Floor Statements

Mr. President, I speak today in response to some things I have heard a few of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle say about Dr. Condoleezza Rice. I want to set the record straight and express my full support for her confirmation.

Dr. Rice is without question one of the most qualified people ever to be chosen as Secretary of State. She is more qualified to be Secretary of State than all 100 Senators are for their jobs.

It is not surprising to me that I have not heard any of my colleagues question Dr. Rice's qualifications. She is one of the most well-rounded foreign policy experts in the nation, having spent some 25 years in Government, the private sector, and academics.

In Government, she has served three Presidents, including service at the National Security Council and the Joint Chiefs of Staff at the Pentagon. As National Security Advisor, one of the most important foreign policy positions in our Government, she has been a key architect of our Nation's response to terrorism and threats abroad. Since she joined the Bush administration as National Security Advisor, this administration has reached an agreement with Russia to reduce nuclear weapons, successfully achieved the return of our military personnel from China when their plane was taken hostage, engaged North Korea in multilateral talks to end their nuclear weapons program, launched an effort to fight AIDS around the world, and freed millions of people living under the tyranny of Saddam Hussein and the Taliban.

In addition to her Government service, Dr. Rice has spent time in the business world where she gained the management experience needed to run an organization as large and diverse as the State Department. She has served on numerous corporate boards, and was the top budget official at Stanford University when she served as Provost.

While I do not think that academic achievement alone qualifies someone for a job as important as Secretary of State, there is no question Dr. Rice has proven her intelligence, knowledge, and hard work through her academic career. She has three degrees, including a doctorate, in Government and foreign policy. She has written numerous books and articles on national defense and foreign policy topics. And while serving as Provost at Stanford, she was also the top academic officer of that prestigious university.

Rather than questioning Dr. Rice's qualifications, the few Senators who have come to the floor to speak against her are simply playing politics. I fear the Senators I listened to all day yesterday are acting out of bitterness from the rejection of their ideas and candidates at the polls last fall. They are attacking Dr. Rice in a continuing effort to tear down our great President and to tear down his policies that are bringing freedom and democracy to those who have never experienced it. Worse yet, I fear some of my colleagues are attacking Dr. Rice to paint a false picture of her because they believe she may one day seek elected office, or even be an opponent at the ballot box.

Well, I have no such concerns about Dr. Rice, and I have no problems supporting her. Late last year I had the pleasure to sit down with Dr. Rice and discuss her vision for our foreign policy and the State Department. I was impressed by how clearly she discussed the war on terrorism and our involvement in the Middle East. We are involved in an effort to bring freedom, democracy, and individual rights to a region of the world that has never known any of those things. Dr. Rice understands that those changes will not happen in just a few months or years. It will take decades, if not generations, to see the Middle East transform into a peaceful and stable region. The next few years are critical to that effort, and I believe Dr. Rice is the right person to lead our relations with Middle Eastern nations as well as all nations around the world.

Mr. President, I am confident the Senate will overwhelmingly confirm Dr. Rice, and I wish her well. She has a huge task ahead of her, including bringing accountability to the United Nations and getting to the bottom of the Oil-for-Food scandal, and I hope this body will be responsive to her needs as she works to promote freedom and our national security.

Mr. President, I wish to pay tribute to Adam Gardner, Yilei Yang, Ashley Smith, Jack Hartz and Benjamin Gowan as five truly outstanding students from the Commonwealth of Kentucky.

The National Honor Society organizes a Scholar's Bowl to foster a spirit of aspiration and hard work in America's students. These Scholar Bowls include testing of each student in five different categories: English, math, science, social studies, and general knowledge. The tests are rigorous and they require a longstanding history as a good student.

