Floor Statements

Mr. President, I rise to commend the Judiciary Committee but most importantly commend to my colleagues on the passage of the Voting Rights Act renewal this afternoon.

I spoke right before Independence Day last month on June 29 on the importance of certain principles as we celebrated the Declaration of Independence. I quoted and I will quote again the importance of this document which is the spirit of America:

We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are

created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with

certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life,

Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness--That to secure these

Rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their

just Powers from the Consent of the Governed. . . .

So in our representative democracy, in our Republic, voting is how the owners, the people of our country in their counties, cities, and States, express their views for the just powers of our government.

I spoke on how it was important for the Senate to act on this measure as promptly as possible. I commend the chairman of the Judiciary Committee, Senator Specter, and the ranking member, Senator Leahy, for moving yet another important piece of legislation this session. The enactment of the Voting Rights Act was absolutely necessary 41 years ago and was passed during a tumultuous time in our Nation's history. History has proven, though, that this law was just and clearly appropriate to provide equal opportunities and protections to persons with the desire to express themselves and give their consent at the ballot box. We are all better off--we are so much better off--for the choices made during that time because this strengthened the fabric of our country. It has made our country a more perfect union--and as we strive to be a more perfect union, it has made us stronger as we have faced the challenges of recent years, presently, and in the future.

What this legislation does is help ensure the fundamental right of all eligible citizens to vote. It sends a strong message, a renewal, a reconfirmation that no matter one's gender, race, ethnicity or religion, you have an opportunity to vote if you are a law-abiding citizen in this country. It is the core--it is absolutely the core of a representative democracy, that we do have the participation of an informed people. Again, the people are the owners of the Government.

Virginia has come a long way. They have come a long way because the Constitution said: You have the right to vote, but we all know that not everyone did have the right to vote. It took many years before African Americans were allowed to vote, but then there were all sorts of devices that prevented them from voting. It took many years before women were given the right to vote. Virginia has come a long way

since the Voting Rights Act was enacted 41 years ago. I think it is important that the Act is reauthorized, not just for Virginia but throughout the United States. It applies everywhere from Florida to Alaska to New York.

Some will argue that counties and cities and States cannot be removed from or ``bail out'' of preclearance if they so desire and have a good record. The facts are that there are 11 counties and cities in Virginia that have been able to ``bail out'' of the Voting Rights Act by proving that ``no racial test or device has been used within such State or political subdivision for the purpose or with the effect of denying or bridging the right to vote on account of race or color.'' The counties in Virginia that have been removed from this preclearance review are Augusta, Frederick, Greene, Pulaski, Roanoke, Rockingham, Shenandoah, and Warren and the cities of Fairfax, Harrisonburg, and Winchester.

The renewal of this act does not mean that the reauthorizing States still engage in voter discrimination on the basis of race. Renewal should instead be viewed as a continued unflagging commitment to ensuring the protection of a law-abiding person's right to vote without subversion or unwarranted interference.

Thanks in part to the Voting Rights Act, Virginia was the first State in our Union to popularly elect the first Governor who is an African American. I hope that after this November's elections, Virginia will not be the only State to have a Governor elected who is an African American. In fact, I would be happy if there were two more Governors elected this year who are African American. The election in Virginia represented an inspirational success for one person, L. Douglas Wilder, who was elected Governor because of his perseverance in winning. But it is also an advancement and a matter of pride, I think, and an achievement of the Commonwealth of Virginia, which only decades earlier had counties that closed their public schools rather than integrate them to comply with the Brown v. Board of Education decision.

Now, we realize we have made progress, but we need to continue to make strides. We need to strive to be a society, as Martin Luther King, Jr., stated, ``Where people are judged by the content of their character rather than by the color of their skin.''

We must join together in our great country, a country that has tremendous promise, to make sure that everybody, no matter their race, or their ethnicity, or their religion, or their gender, has that equal opportunity to lead a fulfilling life, to compete and to succeed in our country.

The reauthorization of the Voting Rights Act is a tool that has, can, and will help achieve this goal of fairness in America. So I urge my colleagues this afternoon to renew and pass this important piece of legislation. We can and have debated the issue, but we also know the results. The results of the Voting Rights Act has made this a more perfect union. Let's keep this country moving forward, making sure this is a land of opportunity for all. I commend this measure to the positive vote of all my colleagues.

Mr. President, I thank my colleagues for their attention, and I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I rise this evening in strong support of the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006. I commend Senator Hatch for his steadfast leadership, his wisdom, and perseverance in finally getting this measure to the floor for a vote. It is long overdue.

I have always believed that one of the very top, most important responsibilities of government at the Federal, State, or, for that matter, the local level is the safety and security of our people, particularly the most vulnerable people in our society--our children.

When I was Governor of the Commonwealth of Virginia, I made the protection of the people of Virginia, including our children, our top priority. We worked with the legislature to abolish the lenient, dishonest parole system in Virginia that was releasing criminals after serving as little as one-fifth of their sentence. We instituted truth in sentencing in Virginia, and by doing that, when you read in the newspaper or see in the news that a felon has gotten a 20-year sentence, he is serving 20 years, not 4 or 5 years to come back out and prey upon innocent law-abiding citizens again.

Clearly, the abolition of parole, truth in sentencing, and longer sentences for

felons has made Virginia safer. The crime rates are down, and there are tens of thousands of people who will not be victims of crime.

