Floor Statements

Mr. President, if there is no further business, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate stand adjourned under the previous order.

Mr. President, I thank my colleague and I thank the Senator from South Carolina for their courtesy.

My understanding is that the Senator from South Carolina wishes to set aside the pending amendment and offer an amendment; is that correct?

Mr. President, I will have to object to offering three amendments. I have no problem if he wants to set aside the pending amendment and bring one amendment up, whichever amendment he would like, and we will deal with them one at a time. I think that will be the appropriate procedure for us to follow.

Mr. President, I appreciate the thought that has gone into the amendment, but, frankly, this is an amendment that is in the jurisdiction of the Banking Committee. Obviously, the Sarbanes-Oxley legislation came out of the Banking Committee and it is squarely within their jurisdiction. We are informed they have not had a chance to review the amendment, have not had a chance to have hearings on the amendment, and wish a chance to come to the floor and discuss it before there is any vote. There is some objection to going to any kind of vote on it at this point, so I am not prepared to discuss the merits of it. I do believe we need to provide an opportunity for those Senators on the Banking Committee who want to come and discuss the merits to come and engage in that debate.

However, I mention to the Senator from South Carolina, I am informed he also has an amendment related to looking at the Tax Code for possible problems with barring innovation; is that correct?

Mr. President, we are not in a position to say yet--we are trying to talk to the Finance Committee, because, of course, they have jurisdiction over tax issues--but we are trying to determine if there is any objection to Senator DeMint's amendment relating to taxes.

Perhaps the right thing to do, since the majority leader has tried-- not just on this bill but as a general matter--to avoid the circumstance where we are bringing up amendments, setting aside amendments; bringing up amendments, setting aside amendments, without ever having disposed of anything for a long period, perhaps the Senator could go ahead and describe this other amendment related to taxes. By the time he has completed that, we might know whether we are in a position to proceed to some kind of action on that.

As I say, if it is another amendment that is going to require a debate and vote here, I think maybe we would want to go ahead and try to get the Banking Committee people here to deal with the Sarbanes-Oxley amendment before we get the Finance Committee people here to deal with the Tax Code amendment.

Perhaps the Senator could put the Senate on notice as to what the amendment entails, and by the time he is through with that discussion, we may know enough to be able to tell him whether we could accept the amendment or whether there is going to be objection.

Mr. President, I know the Senator from Tennessee has some comments on the amendment. Maybe we could continue with that discussion and debate for a few more minutes to see if we can get a little more of a response from people in the Finance Committee.

Mr. President, I am informed we do not have a clear response from the Finance Committee. I agree with the substance of what the Senator from Tennessee said. I don't see this causes any difficulty in the overall thrust of the legislation, so I would be inclined to urge the Senator from South Carolina to go ahead and ask permission to set aside the pending amendment, bring this up, and then conclude any debate he wants to on this amendment related to the study, and then we can dispose of it--by voice vote, as far as I am concerned, unless the Senator wants a recorded vote.

Mr. President, we need to determine when we would want to go ahead since, as I understand the Senator, he wishes a rollcall vote. We want to have a chance to check with our floor managers, the assistant majority leader, and determine when this is appropriate, so I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, let me briefly speak to the amendment of the Senator from South Carolina related to earmarks. I obviously would have to object to it. I think he will find probably any and all Senators involved with appropriations would have to object to it. The way I read it, it says it is not in order to consider any bill that proposes a congressional earmark on appropriated funds unless you have 60 votes. The definition of a congressional earmark is contained in the legislation, but any appropriations bill that comes to the floor virtually by definition is going to contain something that falls into this definition of congressional earmark. It is one thing to be concerned about the addition of earmarks once the Appropriations Committee has presented legislation to the Congress or to the full Senate. But to say we cannot bring up a bill, an appropriations bill, if it has anything in it that might meet this definition is substantially more onerous than I would think would be good policy.

I am glad to yield.

Mr. President, I thank the Senator for the clarification, but I do think the problem remains because this bill is far reaching because this bill covers quite a few Federal agencies and tries to lay out a blueprint for what we hope we will be able to provide by way of appropriations to these agencies in the future, whether it is the National Science Foundation, whether it is the Office of Science in the Department Energy, whether it is the Department of Education, Health and Human Services--there are various agencies that would obtain funding to carry out the purposes of this legislation if we are successful through the appropriations process.