Being recognized by this organization is truly an honor and I am pleased to hear that these five students from Kentucky have become the National Honor Society's Scholar Bowl Champions. The four students from duPont Manual High School in Louisville, KY successfully defended their school's title as National Honor Society National Scholar's Bowl Champions. They are Adam Gardner, Yilei Yang, Ashley Smith, and Jack Hartz. One student, Benjamin Gowan, from Nelson County High School in Bardstown, KY, took first place in the test on the individual science subject category. Thanks to the hard work of these young men and women, four out of five of the top scoring students at last year's Scholar's Bowl were from the Commonwealth of Kentucky.

In their letter to me, the National Honor Society informed me that ``these Kentucky students truly exhibited superlative performance.'' I congratulate these five students for their hard work and their achievement.

Mr. President, I support H.R. 5365, a bill designed to ensure that the thousands of pension plan participants and retirees for the YMCA continue to be able to count on their benefits, ensuring the pension plan may continue to operate as it has for over 80 years. The Senate passed my bill, S. 2589, by unanimous consent on July 14 of this year, and I am pleased that the House has recently passed H.R. 5365, which closely follows the direction of the Senate legislation. I worked together with fellow Senators, including Senator Graham of Florida, to move this process toward today's hopeful conclusion. I want to stress that this effort has been a very bipartisan effort, in both the House and Senate, to produce a consensus solution and legislation.

I also thank Finance Committee Chairman Grassley and Ranking Member Baucus for their assistance in bringing this bill to the floor today.

This is a bill about protecting the retirement security for thousands of YMCA employees and retirees. I have heard from Kentucky YMCA leaders and employees--leaders such as R. Stephen Tarver of YMCA of Greater Louisville, Dean Ehrenheim of the Owensboro YMCA, and Kenneth Barnes, who runs the Chestnut Street YMCA in Louisville, and countless YMCA employees--about the importance of protecting retirement security. This legislation addresses a concern about the technical status of the YMCA pension plan as a church plan, a type of pension plan offered by churches or associations of churches. This legislation will ensures that the YMCA pension plan will be able to provide a secure retirement to the more than 80,000 plan participants.

I also thank the Treasury Department and IRS for their patience while the Congress worked through finding a solution to ensure the YMCA pension plan could continue to offer the benefits to its participants and retirees.

As I have stated, the YMCA pension plan is a very significant part of each YMCA employee's compensation package, most of whom are modestly paid. I have heard from many of the Kentucky YMCAs, and their employees, about the importance of this pension plan to their future. In Kentucky alone, there are 19 YMCAs with over 485,000 members, and 918 pension plan participants, retirees or past employees who have vested benefits. Today's legislation is vitally important to the each and every plan participant in Kentucky and their families, and more than 80,000 participants and retirees in the YMCA pension plan, offering them financial and retirement security for their long service on behalf of our Nation's YMCA.

In closing, I encourage all of my colleagues to support this bill, and I am pleased that we are moving forward with this legislation today and look forward to its enactment soon.

Mr. President, today I voted to approve the Conference Report to Accompany H.R. 4818, the Consolidated Appropriations Act of Fiscal Year 2005. As many of my colleagues in both the Senate and the House of Representatives have discussed at length today, this bill contains a provision, Section 222, which could be interpreted in a way as to cause concern regarding the protection of the privacy of I.R.S. data of U.S. taxpayers. As a Member of the Senate, and particularly as a member of the Senate Finance Committee, I take the American taxpayers' rights to privacy regarding their personal income tax information very seriously. I supported a joint resolution, passed earlier today by the Senate, which calls for the removal of this provision from this conference report. In addition, I understand that the chairmen of the House Appropriations, Senate Appropriations, House Ways and Means and Senate Finance Committees have made clear their intentions to insure that this provision is deleted or otherwise removed at the earliest possible opportunity. I also understand that the President of the United States is expected to issue a statement indicating that this provision of the conference report shall be disregarded. It is with reliance upon these commitments, and with my intentions to follow this issue closely to insure that this situation is corrected at the earliest possible opportunity, that I cast my vote in support of this conference report today.