I am going to talk about Adam Walsh, but there are a lot of other victims of crimes. I remember when we were trying to get the legislature and people behind the abolition of parole and truth in sentencing, listening to the stories of loved ones, of parents who would tell their stories, of people released early and where they have preyed upon, killed, or raped again.

I will always remember a lady talking about being raped, and then right after her, another woman was talking about being raped again, a second time, by that same person. That rapist was released early.

I remember talking about a police officer with young children. The police officer was killed on Father's Day in Richmond by someone released early. The story of a young person working in the bakery in Richmond who was killed by someone released early. The story of a mother talking about a violent assault and then the smothering with a pillow of her daughter, and then having to go back to the parole board to recount why that criminal, that murderer, should not be released once again.

Before I became Governor in Virginia, pedophiles were serving an average of 3\1/2\ years in prison. Now, with the abolition of parole, and truth in sentencing, their sentences are 26 years rather than 3\1/ 2\ years. Not surprisingly, there are now fewer victims of crime in the Commonwealth of Virginia. However, there continue to be child predators who lurk in the shadows of our society.

Studies show that there are more than 550,000 registered sex offenders in the United States, and there are an estimated 100,000 sex offenders who are missing from the system. Loopholes in this current system have allowed some sexual predators to evade law enforcement and place our children at risk. That is why the national registry aspect of this bill is so important.

Some may wonder, why is there such a focus on sex offenders? Why is there such a focus on pedophiles and sex offenders and rapists? The reason is, if you look at the statistics--and it is not unique to Virginia; it is the way it is across this country--the highest recidivist rate, or the highest repeat offender rate of any crime--even higher than murderers, even higher than armed robbers--is sex offenders. That is why it is so important we have the registry. When someone is caught, first, they are getting a long sentence, and the best way to protect people is having these sex offenders behind bars rather than lurking in a parking garage or trying to lure young children. That is why the focus on sexual predators is so important, in that they have the highest repeat offender rate.

Now, these days, child predators have increased their ability to inflict harm on our children by exploiting new communications technologies, including the Internet. Please understand: I believe the Internet is the greatest invention since the Gutenberg press for the dissemination of information and ideas. It is a wonderful tool. And ever since I have been in the Senate, I have been working to make sure that avaricious State and local tax commissars don't impose 18-percent taxes on the Internet in monthly charges. We don't want the Internet monthly bills to look like a telephone bill. Ron Wyden from Oregon has been a good ally on this.

But the Internet also can create new opportunities for criminals, especially child predators. It is vitally important that we as parents and as elected leaders take the necessary steps to make the Internet as safe as possible for our children, as safe as possible for our children when they are at home, as safe as possible for them at schools, as well as in libraries.

I recently introduced a bill called the Internet Tax Nondiscrimination Act. This bill makes permanent the Internet tax moratorium, which is scheduled to expire next year. This measure also increases the ability of parents to protect their children from Internet predators. In fact, this is still law today. We want to keep this going.

In our bill, we impose a responsibility on Internet service providers to offer customers filtering technology. The ISPs, or Internet service providers, need to limit access to material that would be harmful to minors. This feature will create a powerful, and does create a powerful, financial incentive for ISPs to provide the filtering technology that parents need. Once parents are empowered with this technology, I guarantee you they will use it to protect their young sons and daughters. I am pleased the Senate Commerce Committee approved this bill as part of the telecom reform bill on a vote of 19 to 3.

However, we as a legislative body have much more work to do, especially when it comes to increasing penalties on Internet predators, by giving law enforcement officials the tools they need to catch Internet predators and convict them. This is a key reason I have signed on as a cosponsor of the Adam Walsh Act. This legislation is vitally needed. As I said, it should have been passed many years ago. This legislation honors the memory of a 6-year-old boy named Adam Walsh who was kidnapped and murdered nearly 25 years ago. This bill also recognizes the tireless efforts of his parents, John and Reve Walsh, who have been outstanding advocates for children all across America, in making sure we have some common sense when we are combating violent criminals.

The Adam Walsh Act--and I want to focus on one title--this bill in title 7 includes what is called the Internet Safety Act, sets out several provisions that will dramatically increase Internet safety, including tough new penalties for child exploitation enterprises and repeat sex offenders. This title also creates a new crime--and this is important--a new crime for embedding words or digital images on to the source code of a Web site with the intent to deceive a person into viewing this obscenity. This is vitally important for all people. I tell you, it is important for families and children. This section is going to help stop pornographers from tricking children into visiting their sites with words that are designed to attract innocent young people.

The Internet safety provisions in this measure also fund Federal prosecution resources, including 200 new Assistant U.S. Attorney positions to help prosecute persons for offenses related to sexual exploitation of children, and 45 more computer forensic examiners. These are the experts who will be helpful within the regional computer forensic laboratories in the Department of Justice. They include 10 more Internet Crimes Against Children task forces. These are also important. There is some good work being done in Bedford County, Virginia, in between Lynchburg and Roanoke. The sheriff, Mike Brown, in Bedford County has instituted Operation Blue Ridge Thunder which works on this, but the State and local folks can certainly use the assistance and help of the forensic experts and U.S. attorneys. After all, a lot of this is across State lines. All of these resources are absolutely necessary for the investigation and the prosecution of child sex offenses.

The Internet safety provisions in this bill also expand the civil remedy available to children who have been sexually abused and exploited.

