of the hard work and leadership they have brought to this point in this important legislation.

I come to the floor this evening to fix a broken promise to our veterans, a promise our country made to the men and women who serve our country in the armed services. They put their lives on the line to protect us, as we know, and in exchange we have a sacred obligation to extend to them the honors and benefits and the health care benefits they have earned through their service.

I have met with men and women from Michigan and across the country who are recovering at Walter Reed Army Medical Center, as many of my colleagues have. Some have suffered minor injuries that will not have a dramatic impact on the rest of their lives. Others though, because of their injuries, will need years of rehabilitation and face considerable obstacles as they return to their civilian lives.

We owe these men and women our continued support so that they can recover from their injuries and lead productive lives.

Today's soldiers are tomorrow's veterans--and America has made a promise to these brave men and women to provide them the care they deserve. They deserve the respect and support of a grateful nation when they return home.

We also owe it to the men and women who have fought in America's prior conflicts to maintain a place for them in the VA system so they can receive the care they need, as well. We need to keep our promise to our veterans, young and old.

Together we can do better for our men and women who have served our country. We must consider the ongoing costs of medical care for America's veterans as part of the continuing cost of our national defense. The long-term legacy of the wars we fight today is the care of the men and women who have worn the uniform and are willing to pay the ultimate price for their nation.

Senator Johnson, Senator Thune, and I are offering an amendment today to provide full funding for VA health care to ensure the VA has the resources necessary to provide quality health care in a timely manner to our Nation's disabled veterans. The Stabenow-Johnson-Thune amendment provides guaranteed funding for America's veterans from two sources.

First, the legislation provides an annual discretionary amount that will be locked in for future years at the 2005 funding level. Second, in the future, the VA receives a sum of mandatory funding that is adjusted year to year based on changes in demand from the VA health system and the rate of health care inflation.

This funding mechanism will ensure that the VA has the resources it needs to provide a steady and reliable stream of resources to care for America's veterans. It will also ensure that Congress will continue to be responsible for the oversight of the VA health system as it does with other Federal programs funded directly from the U.S. Treasury.

This amendment will bring funding for veterans health care into line with almost 90 percent of Federal health care spending which is mandatory rather than discretionary. One of our greatest accomplishments as a nation is that every American knows when they enter their golden years, when they reach 65 or if they are disabled, they receive the health care they need. Medicare is a universal and comprehensive system that benefits a person for their life's work. Our veterans deserve the same. We can do better for them by ensuring that their service is repaid with reliable health care benefits.

I thank the cosponsors of this amendment for their support: Senators Johnson, Thune, Akaka, Dayton, Nelson, Lautenberg, Salazar, Lincoln, Corzine, Baucus, Landrieu, Jeffords, Bayh, Bingaman, Murray, Kerry, Kennedy, and Biden.

In July, I offered this amendment to the 2006 Defense authorization bill. Unfortunately, the Defense authorization bill was pulled from the Senate at that time. While we are working out whether this will be included in this particular bill, it is important to offer my amendment again at this time. The amendment has been endorsed by the Partnership for Veterans Health Care Budget Reform, a group of major veterans service organizations that has been working to provide a reliable stream of health care for America's veterans over the last 2 years. It includes the American Legion, the AMVETS, the Blinded Veterans Association, Disabled American Veterans, Jewish War Veterans of the United States, Paralyzed Veterans of America, and the Veterans of Foreign Wars, all of them together asking us to get this right for our veterans.

The problem we face today is that resources for veterans health care are falling behind demand. We have more veterans being created, more men and women coming home from the wars. Yet the funding is falling behind. Shortly after coming into office, the President created the task force to improve health care delivery for our Nation's veterans. The task force found historically there has been a gap between the demand for VA care and the resources to meet the needs of our veterans. The task force also found that:

The current mismatch is far greater . . . and its impact

potentially far more detrimental both to the VA's ability to

furnish high quality care and to the support that the system

needs from those it serves.

The task force released its report in May of 2003, well before we understood the impact of the men and women fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan and the impact that would have on our VA system.

If the mismatch between demand and resources was bad in May of 2003, imagine what it is today. Over 360,000 brave soldiers have returned from Iraq and Afghanistan, and over 86,000 have sought health care from the VA. There are an additional 740,000 military personnel who served in Iraq and Afghanistan who are still in the service. This next generation of veterans will be eligible for VA health care and will place additional demands on a system that is already strained. These are promises we need to keep.

In addition, each reservist and National Guard member who has served in Iraq is eligible for 2 years of free health care at the VA. The administration has in its own way admitted they do not have sufficient resources to provide adequate care for our veterans. While they would not until recently admit there were shortfalls, they have for years attempted to ration care and cut services at the expense of our veterans. We can do better than that.

