Floor Statements

Mr. President, last weekend I joined four of my colleagues to travel to Alaska, to see first-hand the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

It's not a welcoming place--it's cold and icy; vast and empty . . . even the Caribou didn't notice our presence. But beneath the icy tundra is one of the largest oil fields in the world--an oil field so vast it could power the State of South Dakota for centuries.

This week the Senate is moving forward on legislation to explore ANWR. This is just one piece of finally passing a national energy policy and reducing our dependence on foreign sources of oil.

We cannot act fast enough: This week gas prices hit record highs. And with oil hovering around $55 per barrel and threatening to move even higher, it's critical that the Senate act to reduce America's dependence on foreign sources oil.

ANWR is one piece of the solution. But equally important--and even more important to my State of South Dakota--is investing in renewable fuels like ethanol.

It is time for the United States Senate to pass the Renewable Fuels Standard.

The Renewable Fuels Standard has languished for too long. Despite strong bipartisan support and private-sector agreements, past Congresses have failed to pass a national energy policy that includes a Renewable Fuels Standard. Now, we have another opportunity.

This legislation has a special importance to my State. South Dakota is a heavily agricultural State and the Nation's fifth largest producer of ethanol. The market for ethanol has breathed new life into the small towns and small farms that dot the prairies of South Dakota. When driving through the rural counties of South Dakota, it's not unusual to observe the silos and storage tanks of an ethanol plant silhouetted against the prairie horizon. In many ways, the ethanol industry and its physical manifestations have become a part of the rural American identity.

Make no mistake about it: South Dakota's farmers are relying on the passage of the Renewable Fuels Standard to provide a surge in corn prices and a guaranteed market for their product.

This legislation is an improvement upon what passed out of the United States Senate last Congress. It increases the ethanol gallon requirement to 6 billion gallons, an increase of 1 billion gallons.

As we have a tremendous opportunity and responsibility to move this country forward. This legislation is vital to the ethanol industry, and will strengthen our economy, and our energy security. After so many failed attempts to pass this important legislation, I hope this Senate will finally finish the job and pass a Renewable Fuel Standard.

I thank the Senator from North Dakota for yielding the time.

I join today with him and others in the Senate in support of this resolution. I hoped it would not come to this, that we could achieve a result, an outcome short of having to have this debate in the Senate. However, I have to say I wholeheartedly agree with the premise of this resolution; that is, that the rule in question is wrong. It is wrong timing.

Agriculture is the No. 1 industry in South Dakota. The cattle industry, the livestock industry, is the biggest component of that. This industry has an enormous impact on the economy, the gross domestic product in my State. In fact, as noted earlier today by another speaker, we have probably five or six times the number of cattle than we have people in South Dakota.

Growing up on the Plains of western South Dakota, I have witnessed firsthand the incredible work ethic of our livestock producers, the willingness to go out during calving season and fight the elements and conditions, and to work to nurture the herds and bring them to the marketplace, to go through the weather we have to deal with in South Dakota on an ongoing yearly basis, and to haul water and to haul feed to those herds, to get them to where they can take them to the marketplace.

As a member of the House Ag Committee when we were debating the 2002 farm bill, I advocated and fought on behalf of country-of-origin labeling because I believe it is important that American consumers know where their products are coming from. It was included in the 2002 farm bill.

More recently, in the last year or so, this body and the House adopted legislation that would delay the implementation of country-of- origin labeling, which is unfortunate because I think it would alter and change the dimensions of the debate we are having here today.

So I come here today to speak in support of this resolution, and I do so knowing full well that as a three-term Member of the House, I come here with a record supporting free trade. I supported trade promotion authority for both President Clinton and President Bush because I believe our leaders in this country need to have the authority to go out there and make the best

possible deals for our agricultural industry and other industries in our country, always reserving the right to vote against those trade agreements if I do not believe they are in the best interests of American agriculture.

I do not harbor any ill will toward Canada. Canada has been an important trading partner in the past and will continue to be in the future. I am hopeful that when this is all said and done we will be able to restore that relationship. But, frankly, this issue is not about protectionism. It is about safety. It is about science. It is about making sure that America's consumers have a safe supply of beef products in this country, and also that those that we do business with overseas, our trading partners, are fully confident in the exports we send their way.

I believe exports are important to America. They are important to agriculture. In this country today, one in every three rows of corn goes to the export markets. We would like to see more of it going into ethanol. I hope it will. But the reality is, we depend heavily upon export markets for the success and prosperity of American agriculture.