This is vitally important, commonsense legislation that is going to protect and, indeed, it is going to save lives. It is perfect that we pass a bill named after Adam Walsh, a child who lost his life at age 6 to a child predator. It can be Adam Walsh, but to all the parents who are out there who lost a young child to a sexual predator, it can be their name put in here as well. The parents of Adam Walsh have dedicated their lives to making sure there are not other parents grieving with the loss of their son or their daughter. Adam's spirit lives on and the inspiration for action is in this measure, action that will save lives. More children will be able to grow up with the innocence they deserve and the safety they deserve, thanks to the efforts of Adam Walsh's parents and also the wisdom, on a bipartisan basis, of the Senate not to dawdle, but to act. I commend the Senate for acting, particularly those in the committee. I am honored to be a cosponsor, and I look forward to the passage of this act, the signing by the President, and the protection of children all across America.

Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. President, today I honor and congratulate Fairfax Water, which serves nearly 1.5 million customers in the Commonwealth of Virginia on the opening of the Frederick P. Griffith, Jr. water treatment plant in Lorton, VA. They are dedicating the plant this Saturday, and while I am not able to attend the ceremony and festivities, I want to congratulate the leadership of Fairfax Water particularly Board Chairman Harry F. Day, and the other Fairfax Water board members Constance M. Houston, Philip W. Allin, Richard G. Terwilliger, Bill G. Evans, Burton J. Rubin, Paul J. Andino, Linda A. Singer, A. Dewey Bond, and Frank R. Begovich as well as Charles M. Murray, the general manager, for their efforts in undertaking this endeavor.

The Griffith plant is a state-of-the-art facility which combines sensitivity to the environment, technologically savvy security measures, and an appreciation for the history of its surrounding area. The plant sits on the site of a prison most famous for holding a group of suffragettes in 1917 who were arrested for demonstrating in front of the White House to secure their right to vote. The facility pays tribute to these brave ladies by incorporating design elements of the workhouse in the plant's architectural design. The opening of the facility shows the dedication Fairfax Water has for its customer's health and safety. Fairfax Water will continue to be a

vital and necessary partner in its community, and a leader in the Commonwealth and the country. Mr. President, I know my colleagues will join me in sending best wishes to the board members and employees at Fairfax Water.

Mr. President, I am pleased today to recognize Commander Robert H. Packard, of Charlottesville, VA, who has served honorably in the U.S. Navy for 40 years.

Robert Packard followed his father's footsteps in joining the proud tradition that is the U.S. Navy when he was sworn in by his father in 1966. In 1974, Packard graduated with a bachelors of science degree from the McIntire School of Commerce at the University of Virginia while serving in the Naval Reserve. After serving various tours, Packard became commanding officer of the Mobile Mine Assembly Group from 1988 to 1992 in Yorktown, VA, where his unit received the REDCOM SIX award for the Best Small Unit, the Most Improved Unit and the Best Small Unit with over 50 percent enlisted. He served in Desert Storm from 1992 to 1994 and then from 1994 to 1997 Packard served as commanding officer of a medical logistics unit in Newport News, VA. Packard concluded his service with the Navy at the Pentagon as a commander assigned to the OPNAV N86 staff.

Commander Packard's leadership and dedication to preserving the freedoms and liberties that make this country so great is truly admirable. I am grateful for Commander Packard's service and contributions to the United States and to the Commonwealth of Virginia.

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

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak in morning business.

Mr. President, as we all depart in celebration of our Declaration of Independence, our secession from the British monarchy, let us, as Senators and as Americans, assess what should be accomplished to secure our independence and, most importantly, the ideals and the freedom that need to be secured, as was expressed in our Declaration of Independence, authored by Thomas Jefferson 260 years ago.

The people of America are the owners of our Government, and they expect us to do certain things. I hope when we return, after the Independence Day celebration, one of the first things we will recognize is we are a nation of laws, we are a nation of immigrants. We will recognize that at Monticello, Mr. Jefferson's home where there is always an Independence Day naturalization ceremony there, which is always so inspiring. For those of us who believe we should have immigration reform, that is how people should become citizens in this country--legally.

The American people have noticed our country has, for far too long, neglected to secure our borders. The first thing we need to do, when we get back, is to find the funds for border personnel, for detention center capacity, for a fence, for sensors. We need to make sure this is Nation of laws, and a Nation of immigrants, that has been built by immigrants, and improved by immigrants.--My mother is an immigrant, so I appreciate the value and the improvements and the promise of America that have been born by so many people who have come to this country from some other land.

But the American people expect us to do our job. The first responsibility of a government is security. And we need to secure our borders.

Secondly, dealing with independence, is our energy. We are far too dependent as a country on foreign sources of energy. We need to--and I think we can do it--help out not just short term but long term in a policy that has our country less dependent on foreign sources of energy. We need more production of oil and natural gas here at home. Some of it can be in deep waters far off our coast. I would like to share some of those royalties and revenues with the people in the States so they can share in some of the benefits while also making sure we have more oil and natural gas from this country.

For my Commonwealth of Virginia, on a bipartisan basis, our legislature, 2 years running, has passed a measure to allow the Commonwealth of Virginia to opt out of the moratorium or the prohibition of deep sea, deep water offshore exploration. Georgia may want another approach; Louisiana would take a different approach--but if a State were able to share in the royalties. For Virginia I would like to have one-quarter of those royalties go to colleges and universities; and it could be used for scholarships for, young people who have attributes or desires to study and be proficient in science, in technology and engineering, where there is such a great demand for people with those talents and skills in our country.