In 2003, the VA banned the enrollment of new priority 8 veterans. For the past 3 years, I fought attempts by the administration to charge middle-income veterans a $250 enrollment fee to join the VA health care system and a 100-percent increase in prescription drug copays. This year, the administration also proposed slashing Federal support for the State veterans homes from $140 million to $12 million. The head of the Grand Rapids Home for Veterans and the D.J. Jacobetti Home For Veterans in Marquette tells me these cuts would be devastating.

The fiscal year 2005 and 2006 VA health care budgets are a case study in why Congress should guarantee reliable and adequate resources through direct spending.

Last March, the President submitted an inadequate fiscal year 2005 budget request for VA health care to Congress that fell $3.2 billion short of the recommendation of the independent budget, an annual estimate of critical veterans health care needs by the coalition of leading veterans organizations.

In fact, in February 2004, Anthony Principi, then the Secretary of VA, testified before Congress that the request the President submitted to Congress fell $1.2 billion short of the amount he had recommended. It then fell to Congress to again increase the amount provided to the VA for health care. The

final amount Congress provided to the VA for health care was $1.2 billion over the President's request, but it was still not enough to meet their immediate needs.

In April of this year I cosponsored an amendment with Senator Murray to the fiscal year 2005 supplemental appropriations bill for Iraq and Afghanistan to provide $1.9 billion for veterans medical care, especially for those soldiers returning from Iraq and Afghanistan. During the debate on the amendment we were again told that the President's budget was sufficient but, in fact, on April 5, Secretary of Veterans Affairs Jim Nicholson sent a letter to the Senate that said:

I can assure you that the VA does not need supplemental

funds for FY2005 to continue to provide timely, quality

service that is always our goal.

I was proud to cosponsor an amendment in June, however, to provide an additional $1.5 billion for veterans health care because they finally admitted there was a gap in funding for this year. Finally, they admitted, in fact, the veterans health care system was not adequately funded this year. I was pleased we were able to add dollars under an emergency spending measure, to be able to fill the gap this year.

As it turned out, we received more bad news from the administration on July 14, when the administration requested another $300 million for this year and a whopping $1.7 billion for next year. The total shortfall for this year and next was nearly $3 billion, 3 billion short of where we should be in adequately funding health care for our veterans.

At the end of July, I was pleased to support the conference report for the Interior appropriations which included the $1.5 billion this year that the Senate has twice unanimously supported. Further, in September, I supported the Senate's Military Construction and Veterans Affairs appropriations bill which provided a total of $33 billion for veterans health care. This is $1.1 billion more than the administration requested and $2.5 billion more than the House version of the legislation for veterans health care.

I tell this to make two points: First, it is clear that the demand for veterans health care is increasing, and a good portion of this increase can be attributed to men and women seeking care after they are returning from Iraq and Afghanistan. The second is to show despite the best intentions of the VA and Congress, the VA does not have a reliable and dependable stream of funding to provide for veterans health care needs. We should not have to pass an emergency funding bill to give our veterans the health care they need and deserve.

In 1993, there were about 2.5 million Americans in the VA health care system. Today there are more than 7 million veterans enrolled in the system, over half of which receive care on a regular basis. Despite the increase in patients, the VA has received on average a 5-percent increase in appropriations over the last 8 years. My amendment will fix this problem and ensure that each year we provide the funding necessary to care for our veterans in a timely manner that is separate from the uncertainty and the ups and downs of the congressional calendar.

At last count, at least 86,000 men and women have returned from Iraq and have sought health care from the VA. We can safely assume that this number will reach hundreds of thousands. This bill provides the resources our troops need to prepare and defend our country in Iraq. We must not forget about them when they return home and put on a veteran's cap. We must ensure that we keep our promises to them when they come home as veterans. Let's stop this up-and-down roller coaster of emergency spending measures, of budgets that do not match with need year to year. We owe our veterans better than that. Together, we can do better than that.

I urge the support of my colleagues for this very important amendment.

I move to waive the applicable sections of the Congressional Budget Act for the purpose of considering my amendment, and I ask for the yeas and nays.

Yes. That is fine.

Pursuant to section 904 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, I move to waive the applicable sections of that act for the purpose of the pending amendment, and I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. President, I ask colleagues to support the Stabenow-Johnson-Thune amendment that guarantees funding for our veterans for health care. It takes it out of the annual appropriations process where every year we are wrestling with whether the funding is available. This year alone already we have had one emergency designation of $1.5 billion because the veterans health care budget was underfunded this year. We know there are concerns about next year.

This amendment would do two things. First, the legislation provides an annual discretionary amount that would be locked in for future years at the 2005 funding level. Then in the future, the VA would receive a sum of mandatory funding that would be adjusted year to year based on changes in demand from the VA health care system as well as rate of inflation.

This is incredibly important. We should not be arbitrarily picking numbers in terms of funding veterans health care. It should be based on the brave men and women who have served who come on home and put on a veteran's cap. We have more and more coming home from Afghanistan and Iraq every day. Each and every one of them has been promised health care. The way to guarantee we keep our promise is to pass this amendment.

I urge agreement.