Mr. President, I would like to ask my colleague about the conference report to accompany H.R. 1047, the Miscellaneous Trade and

Technical Corrections Act of 2004, which passed the Senate floor by unanimous consent earlier today. This legislation contains a number of duty suspensions for imported products. The duty suspensions help make American industry competitive by allowing companies to reduce costs on needed inputs. An important criterion for duty suspension is that the imported product cannot compete with a domestic product.

I am concerned that duty suspensions were included in the bill for eight pigments that may compete directly with pigments produced in my State. If so, it could directly affect hundreds of workers in my State. The provisions at issue are: Sections 1439, 1440, 1441, 1452, 1453, 1454, 1455, and 1456.

I understand that the Department of Commerce has been contacted about these provisions and is willing to review them to determine whether they are appropriate for inclusion in this bill. Will the Senator work with me to ensure that the Department of Commerce completes its analysis?

I thank my colleague and I pledge to work closely with you to resolve this matter.

Mr. President, I want to celebrate the dedication of the Columbia Sportswear 4 Star Distribution Center in Robards, Kentucky.

Columbia Sportswear is a family-owned company that was founded in Portland, OR, in 1938. You may be familiar with this corporation's amusing advertisements featuring Gert Boyle, the matriarch and chairwoman of the company, testing her products under various extreme conditions.

This is a $40 million dollar facility occupying 428,000 square feet. It could add up 400 new jobs to the area, not including any other indirect employment. This site will enable Columbia to have better access to its markets in the Midwest and on the East Coast. The industrial park that the center is built on was the result of cooperation between Henderson, McLean, Union, and Webster Counties. I was very impressed by how the region pulled together to make this project happen.

I believe that this distribution plant will bring jobs and other economic benefits to this area. Columbia Sportswear is good company and I am excited to welcome them to Western Kentucky. I look forward to the positive impact they will have on the community.

Mr. President, today I honor Paducah Post 31 American Legion Senior Baseball Team, of Paducah, Kentucky for making it to the American Legion World Series. In December 19, 2004 this team will be gathering to award each team member the World Series Ring to Commemorate their accomplishments. I congratulate the Paducah post 31 American Legion Senior Baseball Team on their accomplishments and look forward to seeing their continued success in the future.

This band of gifted athletes and team players has consistently fielded team after team in their region. Their competition was intense and they have distinguished themselves just as much by their own skill, as by the skill of those they defeated. They began their season as just one team among 5,400 others from all over the United States and Puerto Rico competing to be in the American Legion World Series. They ended it as one of eight teams from all over the United States and Puerto Rico, that actually did compete in the American Legion World Series.

As a baseball player I am especially proud of the accomplishments of this team from my own State of Kentucky. I know what it means to have played the good game, fought the good fight and won. The feeling that you have done the right thing by trying your hardest is payback enough. But Post 31's baseball team did that and much more, they not only tried their hardest, they also made it to the American Legion World Series.

I am proud of a team that when it does its best, makes it all the way to the World Series Eight. That is a great accomplishment of which they too should be proud.

Mr. President, I would like to honor Mrs. Billie Travis, a mathematics teacher at Scott County's Georgetown Middle School, who has been named the 2005 Kentucky Teacher of the Year.

For the past 19 years, Mrs. Travis has been teaching mathematics at the Georgetown Middle School. As a career educator she earned a bachelor's degree in education from Morehead State University and a Master's degree in education from Georgetown College. Mrs. Travis has taken her own Kentucky education and reinvested in the community. Whether it is serving on the regional board of the Kentucky Middle School Association or the Kentucky Council of Teachers of Mathematics, Mrs. Travis is a leader both inside and out of the classroom.

This is the fourth year that Ashland Inc. and the Kentucky Department of Education have sponsored the Kentucky Teacher Awards. I would like to congratulate Mrs. Travis again on her achievement and thank her for this significant contribution to middle school education in Kentucky.