Then, I would take 50 percent and use it for transportation and roads. There are great needs for roads. And if we were getting hundreds of millions of dollars, 50 percent of it ought to go for transportation and roads and highways in the Commonwealth of Virginia.

And then a quarter of it would go to coastal communities, say, Virginia Beach, for example, that would probably use the money they get for sand or beach replenishment on our coast.

In addition to developing more oil and natural gas in this country, we also ought to recognize that we are the ``Saudi Arabia'' of the world in coal, and we ought to be using clean coal technology for electricity generation. Clean coal technology, in fact, can be used in a way that could be gasified to be like a natural gas and could be used as a fuel similar to diesel fuel.

Natural gas is so important for us for the manufacturing of everything from tires to plastics, to chemicals and fertilizers and forestry products. To be using natural gas for baseload electricity generation, as I have said, is like using bottled water to wash our dishes. It will do the job, but why would you want to use such a clean- burning fuel--which is so important for jobs and manufacturing jobs here in this country, as well as for heating our homes--for electricity generation when we can be using clean-coal technology?

We also ought to be using advanced nuclear technologies for electricity generation.

Beyond that, there are other advancements in technology. With nanotechnology, there are solar powers, solar photovoltaics, which makes more sense now and are much more efficient. There are lithium ion batteries. We can also grow some of our fuels, biofuels, particularly soy diesel. Ethanol in some areas of the corn belt makes a great deal of sense. But I think soy diesel as well as cellulosic biofuels also make a great deal of sense.

My colleagues, not any one of these will solve our energy dependence situation. But if we have diversity of fuels, and more of these fuels and more of this energy grown in America--explored and developed and produced in America for American jobs and American competitiveness and American security--that will improve this country's energy independence rather than having to worry about the whims of some mullah 8,000 miles away.

So let us resolve on this Independence Day week to find ways and actually adopt energy independence policies. We also need to recognize who the owners of the Government are; and that is the people. We ought to be working to lessen the burden, the tax burden, on working people, on families, on family businesses, and on family farms.

Mr. President, I also want to speak at length on a very important matter that I hope will also come to a vote on the floor of this Senate shortly; and that is the reauthorization of the Voting Rights Act. I am pleased this bill is moving through the committee process, and I commend Chairman Arlen Specter, who is moving on yet another important piece of legislation this session.

The enactment of the Voting Rights Act was absolutely necessary 41 years ago and was initially passed during a very tumultuous time in our country's history. In fact, the Voting Rights Act should have been passed many years before then. But history has proven that the law was just and appropriate to provide equal opportunities and protections to persons with the desire to express themselves at the ballot box.

This is completely consistent with the spirit of the Declaration of Independence. And I believe we are all better off for the choices that were made back 41 years ago. And that has strengthened the fabric of our country. It has helped make us a more perfect union, and made us stronger as a country as we face challenges presently.

The present legislation before us reauthorizes several key sections of the Voting Rights Act that will expire next year if no action is taken. The expiring parts are section 5, section 203, and sections 6 through 9.

This legislation helps ensure the fundamental right of all eligible citizens to vote. It sends a strong message that no matter what your race, religion, gender, or national origin, if you are a law-abiding citizen you have the right to vote. At the core of representative democracy is the participation of informed people. The people are the owners of this Government.

While the U.S. Constitution surely guarantees the right to vote, legislation was and is still necessary to ensure that in practice that guarantee is never diminished. My Commonwealth of Virginia has come a long way since this law was first enacted, and a reauthorization is necessary to ensure this progress continues throughout the United States, from Florida to New York to Alaska.

Now, some will argue that counties and cities and States cannot be removed from or ``bail out'' of the preclearance aspects of this if they so desire and have a good record on voting rights. Now, the facts are, though, that--and I am just speaking for the Commonwealth of Virginia--11 cities and counties in Virginia have been able to ``bail out'' of the Voting Rights Act by proving that ``no [racial] test or device has been used within such State or political subdivision for the purpose or with the effect of denying or abridging the right to vote on account of race or color.'' The counties in Virginia that have been removed from preclearance review are--in alphabetical order--Augusta, Frederick, Greene, Pulaski, Roanoke, Rockingham, Shenandoah, and Warren, and the cities of Fairfax, Harrisonburg, and Winchester.

Renewal of the act does not mean that the reauthorizing States still engage in voter discrimination on the basis of race. Renewal should instead be viewed as a continued unflagging commitment to ensuring the protection of a law-abiding persons's right to vote without subversion or unwarranted interference.

The Voting Rights Act is a real and visible commitment made to ensure that voter discrimination will be stamped out and effectively prohibited if and when it does occur. Great strides have been made in ending voter discrimination in all of its forms since the Voting Rights Act was passed. It should also be noted that recognizing and addressing these problems is the appropriate prudent approach. It is responsible rather than ignoring those problems.

Thanks in part to the Voting Rights Act, Virginia was the first State in the Nation to popularly elect the first Governor who is an African American. I hope after this November's elections, Virginia is not still the only State with this record, and that there will be two States that have elected Governors who are African Americans.