So I supported increasing trade opportunities for our producers. But the fact is, we have not been able, at this point, I believe, to provide the level of confidence and assurance to the American consumer and to producers in this country that, in fact, the Canadians are taking the steps necessary to ensure that their herds are 100 percent in compliance with the ruminant feed ban.

My first official act, after being sworn in as a Senator, was to ask the President to delay the opening of the border beyond March 7. I have insisted that decision to open the border be based, first, on two prerequisites: sound science and a return of our foreign cattle export markets--namely, the Pacific rim. This has not been answered.

USDA's own risk assessment in 2002 states the Canadian feed mills were not--were not--100 percent complying with the feed ban. The borders should not be open until that allegation is fully investigated and it is confirmed that the ban is being properly enforced. The most recent assessment completed by the USDA team this year concluded that the feed ban is reducing the risk of transmission of BSE in the Canadian cattle population. That is not 100 percent. Cattle imports from Canada should not be accepted until we can be sure feed mills are 100 percent compliant. American consumers need to be assured the meat they are buying at local supermarkets is safe before the border opens, not after, and American cattle producers need to be assured that live cattle coming from Canada are BSE free.

As I said earlier, another important aspect is regaining the Asian cattle export market. If the trade with these countries is not resumed and the border is opened, South Dakota ranchers will be competing against Canadian cattle without the benefit of exporting our cattle to other countries. Since being sworn in as Senator, I have been in ongoing discussions with the USDA and Secretary Johanns trying to find a way to resolve this border issue. I cosponsored legislation to modify the rule to allow only beef products from animals under 30 months of age. In response to that, the USDA then modified their rule to do just that. I appreciate the Secretary's and the administration's work on this matter.

Mr. President, I have to yield, but I simply close by saying, I urge my colleagues to support this resolution to send a strong message to our producers and consumers that we are going to support making sure that the feed ban is being complied with, and we are going to work hard to make sure our export markets are open before this rule is implemented.

I yield the floor.

Madam President, I rise to echo the words that were just spoken by my colleague, the Senator from Kentucky, distinguished majority whip, with respect to an issue that is incredibly important to the Senate and to the people of this country. The issue is the future of Social Security. The program as we know it today will not last. It is headed for bankruptcy. That is why President Bush and others have done the responsible thing--to begin to raise the issue of reform.

The question before us is, How do we fix the system for our children and for our grandchildren? I would like to commend the Republicans and the Democrats who have acknowledged and agreed that a problem exists with the current system and that we can do better.

Going back to 1998, President Bill Clinton at that time called Social Security ``a looming crisis'' and then went on to detail the deep benefit cuts or massive payroll tax increases that would be required if nothing was done in the very immediate future.

It takes political courage for Members of both parties to be open to reform. Members of both parties have expressed their concern about the current system and about the possible improvements brought about by adding personal retirement accounts.

Social Security is an extremely complicated program. Sometimes it is difficult to grasp numbers in the trillions and dates that are decades from now. That is why it is helpful to tackle this issue in a way we can all understand. For me, the decision to find a fix for Social Security became clear when I thought about two extremely important people in my own life--my father Harold and my daughter Brittany.

My father Harold Thune turned 85 this last December. He is a retired teacher, still living in the town I grew up in, Murdo, SD, with my wonderful mother who was the school librarian. My father also served his country as a decorated World War II fighter pilot. He is the essence of hard work and sacrifice. He has put in his time. I would never do anything to the Social Security benefit that he has earned. Because my parents never struck it rich working for the Murdo public school system, they depend upon their Social Security check. Many other retired Americans are in similar situations.

For one-third of Americans over the age of 65, Social Security benefits constitute 90 percent of their total income. As President Bush outlined his principles regarding Social Security reform last month in the State of the Union, he made it very clear that Social Security benefits would remain unchanged for anyone 55 years of age and older. This includes everyone in retirement and those nearing retirement age.

The system will be there for those who have paid into the system with a lifetime of hard work. No politician is proposing to cut benefits from my father's generation. Despite what we might hear from those who are defending the status quo, reform proposals work to solve the problem for younger workers, not take away the benefits from America's seniors.

That brings me to another important person in my life who has helped me better understand the need to fix Social Security. That is my oldest daughter Brittany. Brittany is 17 years old, and she is a junior in high school at Roosevelt High School in Sioux Falls, SD. Soon she will be entering the workforce. God willing, she will live a full life and reach retirement age in 2055. The Social Security trustees tell us that Social Security will no longer be able to pay full benefits by 2042, which is 13 years before my daughter Brittany could retire. That means even though Brittany will have paid into Social Security throughout her entire working life, the benefit promised to her will be cut by at least 25 percent according to the trustees.