Mr. President, I rise today to bring attention to section 852 of the conference report of H.R. 4520 before us today. First, I thank the managers of the conference report for accepting my amendment which added this provision to the conference report. The amendment codifies current Treasury proposed regulations defining off- highway vehicle. My intention in proposing this amendment was to confirm that Congress feels it is proper that vehicles which do not make use of, or make only very limited use of, the public highways should not be considered a ``highway vehicle'' for purposes of various excise tax sections, including, but not limited to, sections 4053, 4072, 4082, 4483, 6421, and 7701, of the Internal Revenue Code.

When used on public highways, heavy trucks put a greater stress on our roadways than average vehicles. In the past, Congress has passed laws to impose various excise taxes for large vehicles to use our national highway system. For example, there is a 12-percent retail sales tax for large on-highway vehicles, special taxes on tires weighing more than 40 pounds, additional large vehicle gasoline taxes, and there is even an annual use tax imposed on these heavier vehicles. The overwhelming majority of the revenue generated from these provisions is placed in the highway trust fund to rebuild our Nation's infrastructure.

This issue of off-highway vehicles and their tax status is of grave importance to my state of Kentucky. Many companies use heavy machinery and oversize vehicles. In Kentucky, they are used most often at coal mines. Some of these large vehicles are used only internally on the mine lands while others are used to haul materials over our Nation's public roads.

However, the Internal Revenue Code itself has not defined what constitutes a ``highway vehicle.'' The legislative intent of past Congresses seems clear--to impose excise taxes on vehicles that disproportionately stress our highways. It is important that we clarify who should pay these taxes through the legislative process. Current Treasury regulations contain a number of exclusions from the definition of highway vehicle and therefore provide exclusions from the imposition of a number of excise taxes which are dependent upon this definition. One of these exclusions exempts certain vehicles specially designed for off-highway transportation for which the special design substantially limits or impairs the use of such vehicle to transport loads over the highway.

I proposed the amendment to codify this off-highway vehicle exception--an amendment which became section 852 of this conference report--because I believe that these excise taxes should not be imposed on vehicles which make little or no use of the public highways. Under the definition of off-highway vehicle which is provided in this conference report, a vehicle is not treated as a highway vehicle if it is specially designed for the primary function of transporting a particular type of load other than over the public highway and because of this special design its capability to transport a load over the public highway is substantially limited or impaired. In determining whether substantial limitation or impairment exists, account may be taken of factors such as the size of the vehicle, whether it is subject to the licensing, safety, and other requirements applicable to highway vehicles, and whether it can transport a load at a sustained speed.

The Statement of Managers accompanying this conference report states that, when determining whether a vehicle qualifies for the off-highway exception, the fact that its considerable physical characteristics for transporting its load other than over the public highway, when compared with its physical characteristics for transporting the load over the public highway, establish that it is specially designed for the primary function of transporting its load other than over the public highway. These types of vehicles should not be defined as a highway vehicle and should not be subject to the excise taxes at issue.

We often have situation in the mining area of my state where large trucks are used to haul coal in off-highway operations. When these trucks are designed and built, many thousands of dollars are spent to modify standard truck chassises before bed installation. Generally, heavier axles, transmissions and other drive train components, as well as other modifications needed to allow the vehicles to operate at lower operating speeds carrying loads significantly heavier than those legally allowed on the highways, must be added to the trucks. The trucks generally have beds which, along with the truck itself, cause the vehicle's width to exceed that which is allowed to be operated on the public highways of any state. Often these trucks do not need to be licensed like on-highway vehicles in Kentucky and neighboring coal states because the trucks are an off-highway vehicles by state standards. These trucks are actually so large that it is not even legal to drive them on highways, except in very limited circumstance usually involving special trip permits. In fact, very substantial modifications would need to be made to the vehicles to cause them to be legal for highway use. Insurance agents, State licensing agents, State sales tax officials, and even our own transportation laws all recognize these vehicle as ``off-highway.'' It is clear

that, by reason of special design, the use of such vehicles to transport loads over the public highways is substantially limited or substantially impaired.