Now, the election in Virginia, represented an inspirational success for a person, L. Douglas Wilder, who persevered and won that election. It was also an achievement for a State that only decades earlier had counties that closed their public schools rather than integrate them to comply with the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Brown v. Board of education.

My friend and colleague in the other body, Representative John Lewis, and I recently returned from a pilgrimage to Farmville, VA, as part of a group organized by the Faith and Politics Institute. During this pilgrimage, and previous pilgrimages I have taken to Birmingham, Montgomery, and Selma, AL, we heard first-hand stories from still- living civil rights leaders and also personal heartbreaking stories from people about the impediments faced by African Americans as they grew up with the racial discrimination that existed at that time.

Now, as we strive for a society where all people are judged by the content of their character rather than by the color of their skin, we must join together in our great country of promise to make sure that everyone has an equal opportunity to participate and to succeed. Reauthorization of the Voting Rights Act is a tool that has, can, and will help achieve this goal of fairness. I am committed and dedicated to ensuring that the voting rights of all law-abiding Americans are protected, and the Voting Rights Act has proven to be an able vessel for accomplishing this important objective.

I urge my colleagues to bring this important piece of legislation to the Senate floor as soon as practicable this summer so we can debate the issues and amendments and ultimately renew the Voting Rights Act.

Mr. President, I wish my colleagues and all Americans a happy, safe, and patriotic Independence Day. With our friends and families, let's reflect on our foundational values that must be preserved. And a lot of these values need to be preserved from monarchical judges who prevent the pledge of allegiance in schools because of the words ``under God,'' but, on the other hand, allow the desecration of the flag.

We have judges who redefine the institution of marriage, but allow local government officials, in a place like New London, CT, to act like lords--the reason we seceded from the monarchy--among those lords in New London, CT, to take people's homes--the American dream--using eminent domain, not because there was a public purpose of a school or a road to be built, but because they wanted to derive more tax revenue off of that property and that land.

As Senators, let us return to act to secure our borders, develop energy independence, confirm sound judges, and renew the Voting Rights Act to make sure this is a land of opportunity for all.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate now proceed to a period of morning business with Senators permitted to speak for up to 10 minutes.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, before I speak on these amendments, I will share with my colleagues three amendments I have introduced.

The first amendment will double the current referral bonus from $1,000 to $2,000, which will encourage more men and women to enter the U.S. Armed Forces.

The second amendment will provide statutory authority to the Army to pay $8,000 dollar enlistment bonuses to individuals who enlist in Officer Candidate School. The Army has made this promise--and this amendment provides statutory authority to fulfill that promise.

And finally, I have offered--with Senators Craig, Hutchison, Burns and Snowe as cosponsors--an amendment that will provide financial protection to the 25.6 million military personnel and veterans whose personal data and Social Security information were stolen from the home of a Veterans Affairs employee in May of this year.

Under the terms of my amendment, the VA would be required to provide credit monitoring and data theft protection to these veterans at no cost to

our veterans. My amendment is supported by the VFW.

I spoke to Secretary of Veterans Affairs Jim Nicholson earlier today, and he informed me that he had announced that the VA will provide credit monitoring and data theft protection, and at no cost to the servicemembers and veterans. I thank Secretary Nicholson for making this sound and responsible decision.

I also rise in strong opposition to the amendments brought forth by Senators Kerry and Levin which, in my view, is a vacillating strategic plan of retreat. We don't need a plan of retreat. We need to have a steady, strategic plan for success in the war on terror and, in particular, in the theater of Iraq. We need to honor our troops and honor their families, whether they are serving now, or those who have fallen in the midst of this battlefront in Iraq.

We need to move forward in Iraq, and we need to unite all Americans behind our mission, unite Americans behind a strategic plan for success, bringing Americans together, and also our NATO partners and other allies, and get the neighbors of Iraq together, whether they be Jordan, Turkey, Kuwait or Saudi Arabia--they are all important--rather than Senator Kerry's plan, which is a plan for retreat, a tuck-tail- and-run approach. That is not what is need.

We want to see this new unity, diverse Government elected by the people of Iraq, have a chance to stand on its own feet and defend its own interests. We want to see measured, tangible success as quickly as possible, and we want to bring home our troops as soon as possible. But I believe some on the other side of the aisle are too anxious, and that would be retreating. This is not the sort of steady leadership that I believe would unite the American people.

Moreover, I think this approach can embolden our enemies. It would show a weakened resolve in the midst of this war on terror. The terrorists always talk about the United States and Mogadishu or the Beirut bombing and how Americans will retreat. We don't need to be emboldening our enemies. Moreover, it can cause discouragement and dismay to the Iraqi leaders who are bravely trying to stand up for a free and just society. It also can be a discredit to the United States in the eyes of some of our allies. Our European allies came out strongly in support of us today, for example, in our negotiations with Iran and telling the Iranian leaders: You ought to take the carrot, take the right approach. It is important as we deal with the Iranians that the United States shows there is a resolve and a commitment to sticking to a path of security and peace.

Just a few weeks ago, I was on a bipartisan delegation to Iraq. Everyone we spoke with, whether they were Kurds, Sunnis, or Shiites, was grateful to the United States for liberating them from that repressive regime. We asked what would happen if we left in 6 months. They all said it would be a ``disaster.'' That was the word we heard more than anything else. Even the Sunni speaker of the new assembly, who was once imprisoned by the United States, said that if the U.S. military left--as a Sunni who was once imprisoned and was against the United States being there in the first place--he said to us, as he said subsequently to the President, that: We are grateful, and the U.S. military presence in Iraq is helpful to them. If we left, then those who would come in would be the Iranians, the Syrians, or potentially, of course, in the north, the Turks.