For us to be putting a provision in this authorizing bill saying you cannot bring an appropriations bill to the floor that contains anything we would define as a congressional earmark is unduly restricting the authority and the prerogatives of the Appropriations Committee in putting together legislation they think makes sense.

I am well aware there are three sort of distinct hurdles that need to be surmounted in order for us to actually get funds to be spent on these good purposes that are outlined in this bill. One of those hurdles is the Budget Act. We need to be sure there is room in the Budget Act for the funding we are calling for in this legislation. We offered an amendment to do that. We got very good support here in the Senate. Senator Alexander and I offered that and I think that was a major step forward.

The second hurdle, of course, is trying to authorize these programs so if the funds are appropriated for these purposes nobody can raise an objection that these are not authorized uses of the funds.

Then the third and perhaps most difficult is, each year over the next several years, the period that is covered by the legislation--each year we are going to have to try to see that the funds are properly appropriated for these agencies to carry out the work as outlined in this bill.

I think it would be foolhardy for us to be requiring that before you can bring a bill to the floor that contained funding related to this authorization bill, if it could be construed to fall under this definition of congressional earmark, you would have to have 60 votes to proceed to that appropriations bill. That would be an unprecedented procedure for us in the Senate and one that would be very wrongheaded. As I say, people involved in the appropriations process would probably see it that way as well.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that at 2:17 p.m., the Senate proceed to vote on or in relation to amendment No. 929; that at 2:15 p.m., there be 2 minutes of debate equally divided between Senators Baucus and DeMint or their designees and that no amendment be in order to the amendment prior to the vote; that upon the conclusion of the vote, Senator Kennedy be recognized to speak on the bill; that following Senator Kennedy, Senator Coburn be recognized as provided for under the previous order.

Mr. President, I know Senator Baucus intended to be here. I don't see him right now. I know the Senator from South Carolina wishes to use his 1 minute. I am informed that Senator Baucus will support the amendment and is urging other Senators to do the same.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Senator Domenici be recognized for up to 15 minutes, that Senator Sanders would follow him for up to 20 minutes, and that Senator Ensign would follow him for up to 15 minutes.

Mr. President, I ask for regular order with respect to the DeMint amendment No. 928.

Mr. President, I ask to call up the Dodd-Shelby amendment No. 947. It is a second-degree amendment.

I ask unanimous consent the reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Mr. President, I have a unanimous consent request here which I will propound at this point, that sets out a procedure for us to follow this evening.

I ask unanimous consent that at 5:10 p.m. the Senate resume debate with respect to the Dodd-Shelby amendment, No. 947, and the DeMint amendment No. 928, with the time divided 5 minutes each for Senators Dodd and Shelby, and 10 minutes under the control of Senator DeMint, to be debated concurrently; that no amendments be in order to either amendment and that the Dodd amendment be modified to be a first-degree amendment; that upon the use or yielding back of time, the Senate proceed to vote in relation to the Dodd-Shelby amendment, as modified; that there be 2 minutes between the votes equally divided and controlled between Senators Dodd and DeMint or their designees, to be followed by a vote in relation to the DeMint amendment; that upon the use of that time, the Senate, without further intervening action or debate, vote in relation to the DeMint amendment; that upon disposition of the DeMint amendment, the Senate resume the Coburn amendment No. 917, and that the previous order with respect to the debate time prior to the vote be in order, with the time equally divided and controlled between Senators Bingaman and Coburn or their designees; and without further debate the Senate proceed to vote in relation to the Coburn amendment No. 917; that no amendment be in order to the Coburn amendment; that upon disposition of these amendments it be in order to call up the Sununu amendment No. 938 and the Sanders amendment No. 936, and the Senate then return to the regular order of amendments.

Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I did not realize that the time was reserved between now and 5:10. Is it reserved? My impression was that the floor was open for Senators to speak or offer amendments.

Mr. President, could we clarify what the request is? I am sorry. I was not able to pay full attention.