This is the problem. If we do nothing, our children and grandchildren will not see the benefits that are promised to them. Brittany's benefits would be cut by at least 25 percent and probably more.

The reason this will happen is nothing more than simple demographics. When my father Harold was working in the 1950s, there were 16 workers for every Social Security beneficiary. Today there are only three workers per beneficiary. When my daughter retires, there will be two workers per beneficiary. The current pay-as-you-go Social Security system will not be able to handle the demographic shifts as the number of workers goes down and the number of retirees goes up.

A majority of younger voters understand there is a major problem with the current system for their generation. A Newsweek poll earlier this month found that 62 percent of those age 18 to 34 believe Social Security will not be there for them when they retire. Predictably, young Americans are frustrated with the prospect of spending a lifetime paying into a system that is destined for bankruptcy.

Some in Washington believe the best approach is to push that problem down the road; leave it for another Congress and for another President. I call that the ``sweep it under the carpet'' caucus. The American people sent us here to solve problems, and they expect us to do just that. To the sweep it under the carpet caucus, I say: Don't hide behind the status quo. Don't resort to the politics of fear and to scaring seniors. Your constituents and my constituents deserve better of their elected representatives.

If we do nothing, we are looking at a $10 trillion shortfall. The longer we wait, the more expensive the fix will become. If we find a solution today, most experts agree it will most likely require $1 trillion. One trillion today or $10 trillion tomorrow--those are the options.

The predicament could be somewhat more manageable if we didn't start seeing problems until Brittany and her classmates start retiring. No, the looming crisis is coming much sooner than that. The Social Security trustees have told us that beginning in the year 2018, a little more than a decade from now, Social Security will begin paying out more in benefits than it is currently taking in.

This means we will need to start dramatically raising taxes, taking on massive loads of new debt, or accept severe benefit cuts in just 13 years to cover our promise to retirees.

We cannot wait on the sidelines and let this problem come to us. We need to face it and we need to attack it by putting all ideas on the table. We need to stop the quibbling, the partisan games, and political brinkmanship to find a solution that saves and strengthens Social Security for the future.

I ask my colleagues not to engage in futile bickering over individual ideas that may be put forward by some as part of the larger solution. My guess is, the solution will involve a number of ideas packaged together. Let's not dismiss or attack individual ideas as being inadequate before we have had a chance to assess their positive effect as part of a whole solution.

I remind my colleagues that we must put all the good ideas on the table. My two elderly parents and my two young daughters are constant reminders of what is at stake in this debate. We must ensure that today's seniors' benefits are rock solid and find a solution that fixes Social Security for the next generation that is just entering the workforce. We need Senators on both sides of the aisle to think not only

about what is good politics, but what is good for their children and their grandchildren.

As this debate engages, I urge my colleagues in the Senate to listen to the voices of the people around the country and to understand that they expect us to come here to solve problems. That is why they have elected us, not to kick it down the road, not to sweep it under the carpet for another Congress and another President to deal with. If we wait, the cost will be much higher and the American people, the taxpayers, will experience a much higher degree of pain. It is the taxpayers who are ultimately going to have to bear the burden for the lack of responsibility demonstrated by the leaders of today if we choose to do nothing.

I look forward to this debate as it gets underway. I urge my colleagues to acknowledge what is clear, what is obvious: We have a problem. The second thing that is clear and is obvious is that the American people sent us here to solve problems. Let's not sweep it under the carpet or kick it down the road; let's do the responsible thing and acknowledge this is a problem that needs to be fixed. The solution will require bipartisan support in this Chamber and in the House of Representatives. We must work together to save and strengthen Social Security not just for my father's generation but also for my daughters' generation.

I yield back the remainder of my time, and I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I recently had the good fortune to travel to Iraq with my colleagues Senator Inhofe and Senator Isakson. With my own eyes, I saw the political genesis of a nation moving from tyranny to liberty. This process was made possible by the skill and determination of our troops, the strides being made by the Iraqi security forces, and the growing determination of the Iraqi people to engage in the democratic process.

I cannot say enough about the sacrifice and dedication of our troops. Their professionalism and devotion to duty are truly inspiring. And I am convinced now more than ever the United States has the finest military in the world. To those who know it best, our military's might is not defined only by its sheer firepower but by the individual soldiers who all play their part in making a multifaceted operation like this possible.