We are making progress. We are fighting vile terrorists. We need to understand who we are fighting. These terrorists are beheading men and women in Iraq. Meanwhile, the United States and our coalition partners are trying to give the Iraqis the chance to vote, to have a say on their public servants in that country.

We are also making progress on the security fronts. General Casey relayed to us that, right now, maybe a quarter of military operations are led by Iraqis. He said that by the end of the year, as much as three-quarters of the military operations will be led by the Iraqis, with the United States being in a supportive role for medical, intelligence, and military efforts.

Mr. President, I know Iraq has been tough. It is a tough battlefront for Americans. But it is a war and a theater in this war on terror that we can win and must win. The next few months will be vitally important. This is not the time to get weak in the knees. The future of Iraq is ultimately the responsibility of the Iraqi people. It is going to be the Iraqis' hands, backs, and minds that will be needed to build a secure and free Iraq. We don't want to stay a day longer than absolutely necessary. We are supporting Iraq in this because we are a generous people, but it is also good for our national security.

So I think we need to make sure that Senator Kerry's strategic plan for retreat--a tuck-tail-and-fail approach--must be rejected. We must unite as Americans for a renewed commitment for a strategic plan for success. It is important for Iraq, important for the Middle East, and it is vitally important for the security of the United States of America.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I take this opportunity to express my support

for H.R. 4894, the School Safety Acquiring Faculty Excellence Act.

As the father of three children, I know that nothing is more important than protecting their safety. We do everything to ensure that our children are safe while they are in our care. But just as important, we must do everything we can to make sure they are safe when we cannot be right there beside them. One of the ways we can accomplish this is to provide for a safe school environment.

We trust teachers, principals, coaches, and other school employees to teach our children, to protect our children, and to nurture our children during the school day. Therefore, it is imperative that our school districts have the necessary tools to thoroughly review all school employees before they ever come into contact with our children.

The School Safety Acquiring Faculty Excellence Act will help school districts better examine job applicants by having the Attorney General and the Department of Justice provide localities with direct access to the FBI's national crime information databases and assistance with fingerprint background checks for potential employees. Currently there are a myriad of laws across the States pertaining to background checks for school employees. This legislation will ensure a more thorough process and encourage information sharing across State borders.

I urge my colleagues to support this important legislation, which is a step forward in promoting safe schools and protecting our children.

Mr. President, I rise today to honor a lifetime commitment of service to the United States of America, our Defense Department and our great U.S. Navy by a true patriot, VADM Keith W. Lippert, Supply Corps, U.S. Navy. On September 1, 2006, Vice Admiral Lippert will retire after 37 years and 8 months of dedicated and exceptionally distinguished service in the U.S. Navy. In addition to his retirement, Vice Admiral Lippert will relinquish command as the 14th Director of the Defense Logistics Agency, DLA, and I would note that he will retire as our longest serving DLA Director having spent the last 5 years at the helm of a Defense agency that has become increasingly important to the Nation. The Admiral's departure is indeed a loss for our nation since over these last 5 years, he has made remarkable accomplishments and I would highlight a few of them here.

The remarkable success of our military servicemen and women in the field, and the battles won every day by our forces engaged in the global war against terrorism could not be accomplished if not for the unparalleled logistics support our military so critically depends upon. On Admiral Lippert's watch this support has increased to the extent that 95 percent of the materials used by the entire U.S. military is provided by the 22,000 personnel hard at work in DLA activities around the globe and many here in Virginia. I am proud to note that Virginia hosts the DLA Headquarters and the Defense Energy Support Center at Fort Belvoir in Northern Virginia, the Defense Supply Center, Aviation, and Distribution Depot in our State capital of Richmond, and another Distribution Depot right on Virginia's Navy waterfront in Norfolk.

DLA has facilities in 48 States and 24 countries around the world and each facility is a source of pride for all of the DLA employees. All of the fuel supporting our jets, helicopters, ships and tanks is purchased by DLA. All of the food, military clothing, and supplies needed to sustain our forces is managed by the DLA workforce.

The DLA Defense Distribution system, a total of 26 distribution depots here in the United States and in overseas locations such as Kuwait, Korea, Japan, Italy, and Germany are all crucial to the steady flow of materials to our troops and these depots constitute a national treasure in their own right.

Allied forces that have partnered with DLA on Admiral Lippert's watch also enjoy this same support.

Remarkably, Admiral Lippert has aggressively driven down the cost of managing this enterprise to the lowest level in the 45-year history of DLA while dramatically improving the inventory validity of our critical defense stocks, championing a series of transformational initiatives, leading the most successful enterprise resource planning software re- engineering initiative in the entire Defense Department, and greatly improving the quality of customer service provided by this amazing Agency. I would add that the Agency has become equally important to the Coast Guard, FEMA and other Agencies in our Federal, State, and local governments. This support was especially significant to our country after the last hurricane season when millions of Meals Ready to Eat, MREs, were sent en masse from Norfolk to our fellow citizens in need.