I am concerned about the interpretation of these rules by the administration. Make no mistake about it, as a member of the Senate Finance Committee, I will be watching this issue closely to ensure that the intent of Congress is being followed with regard to the imposition of taxes on highway vehicles and the exception of nonhighway vehicles from these taxes. I will not hesitate to urge the Congress to address this issue again if necessary to ensure that congressional intent is being properly implemented.

Mr. President, I rise today in support of the Department of Defense Authorization conference report.

This bill funds important priorities for our troops. It gives them a 3.5-percent pay raise. It makes last year's increases in special pay for combat duty and family separation permanent.

The bill expands health care coverage for our National Guard and Reserve members and improves retirement and survivor benefits for those who have served.

The bill also funds the safety needs of our troops for the coming year. It includes over $750 million for force protection gear, including over $430 million for body armor. More than $570 million is provided for additional armored humvees, and another $100 million will be used on more armor for existing vehicles.

This bill gives our troops the tools they need to do their jobs, and the benefits they and their families deserve.

This bill also contains important reforms to the Energy Employees Compensation Program.

The Bunning-Bingaman worker compensation Amendment was added in the bill when it was on the Senate floor. The amendment included reform for the compensation program and was cosponsored by a bipartisan group including myself and 18 other Senators.

I thank the Senate managers, Senators Warner and Levin, for their consideration and support of this important provision in the conference report.

This provision will fix the problems with Subtitle D of the Department of Energy's Energy Employees compensation program for sick injured cold war workers at Energy sites throughout the country.

Since the end of World War II, workers at Department of Energy sites across the country helped our Nation face threats from our enemies by creating and maintaining our Nation's nuclear weapons.

Many of these workers sacrificed their health and safety and were exposed to harms unknown at the time in their work to preserve our freedoms.

Congress passed a compensation program for the energy workers in 2000 in an effort to help these workers.

The Department of Energy's Subtitle D program failed miserably. During the past 4 years the Department received $95 million but processed and paid only a small number of the more than 25,000 claims for workers who were made ill by their work.

DOE's miserable job with this program was especially troubling because of the Kentucky workers at the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion plant, where the uranium shipped to sites throughout the country was refined.

Under DOE's operation, more than 3,000 former Paducah workers have filed for compensation for their illnesses. But zero Paducah workers have received compensation for their illnesses.

The provision in this bill transfers Subtitle D claims processing operations from the Department of Energy to the Department of Labor, which is currently handling thousands of similar claims under Subtitle B of the program.

The Department of Labor runs one of the largest and most efficient claims operations in the country.

Payments will be made directly by the Department of Labor to the worker or survivor. This solves the current issue of no willing payer for all eligible claims. Workers will get prompt medical care for their covered illnesses with no need to go through another system at the State.

This reform effort finally fulfills the promise that Congress made to DOE workers in 2000.

Many of these workers are ill and dying. Because of this reform, they will not have to wait for the Department of Energy to get its act together to process and pay the valid claims in a timely manner. DOL will take over these operations and process the claims much more efficiently and get deserving claimants the compensation Congress promised.

I urge you to support this conference report to help protect those workers who risked their health and safety to help us win the cold war.

Mr. President, I yield myself 10 minutes of allotted time. I so ask unanimous consent.

Mr. President, I rise today in support of the conference report on the American Job Creation Act of 2004. This conference report will provide needed incentives for U.S. manufacturers and will take the first step toward ending EU tariffs on our exporters.

Most importantly for Kentucky, this bill will finally bring the help that our tobacco growers have needed for years.

Because we are repealing the FSC/E.T.I. rules, the European Union must remove the sanctions--now 11 percent--which they have levied on many U.S. exports.

I have from employers back home about how they are struggling under the weight of these tariffs, which are hurting their exports and their plans to expand their businesses.

By passing this bill, we make our exports more competitive again, and we help our economy create new jobs.

It is a big win for my state and our Nation.