Of course, our service members perform their military responsibilities with pride, with diligence, and with professionalism. But many of them also work hand to hand with the Iraqis every day trying to bridge the gaps in language, culture, and community, to forge a common bond cemented by freedom. In doing so, our men and women in uniform represent all that is good about our country.

My fellow Senators and I also visited wounded American soldiers in a military hospital in Germany on our way back from Iraq. These brave men and women who have already sacrificed so much for the cause of freedom were mostly and primarily concerned with getting back together with their units and for the well-being of their peers who are still in Iraq. That warrior spirit among these brave men and women is inspiring and gave me pause to consider what is clearly at stake for the Iraqi people.

Our National Guard and Reserves are also playing a critical role in Iraq. Three days ago I was honored to be able to welcome home the Second Battalion, 147th Field Artillery of the South Dakota National Guard from Iraq. These citizen soldiers put their lives on hold for over a year to provide critically needed support. They performed their mission effectively and honorably, and I applaud their selfless sacrifice.

The Iraqi people also deserve our admiration and thanks. While in Iraq we met with General David Petraeus who is in charge of training Iraqi securities forces. He was upbeat about their progress and the efficiency that is beginning to take root. General Petraeus's convictions were legitimized by the effectiveness shown by the Iraqi security forces on election day. Those forces were the first line of defense in successfully protecting over 5,000 polling stations throughout Iraq, none of which were penetrated by the insurgents. Some of the Iraqi security forces even gave their lives so their fellow countrymen could vote.

Perhaps the bravest of all on election day were the Iraqi citizens who also risked their lives by taking that critical first step on their journey to self-determination. The insurgents and terrorists grossly underestimated the Iraqi people's courage and thirst for freedom. The Iraqi people did not buckle under threats of violence and murder. Instead they spoke out with a great voice that has been heard throughout the world and well into the annals of recorded history. They have demanded their right to self-determination, their right to live their lives as they see fit, free from tyranny, free from fear, free from extremism. On election day, they earned that right.

Let me be clear, there is still much work that needs to be done, and there are still enemies to fight. But freedom's light does not shine without a

price. The Iraqi people know this. They understand a new Iraq must not be dominated by only one ethnic or religious sect. Many Iraqis I met with, including Shiites and others, expressed the belief that for democracy to work, the Sunnis, who now find themselves the minority, must be a part of and represented in an inclusive Iraqi government.

Of course we all look forward to a free and stable Iraq. But we should not attempt to impose an artificial time line on this goal. Instead we should focus on a conditions-based schedule that allows for a responsible transfer of responsibility from American to Iraqi troops. Our generals support that concept, not arbitrary deadlines. When the conditions are right for us to leave, we will know and so will a free and sovereign Iraq.

I believe the recent elections and the self-confidence they have inspired in the Iraqi people may represent a turning point in the struggle for democracy in Iraq. With the bravery and the dedication of our troops and the courage of the Iraqi people and their security forces, we can look forward to the day when our troops come home with the honor they have earned.

We will soon be debating legislation that will provide funding and resources for our troops to complete their mission. It is critical that in the course of this debate we understand what is happening today in Iraq and what it means for American troops who are bringing about freedom and democracy. We must make sure they have the resources, the equipment, the training, and the weaponry to succeed in this mission.

The insurgents, who continue to prey upon the fears of the Iraqi people, who resort to tactics and thuggery and indiscriminately kill innocent people, are not going to go quietly. It is important that we complete this mission. It is important that we win and secure the freedom of the Iraqi people. It was clear to me, having traveled to Iraq and listened firsthand to the stories that have been shared and conveyed by Iraqi voters, who for the first time were able to take that ink-stained finger and mark a ballot, that they are committed to the cause of freedom and democracy in their own country.

We heard statements such as ``we are profoundly grateful.'' We heard statements talking about how the mission is succeeding, but it is still fragile, how we need to continue to focus on training and equipping Iraqi security forces, and that the reconstruction needs to move faster.

Engagement with the Iraqis is the way for us to succeed, and giving the Iraqis the opportunity to govern, which is what the elections were all about. Giving the Iraqis the opportunity to defend the freedom they secured when they voted on election day should be our mission in Iraq. It is important as a nation, as a Congress, and here in the Senate, that we take the steps necessary to ensure that our troops--our young men and women who are bravely and courageously setting and laying the foundation for a safe, strong, and free Iraq--have what they need to complete that mission.