Could we modify that request to provide that Senator Cornyn's intention is to offer and then withdraw an amendment?

Mr. President, I have no objection to the Senator from Texas being allotted 10 minutes and then the other Senator from Texas, Mr. Cornyn, going ahead with his comments and the offering and withdrawal of an amendment.

Mr. President, let me also commend the Senator from Texas and thank him for his support for the underlying legislation. I do think the substance of what he is trying to get accomplished with regard to the immigration laws of the country--I very much support trying to facilitate allowing people who get an education here to stay here and use those talents and skills and knowledge they have acquired to benefit our country. So we need to work on that. I think the appropriate place to do that is as part of the debate we will do on immigration, which is coming up. The majority leader has indicated he plans to get to that issue in May, so I think, clearly, that is coming up very soon. But I commend the Senator from Texas for his willingness to withdraw his amendment at this time.

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

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

Mr. President, I send a modification to amendment No. 908 to the desk.

Mr. President, I ask that we proceed to act on this modified amendment at this point. This is the managers' package from the Energy Committee, and it clarifies several points that are of a technical nature. I ask unanimous consent that the amendment, as modified, be agreed to.

Mr. President, I also call up amendment No. 940.

Mr. President, again, this is a managers' package from the HELP Committee. Senator Kennedy and Senator Enzi are cosponsoring this. I would urge that the Senate agree to this amendment at this time.

Mr. President, I yield the floor. I know Senator Dodd and Senator Shelby are here ready to speak, and Senator DeMint as well, with regard to their respective amendments.

Amendments Nos. 947 and 928

Mr. President, I believe Senator Dodd has 5 minutes, Senator Shelby has 5 minutes, and Senator DeMint has 10 minutes under the order.

Mr. President, regarding the amendment we are about to vote on, we voted on essentially the same amendment last Wednesday as an amendment to the Court Security Improvement Act. The amendment provides that any new program or initiative that is contained in legislation be offset. The point that defeated the amendment last week is still valid; that is, we should not be required to offset authorizing legislation. This is authorizing legislation. There is no spending in this bill. This does not appropriate funds.

Mr. President, on behalf of myself and my colleague, Senator Domenici, I will be moving to table the amendment after he completes his statement.

I yield the remainder of my time to Senator Domenici.

Mr. President, I move to table the Coburn amendment and ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. President, under the previous order, I call up amendments Nos. 938 and 936.

Mr. President, I also wish to propound a unanimous consent request. I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate resumes consideration of S. 761 on Wednesday, there be 30 minutes of debate with respect to the Sununu amendment No. 938, with the time equally divided and controlled between Senators Sununu and Kennedy or their designees; that upon the use or yielding back of time, the Senate proceed to vote in relation to the amendment, with no amendment in order to the amendment prior to the vote.

Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I thank my colleague for his question and his great work on this legislation.

The plan for tomorrow, as I understand it, is we will go ahead with this Sununu amendment at around 10:45 and hopefully vote shortly after 11 o'clock on that amendment. We have talked to Senator Coburn from Oklahoma about considering three amendments he still has that he is committed to offering at some time in the 2 o'clock period.

We urge other Senators who have amendments they wish to have votes on to bring those to the floor for consideration after disposing of Senator Sununu's amendment shortly after 11 o'clock. Now, obviously, the Senator's amendment is still pending, as we have indicated, and we still have to get agreement as to how to proceed on that. We are working on that at the present time.

But I agree, we have made good progress today. I hope we can complete the remaining amendments tomorrow and proceed to final action on the bill.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry be authorized to conduct a hearing during the session of the Senate on April 24, 2007, at 9:30 a.m. in SD-106. The title of this committee hearing is, ``Challenges and Opportunities Facing American Agriculture Producers Today, Part II.''

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Armed Services be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, April 24, 2007, at 9:30 a.m., in open session to receive testimony on United States Pacific Command, United States Forces Korea, and United States Special Operations Command in review of the defense authorization request for fiscal year 2008 and the future years defense program.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation be authorized to hold a hearing during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, April 24 2007, at 10 a.m., in room 253 of the Russell Senate Office Building.