Thirty-eight years ago, Vice Admiral Lippert earned his commission through the Navy Reserve Officer Training Corps program at Miami University in Oxford, OH, with a bachelor of arts degree in mathematics in 1968. He received his master's degrees in management and in operations research from the Naval Postgraduate School. In 1994, he attended the senior executive program in national and international security at the John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University.

The admiral has spent a significant time on sea duty tours including service as the supply officer on the nuclear submarine USS Queenfish, SSN 651, as assistant supply officer on the Submarine Tender USS Simon Lake, AS 33, and as the supply officer on the Submarine Tender USS Canopus, AS 34. The admiral has had increasingly important shore duty tours including assignments as assistant comptroller, Commander Submarine Force, U.S. Pacific Fleet, operations research officer at the Navy Ships Parts Control Center, Mechanicsburg, PA; inventory analysis staff, Naval Supply Systems Command, Washington, DC; executive officer, Naval Supply Center, Jacksonville, FL; and director, spares programs and policy branch in the Office of the Deputy Chief of Naval Operations for Logistics.

In 1990, he rejoined the Naval Supply Systems Command as the deputy commander for financial management/comptroller. From July 1993 to July 1995, Admiral Lippert served as the commander, Defense General Supply Center in the great capital of our commonwealth, Richmond. In August 1995, he became the first commander of the Naval Inventory Control Point with offices in Philadelphia, PA, and Mechanicsburg, PA. Admiral Lippert officially entered the Flag Officer Corps when he was awarded the rank of rear admiral, lower half, in November 1995. From 1997 to 1999, he served as the vice commander for the Naval Supply Systems Command and received his promotion to rear admiral, upper half, in October 1998. From 1999 to 2001, he commanded the Naval Supply Systems Command and served as the Navy's 41st chief of Supply Corps. In May of 2000, President Clinton appointed Vice Admiral Lippert to represent the Navy as a member of the President's Committee for Purchase from People who are Blind or Severely Disabled. He assumed his current position as the director of DLA in July of 2001 and received his promotion to vice admiral in September of 2001.

His decorations include the Defense Superior Service Medal, three Legion of Merits, four Meritorious Service Medals, two Navy and Marine Corps Commendation Medals, Navy and Marine Corps Achievement Medal, and Submarine Supply Dolphins. He is also the recipient of the Society of Logistics Engineers 1992 International Award for outstanding performance in financial management/inventory control. Under Admiral Lippert's tenure as Director, DLA received two Joint Meritorious Unit Awards.

In closing I wish to commend Vice Admiral Lippert for his nearly 38 years

of distinguished service to our Nation, protecting our freedoms of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness and wish him the best in his future endeavors. His departure is a great loss to our Navy, but we are markedly better for having had him aboard. He leaves us with a Defense agency that is indeed a national treasure and one that has been vastly improved on his watch. I honor this patriot and dedicated public servant, wishing him a fond farewell, fair winds for his sails and following seas.

Mr. President, I am pleased today to recognize the Honorable James D. Darnell of Orange, VA, who has served as a member of the Orange town council for 14 years. For 2 of those years, Mr. Darnell also held the position of vice mayor.

As a member of the town council, Mr. Darnell has helped the town of Orange live up to his motto, ``Sweet Living, Steady Progress.'' In part because of Mr. Darnell's dedicated leadership, the town of Orange has witnessed positive growth. Mr. Darnell helped implement such developments as the design and completion of a raw water storage basin, the improvement of the town's infrastructure, the completion of a public works facility and meeting room, the launch of the town's first public transit system, and the construction of a road to the new middle school.

Mr. Darnell, who is a respected businessman and farmer, brought a spirit of innovation and commitment to the town of Orange. I am grateful for his contributions to the town and to the Commonwealth of Virginia.

Mr. President, I am pleased today to recognize the Honorable Raymond C. Lonick of Orange, VA, who has served as mayor of Orange for 10 years and as a member of the Orange town council for 16 years.

Since 1990, when he was first elected to the town council, Mayor Lonick has brought innovative and motivated leadership to the town of Orange. He has made countless contributions, and as a result the town has thrived. It was during Mayor Lonick's tenure as mayor that the town adopted the motto, ``Sweet Living, Steady Progress,'' demonstrating Orange's commitment to finding a balance between maintaining the town's charm and history while encouraging its growth. Mayor Lonick and the town of Orange have celebrated many other achievements during the past 16 years, including improvements to the town's infrastructure, the completion of a new public works facility and meeting room, and the launch of the town's first public transit system. One of Mayor Lonick's most notable accomplishments as mayor was helping the town acquire a $300,000 grant in 2002 that will be used for the design and completion of a raw water storage basin.

In addition to playing a significant role in the governance of the town, Mayor Lonick has served Orange in many other capacities. He is a dedicated member of St. Isidore the Farmer Catholic Church, a substitute teacher with the Orange County Public Schools, and a loyal supporter of the Orange Downtown Alliance. I am grateful for his contributions to the town of Orange and to the Commonwealth of Virginia.

Mr. President, I rise to strongly endorse H.R. 8, the Death Tax Repeal Permanency Act of 2005 and urge my colleagues to vote for it. This has been brought up year after year for decades. I hope my colleagues will vote in favor of giving the death penalty to the death tax. It is an unfair tax.