I yield back the remainder of my time.

Mr. President, I congratulate and honor two young South Dakota students who have achieved national recognition for exemplary volunteer service in their communities. Michelle Rydell of Vermillion and Molly Stehly of Sioux Falls have just been named State Honorees in the 2005 Prudential Spirit of Community Awards program. They have proved themselves to be a part of the extraordinary youth of our country who understand the importance of civic duty and service in the community.

Michelle is being recognized for her creation of a ``Dream Team'' that collected essential goods for impoverished people in Guatemala and helped raise awareness of poverty in the region. She gave more than goods to the people of a foreign land, she gave them hope.

Molly is being recognized for her help with her mother's special education class. She offered freely of herself, at the young age of 13, in an effort to help the students with special needs to move toward greater independence.

In a State like South Dakota, selfless acts of goodwill toward the community are often commonplace. Michelle and Molly stand out, however, for their constant contributions to others without consideration for themselves. The Prudential Spirit of Community Awards program has considered more than 20,000 young people this year and Michelle and Molly are among the handful selected for the honor.

I heartily applaud Michelle and Molly for their initiative in seeking to

make others' lives better. They have demonstrated a level of commitment and service that many adults will never achieve. They are shining examples, to young and old alike, of selfless public service. I would also like to recognize Kelly Fawcett of Miller and Kirstin Hanson of Elk Point, who were named Distinguished Finalists for their outstanding volunteer service.

The actions of all of these young people demonstrate that young Americans can, and do, play important roles in their communities, and that America's youth continue to hold tremendous promise for the future.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Tribal Parity Act. I am proud to be joined by my colleague from South Dakota, Senator Johnson, in introducing this legislation.

Several Indian tribes that border the Missouri River in South Dakota have been compensated for damage to their tribal lands caused by Pick- Sloan projects. Unfortunately, the compensation provided to those tribes has not been consistent. This legislation will allow the Lower Brule and Crow Creek Sioux Tribes to be fairly compensated.

The Tribal Parity Act passed the Senate three times during the 108th Congress, after being reported out of the Indian Affairs Committee without objection. This legislation has also been endorsed by the Governor of my home State, Governor Rounds, and a similar bill has been introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives.

I am committed to working with my colleagues to get this compensation for the Lower Brule and Crow Creek Sioux Tribes. I hope we can pass it in an expeditious manner and send it to the House for timely consideration.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Tribal Parity Act. I am proud to be joined by my colleague from South Dakota, Senator Johnson, in introducing this legislation.

Several Indian tribes that border the Missouri River in South Dakota have been compensated for damage to their tribal lands caused by Pick- Sloan projects. Unfortunately, the compensation provided to those tribes has not been consistent. This legislation will allow the Lower Brule and Crow Creek Sioux Tribes to be fairly compensated.

The Tribal Parity Act passed the Senate three times during the 108th Congress, after being reported out of the Indian Affairs Committee without objection. This legislation has also been endorsed by the Governor of my home State, Governor Rounds, and a similar bill has been introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives.

I am committed to working with my colleagues to get this compensation for the Lower Brule and Crow Creek Sioux Tribes. I hope we can pass it in an expeditious manner and send it to the House for timely consideration.

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

Mr. President, I rise today for the first time as a Senator from the State of South Dakota. First and foremost, I thank the people of South Dakota for putting their trust in me, for sending me to fight for their values and to represent them here in Washington, DC.

I had the distinct pleasure of serving the State of South Dakota for three terms in the House of Representatives, and now I am looking forward to continuing my service to South Dakota and to our Nation here in the Senate. I decided to run for the Senate because I believe we can make better progress on an agenda that strengthens our Nation and increases the prosperity of every American. We have a lot of work to do, and we should not let partisanship or political gamesmanship get in the way of this agenda.

The Senate is known for its deliberative qualities, most commonly manifested through the right to free debate. This quality is part of the fiber of the Senate, part of the character that makes it one of the most august institutions in the world.

Some of the greatest debates in our Nation's history have taken place in this very Chamber, from the 19th century debates on slavery and the Republic to the 20th century debates on civil rights and Social Security. While there is time to debate, we all came here to solve problems, not pass them on to our children. I think I speak for many Members when I say that the only thing that sustains me when I am away from my children is the knowledge that we are improving their lives through our work. That is why I firmly

hope that Congress can work together to do more than simply debate our problems, but work together to solve them.