The hearing will examine the state of U.S. broadband deployment and penetration. In addition, it will provide a forum for considering the state of U.S. telecommunications research and development and the consequences for competitiveness in the global economy.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Environment and Public Works be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, April 24, 2007 at 9:45 a.m. in Room 406 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building.

The agenda to be considered: Hearing on the Implications of the Supreme Court's Decision Regarding EPA's Authorities with Respect to Greenhouse Gases under the Clean Air Act.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions be authorized to hold a hearing on the No Child Left Behind Reauthorization during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, April 24, 2007 at 10 a.m. in SD-628.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary be authorized to meet to conduct a hearing on ``The Insurrection Act Rider and State Control of the National Guard'' on Tuesday, April 24, 2007 at 2:30 p.m. in Dirksen Senate Office Building Room 226.

The Honorable Michael F. Easley, Governor, State of North Carolina, Raleigh, NC.

Lieutenant General H. Steven Blum, USA, Chief, National Guard Bureau, Alexandria, VA.

Major General Timothy Lowenberg, USAF, The Adjutant General, State of Washington, Tacoma, WA.

Sheriff Ted G. Kamatchus, Sheriff, Marshall County Iowa, President, National Sheriffs' Association, Marshalltown, IA.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Select Committee on Intelligence be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on April 24, 2007 at 2:30 p.m. to hold a closed hearing.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Ad Hoc Subcommittee on Disaster Recovery be authorized to meet on Tuesday, April 24, 2007, at 9:30 a.m. for a hearing titled ``Beyond Trailers, Part I: Creating a More Flexible, Efficient, and Cost Effective Federal Disaster Housing Program.''

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations be authorized to meet on Tuesday, April 24, 2007, at 2:30 p.m., for a hearing entitled ``Transit Benefits: How Some Federal Employees Are Taking Uncle Sam for a Ride.''

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on Human Rights and the Law be authorized to meet on Tuesday, April 24, 2007 at 10 a.m. to conduct a hearing on ``A Long Way Gone: Memoirs of a Boy Soldier'' in room 226 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building.

Witness List

Ishmael Beah, author, ``A Long Way Gone: Memoirs of a Boy Soldier,'' New York, NY; Kenneth Roth, executive director, Human Rights Watch, New York, NY; Anwen Hughes, senior counsel, Refugee Protection Program, Human Rights First, New York, NY; Joseph Mettimano, director, Public Policy and Advocacy, World Vision, Washington, DC.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on Readiness and Management Support be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, April 24, 2007, at 3 p.m., to receive testimony on the readiness of U.S. ground forces in review of the defense authorization request for fiscal year 2008 and the future years defense program.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of S. Res. 167 which was submitted earlier today.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table, and that any statements related thereto be printed in the Record, without intervening action or debate.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of S. Res. 168, which was submitted earlier today.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table, and that any statements relating thereto be printed in the Record, without intervening action or debate.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate now proceed to the consideration of S. Res. 169, which was submitted earlier today.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, the motions to reconsider be laid upon the table.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it stand adjourned until 9:30 a.m., Wednesday, April 25; that on Wednesday, following the prayer and the pledge, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, the morning hour be deemed to have expired, and the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day; that there then be a period of morning business for 60 minutes, with Senators permitted to speak therein, with the first 30 minutes under the control of the majority and final 30 minutes under the control of the Republicans; that following morning business, the Senate resume consideration of S. 761.

Mr. President, I understand my colleague from Tennessee, Senator Alexander, wishes to make some final comments tonight.

If there is no further business today, I ask unanimous consent that following the remarks of Senator Alexander, the Senate stand adjourned under the previous order.

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

Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk on behalf of myself and Senator Alexander.

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

Mr. President, at this point I will yield the floor. I know my colleague from Tennessee wishes to speak about a variety of issues, and then there is another amendment which we also will be sending to the desk for Senator Inouye, who will be here fairly shortly, related to provisions that have come from the Commerce Committee.

Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Madam President, I appreciate the good work my colleague from Tennessee, as comanager of the bill, has been doing on this issue, as I have been unavoidably detained over in the Energy Committee.