The tax centerpiece of this bill, of course, is a provision to provide help to America's manufacturing sector.

This sector of our economy has been under serious pressure since early 2000.

The jobs that manufacturing creates are good-paying jobs and we must do what we can to ensure that these jobs will be here in the future.

This bill creates a new deduction for domestic manufacturers employing American workers. That deduction cuts the tax rate for domestic manufacturers who employ American workers.

This will help keep jobs here at home and make our manufacturers more competitive in the world marketplace.

I am pleased that we were able to improve one aspect of this provision in conference. We were able to eliminate the ``haircut'' that would have cut the benefits available to many businesses that employ workers in the U.S. merely because those businesses also operate abroad.

I am glad that this bill recognizes the contributions to our economy made by companies such as Toyota, Nestle, and Mazak that are in my state providing jobs to hard-working Kentuckians every day.

While I am pleased that the conference report before us includes many other provisions that will have a positive impact on my state's economy, including the horse, restaurant and railroad industries, I am disappointed that the conference did not include the Senate energy tax credits.

We have waited for a comprehensive energy bill for too long. America has energy needs we must address today, and so we put a few energy provisions in this bill.

Despite these clear needs and my best efforts, they were stripped in conference. This bill could have done more, but let me be clear about one thing ---- we will be back.

Despite this shortcoming, I am pleased that the Soybean Biodiesel and Corn Ethanol Tax provisions are in the conference report.

These tax provisions will encourage the use of alternative fuels which will help Kentucky farmers and biodiesel manufacturers while also increasing domestic energy production, boosting conservation, and lessening our dependence on foreign oil.

And most importantly, this is an historic day for Kentucky's tobacco growers. My growers will finally receive the relief they need and deserve. We finally have a buyout.

Since Daniel Boone first came through the Cumberland Gap, farming has been both the economic and cultural backbone of the commonwealth.

The family farm is the basis of Kentucky culture and these farms rely on tobacco.

For years, we in Kentucky have tried to diversify from the tobacco crop. We have had some success and some failures.

But in the end, we come back to tobacco because nothing brings a higher return.

The money farmers get from tobacco pays their mortgage and puts their kids through school and allows them to stay on the farm.

Outside of the western part of Kentucky, we do not have tens of thousands of acres of flat land.

We need a crop that grows on rolling hills and that thrives in our climate. Tobacco does that.

But many forces have conspired against tobacco in the last few years.

The previous administration declared war on tobacco and, by extension, tobacco farmers.

The Asian economic crisis hurt exports. The master settlement agreement and state tax increases dramatically raised the price of cigarettes.

And although American tobacco is still superior, the companies have invested so much overseas that the gap has narrowed between American tobacco and cheap foreign tobacco.

As most of my colleagues know, there are no direct payments to tobacco farmers, but we do have price supports and production controls.

Growers own quota which they can buy, sell or lease. The government administers this program to get growers a fair price for their tobacco and make sure they only sell what they are allowed to.

If you grow too much, you can't sell it. However, the tobacco program, which has served Kentucky so well, now hangs like a millstone around growers' necks.

Burley tobacco quotas have lost 46 percent of their value since 1998. We are looking at another 10 percent cut this year. We have lost a lot of growers, from 10,000 in 1988 to 32,000 in the year 2003. We have many who are barely holding on.

Many of the tobacco quota holders are elderly and can no longer work the land, so they lease their quota and that income becomes a major part of their retirement security. That quota is tied to the land. It has a direct effect on the property taxes Kentuckians pay.

The conference report we have before us today will buy out those tobacco programs. We will give our growers relief and end the Federal price support program. We will also have many growers whose average age is 62 retire and get out of the business. Dr. Will Snell of the University of Kentucky estimates that 70 to 75 percent of tobacco growers will get out of the business with the buyout. We will allow growers to pay off their debts and have more certainty about their future.