I like listening to all the different commentaries. The preceding speaker from New Jersey was acting as if it is the Government's money, that this is the taxpayers' money somehow going to those who have estates. It is individuals, human beings. Americans are the ones who are the owners of their property, not the Government. My view, as a matter of principle, is that death should not be a taxable event. The sale of an asset ought to be the taxable event.

This is an important tax policy that affects family businesses, small farms, people all over this country who would like to pass on their American Dream, what they worked on and worked for and accrued through their lives, to their children.

I was listening to the Senator from Arkansas who said she wanted a solution, fairness, and certainty. There is going to be a chance to have that fairness, that certainty and solution. Tomorrow we will vote on this measure, and we can repeal the death tax. That will bring a solution. It will bring fairness, and it will bring certainty.

In 2001, I proudly supported efforts to reduce taxes on families, individuals, and small businesses, and also to phase out over a period of time the death tax. We reduced the death tax in the strange way that they do things in Washington. The death tax was at 55 percent. It gets reduced over a period of years, until the year 2010, to zero. In 2006, it is one amount; in 2008, it is another. By 2010, it is down to zero. But then in the year 2011, it goes back up to 55 percent and a $600,000-something exemption. One would think in looking at this tax policy that the folks in Washington are incentivizing the American people to die in the year 2010. If they die that year, there is no death tax. If they survive, then they will be subjected to a 55-percent tax. This is a strange and odd policy. It hurts hard-working taxpayers who wish to leave their life's work to their loved ones.

It has harmed entrepreneurs and innovators who want to rely on a predictable, consistent tax system so that they can invest and create jobs and expand opportunity and spur economic growth. This absurd, complicated tax policy does not allow people to plan with a simple, stable, and certain tax law.

We have an opportunity to give the death penalty to the death tax once and for all. This is the right thing to do for a number of reasons. First and foremost is the issue of fairness. Talking about whose money is this, if an American man or woman earns money, they get hit with an income tax. If they invest it, they get hit with taxes on any interest. If they sell an asset that they have invested in, that ends up getting hit with a capital gains tax. Dividends are taxed. Interest is taxed. If they buy something with that earned money that has already been taxed once or twice before, they pay a sales tax. And as a practical matter, the Government taxes people to death. Then, after they do die, what happens? You have, in effect, the IRS, like a bunch of buzzards, hovering around at the funeral trying to get another chunk out of what is left from that person who is deceased.

I like to paraphrase Virginia's first Governor, Patrick Henry: There should be no taxation without respiration in the United States of America. We do need to get rid of this death tax.

Part of the American dream is to be able to pass on what you have worked for or the business you have started. You may have inherited it from someone else or bought it, but you built it up and would like to pass it on. A majority of Americans agree. About 70 percent of Americans, according to surveys, support it, even if they would not be subjected to this tax, because they recognize how unfair it is to be taxing death. This is a matter of fairness that the American people understand.

The second reason to eliminate the death tax is that it has a harmful effect on our economy. In many cases, the assets that are subjected to the death tax have already been taxed once or twice or three or four times before. That means the death tax is the fourth or fifth tax. It drains our economy. It provides little incentive to keep a farm and provides little incentive for a business to expand or to improve because its value would go up.

We have done a lot of things in the last few years that are beneficial for small business: For example, the $100,000 expensing for capital equipment as opposed to $25,000. That new equipment will make that company or that enterprise more productive, more efficient, and undoubtedly more profitable. But if you keep doing that year after year and improving it, you will improve the value of your business, making it subject to the death tax which is obviously counterproductive.

Another way this unfair tax hits people in the Commonwealth of Virginia is to look at the outer suburbs, Prince William County, Loudon County, the Piedmont of Virginia, the Shenandoah Valley. Someone may have farmland or forestry property in the hills and mountains. That property, when someone dies, is not taxed at what the value would be for running cattle on it or growing trees. It is taxed by the Federal Government at its highest and best use. The highest and best use of most of this property is not running cattle or growing soybeans or timber. It is going to be taxed at what the value would be if it were subdivided into a development or if it were along a highway commercially. So what happens so often is urban sprawl or suburban sprawl in the Piedmont, the Shenandoah Valley, the Richmond area, and elsewhere in Virginia and in the country because that forestry property will give you just the return when you harvest the timber. But to pay those

taxes, you will have to get a loan. You are not going to get enough income off of that property to be able to pay those taxes. So what happens is that that forestry property or that family farm gets subdivided to pay the Federal Government death taxes. And whatever remains of that farm, if any, after it is subdivided, is a less efficient farming or agricultural or forestry operation.

This does harm people in a variety of ways, not just fairness, not just impeding and countering incentives for improving a business. It also means for Virginia ending up with more suburban sprawl. Talk to developers when they develop a subdivision. It is usually and so often from an estate sale where that family cannot keep the family farm going, and it changes the nature of many communities.

I have listened to all the arguments: Gosh, why can't we do this, and why can't we do that. We can do a lot tomorrow. We can act. It is something that has been promised year after year. Some people may not think it is entirely how they would like it, but why not do something positive, constructive and useful and follow the will of the majority of the Senators. Those of us advocating this are not in the minority. We are in the majority. There is a supermajority needed to keep proceeding, but stop the obstruction. Let's follow the will of the majority of the American people, the will of a majority of the Senate, and for tax fairness, for tax simplification, for certainty and stability of tax policy, let's kill the death tax once and for all and provide new life to the American economy and the American Dream.

I yield the floor.