It is my understanding, unless someone knows otherwise, that all debate expected on the pending amendment has taken place. As far as I have been informed, the Senate is ready to dispense with the amendment.

Madam President, I send another 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, for the information of Senators, this amendment makes a series of clarifying changes in the bill that are technical in nature. It is not controversial, as far as I have been informed. I am informed by the leadership that they would like to leave this pending at this point. We will proceed that way in case a Member decides to come and speak on it.

Madam President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate now be in a period of morning business, with Senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each.

I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Madam President, I wish to congratulate Dr. Howard-Yana Shapiro, who will receive the Organic Leadership Award on May 7, 2007. The award is bestowed annually by the Organic Trade Association on individuals who have demonstrated leadership and vision in furthering the goals of organic agriculture.

Dr. Shapiro has had a very impressive career in organic agriculture, having been involved with sustainable agricultural and agroforestry systems, plant genetics, and food production systems for over 35 years. He is best known as the principal author of ``Gardening for the Future of the Earth,'' which shows how to ``create natural bounty in your own backyard and help save the planet one seed at a time.''

During his long and diverse career, Dr. Shapiro has been a community gardening activist, a university professor for 15 years, twice a Fulbright Scholar, twice a Ford Foundation Fellow, and winner of the National Endowment for the Humanities Award. He has worked with indigenous communities, nongovernmental organizations, governmental agencies, and private institutions throughout the world, including Conservation International, World Wildlife Fund, U.S. Department of Agriculture, U.S. Agency for International Development, U.S. Forest Service, ICRAF, The World Agroforestry Centre, Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute, and many other national and regional agricultural institutions in Mexico, Brazil, Ecuador, Bolivia, Costa Rica, Honduras, Ghana, Nigeria, Cameroon, Senegal, South Africa, Vietnam, Indonesia, Papua New Guinea, and Australia.

Most recently, Dr. Shapiro has held a leadership role in Seeds of Change, the largest certified organic seed company in the country. Located along the Rio Grande in El Guique, NM, Seeds of Change, a division of Mars, Incorporated, is a pioneering cultivator of organically grown seeds for home and market growers, a leader in the organic foods industry, and a valued resource for organic farmers. Dr. Shapiro has been dedicated to Seeds of Change since its inception and was a key figure during the launching of the Seeds of Change 100 percent certified organic food line in the United States, Europe, Australia, and Japan.

I am proud that New Mexico is home to Seeds of Change and that the company, and organic agriculture as an industry, has been so well served by the expertise and vision of Dr. Shapiro throughout its growth. Again, I congratulate Dr. Howard-Yana Shapiro for receiving the Organic Trade Association's highest honor. I thank him for his commitment to furthering organic agriculture around the world, and I wish him continued success in the years ahead.

Mr. President, I wanted to take a few minutes of the Senate's time to talk about a bill that I introduced, along with Senator Burr and Senator Kennedy, entitled the Graduation Promise Act of 2007, or GPA.

This bill would create a Federal-State-local partnership to improve the Nation's graduation rates and help transform our lowest performing high schools. This is a bill we just introduced today.

I thank Senator Burr and Senator Kennedy for their commitment to improving our high schools and for increasing graduation rates in this country. I am very pleased to be working with both of them on this legislation. I am also very glad that GPA, this legislation we have introduced, is supported by the Alliance for Excellent Education, by the Center for American Progress, by Jobs for the Future, by the National Council of La Raza, by First Focus, and many other education groups.

Nearly 20 years ago, the Nation's Governors met for the first education summit and, as far as I know, for the only national education summit in our country's history. They met with the first President Bush in Charlottesville, VA. They agreed to set high expectations for education for the coming decade. That was the decade following 1989.

One of those standards they set was for an increase in high school graduation rates to 90 percent by the year 2000. Today, we are not even close to achieving that goal. In fact, the Nation's graduation rate has stagnated at around 70 percent instead of 90 percent. Graduation rates for Hispanic and African-American students are lower than that. In my home State of New Mexico, by some estimates, the graduation rate is less than 60 percent in some high schools.