I am also happy we were able to bring the bill out of conference without the FDA provisions. The House made it very clear in conference they would not pass a bill with FDA regulations in it. I voted for FDA regulations on the Senate floor, but only as a means to get my growers a buyout. But in the end, FDA regulation provisions have become a hindrance to the buyout. A buyout without FDA is the best of both worlds for Kentuckians. My growers will get their relief but without the worry of having the FDA invade their farms.

In the conference, when we were forced to choose between my growers getting relief or killing the bill by adding FDA, I chose the buyout, and I would do so again in a heartbeat. That is how important this buyout is to Kentucky.

I strongly urge my colleagues to support this conference report.

Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. President, a rollcall vote has been ordered. I don't think that is permitted.

Mr. President, today I honor Carl and Hester White of Ludlowe, KY. On this day 60 years ago, they were married and they set out on the path of life together.

The commitment of 60 years of marriage is a truly magnificent accomplishment. This married couple has dedicated themselves to each other through thick and thin for the greater part of a century. This kind of faithfulness in marriage is no less than perseverance in the most important virtue of all, love of your fellow man.

Marriages are the bedrock of society and the foundation of responsible citizenship. I congratulate Carl and Hester on their sixtieth wedding anniversary. I hope they have many more wonderful years together. May God bless them.

Mr. President, I today honor LCpl Will Stevens of Russell, KY, for his service to his country in the United States Marine Corps. While LCpl Stevens is recovering from a combat injury to his foot in a hospital bed in San Diego, I point out the importance of his service to our country.

Will's service to his country in Iraq ensures a safer future for America and a more stable world in general. Will's family, his loved ones and his countrymen are the people who benefit from the work he did in Iraq. We are all indebted to him for our way of life, our freedoms and for an example of what it means to be a good American.

In the words of Will's grandfather, ``He is my hero . . . I am really proud of him and am relieved he is going to be alright.'' And so am I. I thank Will and all his fellow service members for their work. May God bless them.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Agricultural Business Security Investment Tax Credit Act of 2004. I am pleased to join with my colleague from Nebraska, Senator Nelson, In supporting this important legislation.

Security at our agricultural facilities has regrettably become a national concern in the last decade. While we saw agricultural products used for destruction in Oklahoma City in 1995, our concerns have only been compounded by the tragedies of September 11 and the threat of terrorism. The Senate recognized this growing concern when we considered agricultural products in the Federal hazardous materials lists in the USA Patriot Act of 2001.

The American agricultural industry has already recognized some of the dangers on its own and has made significant strides in improving security. Shops throughout the country have started to invest in security measures to keep their chemicals and fertilizers from being used illegally. In 2003, the Agricultural Retailers Association published a web-based, security-vulnerability assessment tool and has cooperated with the USDA to secure farmers and ranchers.

But vulnerability assessments often require as much as $50,000 to $100,000 in capital investment. Meeting these pressing security needs is not feasible for many of the more than 9,000 retail facilities with fertilizer and chemicals stocks in the United States.

That is why it is important we enact this tax credit. The credit would equal 50 percent of the cost of eligible security upgrades at agricultural retail businesses and is capped at $50,000 during any 5 year period. This money can be used for many different security programs, such as employee background checks, locking equipment and even the latest chemical additives that can render fertilizer unfit for illegal purposes.

In my home State of Kentucky, fertilizer theft has become a serious problem and is contributing to a dangerous rise in the illegal drug trade. One common fertilizer, anhydrous ammonia, is stolen in large quantities and is a fundamental part of the production of some forms of methamphetamine. This problem is especially bad in rural areas where police officers in Kentucky are try to curb the problem by distributing locks to farmers and training them to identify the signs of a methamphetamine label.

But these efforts are not enough. This legislation is an important step to ensure that America's agricultural facilities are secure. Without our action, many of the facilities throughout our country would simply be unable to fund security improvements. We cannot risk fertilizers and chemicals falling into the wrong hands and facilitating illegal drug manufacturing or terrorist bomb makers. I hope my colleagues will join Senator Nelson and me in supporting this important legislation.