There are some goals that we can all agree on: a national energy policy that increases the use of renewable fuels, more affordable and accessible health care, and meaningful tort reform. We are, in fact, on the eve of passing class action reform that will restore fairness to the judicial system in this country. Our tort system is broken and, without the necessary reforms, beginning with class action lawsuits, we deny our Nation not only fair and efficient access to justice, but we allow this problem to pull our economy downward. Excessive and often unnecessary litigation expenses cost us in terms of lost jobs, lost growth, and lost revenues every day that it goes unabated. We have a full agenda ahead of us. The American people have put their trust in us to make this Nation even greater than it is today, and we cannot let them down.

Part of the task before us, and the reason I rise today, is the need to fix Social Security. Social Security as the system exists today is in danger. While the system has provided 70 years' worth of benefits to our Nation's retirees, the system as we know it today will no longer be able to keep that promise for the next generation.

I understand the intergenerational aspect of this discussion. My father turned 85 in December. My mom will be 84 in May. My father has served his country as a combat pilot in World War II. He has shot down enemy warplanes for his country. He and my mother rely--depend upon Social Security. We need to keep faith in our promise to them.

But I also have teenage daughters. I understand, if we do nothing to improve this system, that our children and grandchildren will not see the Social Security benefits they are counting on receiving. Today's seniors, like my mom and dad back in Murdo, SD, and those nearing retirement age, can be assured that their benefits are safe and sound. The same cannot be said for my two daughters and the rest of their generation.

The explanation of why this is happening is not that difficult to understand. In 1950, there were 16 workers for every retiree. Today, there are only three workers for every retiree. Soon there will be only two workers for every one retiree. Our Nation is aging and, as more and more Americans leave the workforce for retirement, there are fewer and fewer workers paying into the system. The current system is unsustainable given the changing demographics of this country.

Some may ask, When will we start to see the effects from these changes? The Social Security trustees have told us that beginning in 2018, Social Security will begin paying out more in benefits than it is taking in. This means that we will need to start raising taxes, cutting spending, or reducing benefits in just 13 years to cover the promises that have been made to our retirees. In 2042 the system will no longer be able to pay full benefits without major restructuring.

Some will say those dates sound like they are a long ways off, but as the Vice President recently put it, some might be inclined to ``kick the can further down the road,'' leaving the problem for another President and another Congress to fix. Thirteen years is not that far away. Believe me, if you have children you know how quickly those first 12 years can go by, and all of a sudden you have a teenager. It happened to me twice with my two daughters. So the problems with Social Security are not going away, and the longer we wait, the more expensive the solution will be and the more painful to the American taxpayer.

The Social Security trustees have told us that if we wait to solve this problem, we are facing a $10.4 trillion shortfall. Experts agree that if we work on solving the problem today, that cost will be closer to $1 trillion--$1 trillion today, $10 trillion later.

My teenage daughters--and I daresay most Americans--can understand the dimensions of that problem. It is our duty to fix this problem now.

Possible solutions are numerous. Many include personal retirement accounts which would create a nest egg for younger generations. These voluntary accounts would allow younger workers to save some of their payroll taxes in a personal account for their retirement. In fact, they would most likely be fashioned like the Thrift Savings Plan that is available to Federal employees. With personal retirement accounts, our children and grandchildren will be able to get more out of the Social Security system when they retire. In addition, they will have something to pass on to their children.

No matter how the solution is fashioned, current retirees and those nearing retirement do not have to worry about their benefits. They have put their time in, and their benefits will be there for them, no matter what happens.

I have laid out the stakes here today, and it is clear that they could not be much higher. I call on members of both parties to be open to the ideas that are put on the table. Refrain from playing on the fears that often surround this issue. And for those of you who worry about political danger in discussing this issue, know that I am standing here today before you as a Senator who has been on the receiving end of many of those accusations and attacks--the key words being, I am still standing here as a Senator today. I believe we can do more than send and receive political attacks on this issue. We can work together to find a strong bipartisan solution.

As those of us here in Washington begin to debate the issue of Social Security reform, I ask that we think not about our next election but in fact about the next generation--our children and our grandchildren. The same goes for seniors. I ask that they fight the temptation to be concerned about their next Social Security check, because it is going to be there, no matter what. Instead, I ask that they also think about our children and our grandchildren. Their future is what this debate is all about. I for one intend to fight to make it a better future. I hope my colleagues in this Chamber will join me.

I yield the floor.

I thank the distinguished whip for his kind remarks.