Many students are entering the ninth grade significantly behind in their reading and mathematics skills. They are ill-prepared to master the challenges of the typical high school curriculum. Not surprisingly, these students are more prone to academic failure and grade retention and, accordingly, the dropout rates among these students are disturbingly high, specifically in the ninth grade.

But low graduation rates are only one broad indicator of the crisis affecting our Nation's high schools. Even if a student makes it to graduation, only a third of all students who enter the ninth grade will graduate with the skills and the knowledge necessary to go on to college or to succeed in the modern workplace. They are not receiving the kind of quality education that permits a seamless transition to a job or postsecondary education. Again, this problem disproportionately affects minority students. Only 16 percent of Hispanic students and 23 percent of African-American students graduate prepared for college, compared to 40 percent for other students.

This situation is simply unacceptable. In the global technology-based economy we live in today, a high school diploma is a minimum qualification for most jobs in our fastest growing sectors. The United States ranks 19th in high school graduation rates among major industrial democracies.

The Federal Government recognized that investments in early childhood and elementary grades are critical to a student's academic growth and success. Still, attention and resources must be sustained throughout the middle and high school years as well if the national goal of leaving no child behind is to be met. Unfortunately, we have not been doing this. Only about 8 percent of all title I dollars go to our high schools today.

Our continued economic security hinges on preparing our young people to enter college and to enter the 21st century workforce. In fact, our national security depends on it.

Fortunately, research has come to light that will help us to better understand the factors behind the low graduation and student performance data. For instance, we can identify the high schools that are producing the majority of dropouts in this country. These schools-- roughly 2,000 schools I am referring to--represent about 15 percent of all high schools in the country, and they have persistently low rates of graduation and low rates of grade promotion.

If we look at the typical senior class at one of these high schools, it will have decreased in size by at least 40 percent since the students entered the school 4 years earlier. These high schools are in every State. They tend to be concentrated in urban areas, and they serve more than a third of our African-American and Hispanic students nationwide. Unfortunately, there are 23 of these high schools in my home State of New Mexico.

Research has also shed light on the specific factors that allow us to predict who is going to drop out of high school. We can identify with up to 80 percent accuracy the future dropouts as early as the ninth grade. We can do so by looking at such predictors as course failure, poor attendance, behavior problems, and retention in earlier grades. Students who enter high school significantly lagging behind in their academics and who show signs of becoming disengaged from the school are prone to drop out unless additional support is put in place.

Finally, research-based solutions with solid evidence of success are transforming of our high schools with low graduation rates. Restructuring schools into smaller, more personalized learning environments ensures that students become engaged from the time they enter the ninth grade on. Sustained efforts to boost attendance ensure they will not fall further behind.

Schools that have combined these efforts with a high-quality curriculum and structural improvements have been very successful at improving student performance and improving graduation rates. They have done so with transitional math and English for ninth graders that will help them catch up by offering challenging curricula and tangible contextual applications of

learning in order to rekindle the interests of these students and creating teaching teams, targeting professional development for the teachers to help them meet this challenge. A combination of these interventions has improved student performance and increased graduation rates. We know this problem can be solved to meet the goal.

This legislation has been introduced by Senators Burr and Kennedy, and I hope very much this legislation and many of its provisions can be included when we get to a markup of the No Child Left Behind legislation later this year.

I submit we cannot afford to let the estimated 2,000 failing high schools continue to push students off the path to prosperity. Collectively, these schools serve about 2.4 million students. We need to ensure for the continued prosperity of the country that these students remain in school and graduate with the skills needed to become productive citizens.

Mr. President, I wanted to take a few minutes of the Senate's time to talk about a bill that I introduced, along with Senator Burr and Senator Kennedy, entitled the Graduation Promise Act of 2007, or GPA.

This bill would create a Federal-State-local partnership to improve the Nation's graduation rates and help transform our lowest performing high schools. This is a bill we just introduced today.

I thank Senator Burr and Senator Kennedy for their commitment to improving our high schools and for increasing graduation rates in this country. I am very pleased to be working with both of them on this legislation. I am also very glad that GPA, this legislation we have introduced, is supported by the Alliance for Excellent Education, by the Center for American Progress, by Jobs for the Future, by the National Council of La Raza, by First Focus, and many other education groups.

Nearly 20 years ago, the Nation's Governors met for the first education summit and, as far as I know, for the only national education summit in our country's history. They met with the first President Bush in Charlottesville, VA. They agreed to set high expectations for education for the coming decade. That was the decade following 1989.

One of those standards they set was for an increase in high school graduation rates to 90 percent by the year 2000. Today, we are not even close to achieving that goal. In fact, the Nation's graduation rate has stagnated at around 70 percent instead of 90 percent. Graduation rates for Hispanic and African-American students are lower than that. In my home State of New Mexico, by some estimates, the graduation rate is less than 60 percent in some high schools.

Many students are entering the ninth grade significantly behind in their reading and mathematics skills. They are ill-prepared to master the challenges of the typical high school curriculum. Not surprisingly, these students are more prone to academic failure and grade retention and, accordingly, the dropout rates among these students are disturbingly high, specifically in the ninth grade.

But low graduation rates are only one broad indicator of the crisis affecting our Nation's high schools. Even if a student makes it to graduation, only a third of all students who enter the ninth grade will graduate with the skills and the knowledge necessary to go on to college or to succeed in the modern workplace. They are not receiving the kind of quality education that permits a seamless transition to a job or postsecondary education. Again, this problem disproportionately affects minority students. Only 16 percent of Hispanic students and 23 percent of African-American students graduate prepared for college, compared to 40 percent for other students.

This situation is simply unacceptable. In the global technology-based economy we live in today, a high school diploma is a minimum qualification for most jobs in our fastest growing sectors. The United States ranks 19th in high school graduation rates among major industrial democracies.

The Federal Government recognized that investments in early childhood and elementary grades are critical to a student's academic growth and success. Still, attention and resources must be sustained throughout the middle and high school years as well if the national goal of leaving no child behind is to be met. Unfortunately, we have not been doing this. Only about 8 percent of all title I dollars go to our high schools today.

Our continued economic security hinges on preparing our young people to enter college and to enter the 21st century workforce. In fact, our national security depends on it.

Fortunately, research has come to light that will help us to better understand the factors behind the low graduation and student performance data. For instance, we can identify the high schools that are producing the majority of dropouts in this country. These schools-- roughly 2,000 schools I am referring to--represent about 15 percent of all high schools in the country, and they have persistently low rates of graduation and low rates of grade promotion.

If we look at the typical senior class at one of these high schools, it will have decreased in size by at least 40 percent since the students entered the school 4 years earlier. These high schools are in every State. They tend to be concentrated in urban areas, and they serve more than a third of our African-American and Hispanic students nationwide. Unfortunately, there are 23 of these high schools in my home State of New Mexico.

Research has also shed light on the specific factors that allow us to predict who is going to drop out of high school. We can identify with up to 80 percent accuracy the future dropouts as early as the ninth grade. We can do so by looking at such predictors as course failure, poor attendance, behavior problems, and retention in earlier grades. Students who enter high school significantly lagging behind in their academics and who show signs of becoming disengaged from the school are prone to drop out unless additional support is put in place.

Finally, research-based solutions with solid evidence of success are transforming of our high schools with low graduation rates. Restructuring schools into smaller, more personalized learning environments ensures that students become engaged from the time they enter the ninth grade on. Sustained efforts to boost attendance ensure they will not fall further behind.

Schools that have combined these efforts with a high-quality curriculum and structural improvements have been very successful at improving student performance and improving graduation rates. They have done so with transitional math and English for ninth graders that will help them catch up by offering challenging curricula and tangible contextual applications of

learning in order to rekindle the interests of these students and creating teaching teams, targeting professional development for the teachers to help them meet this challenge. A combination of these interventions has improved student performance and increased graduation rates. We know this problem can be solved to meet the goal.

This legislation has been introduced by Senators Burr and Kennedy, and I hope very much this legislation and many of its provisions can be included when we get to a markup of the No Child Left Behind legislation later this year.

I submit we cannot afford to let the estimated 2,000 failing high schools continue to push students off the path to prosperity. Collectively, these schools serve about 2.4 million students. We need to ensure for the continued prosperity of the country that these students remain in school and graduate with the skills needed to become productive citizens.