Floor Statements

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, I rise today to acknowledge the lifetime achievements of Dr. Michael Ellis DeBakey, a public servant and world-renowned cardiologist, by offering legislation to award him the Congressional Gold Medal.

When he was only 23 years of age and still attending medical school, Dr. DeBakey accomplished what would be the first of many life saving accomplishments. He successfully developed a roller pump for blood transfusions--the precursor and major component of the heart-lung machine used in the first open-heart operation. This device later led to national recognition for his expertise in vascular disease.

Like many Americans of his generation, Dr. DeBakey put his practice on hold and volunteered for military service during World War II with the Surgeon General's staff. During this time, he received the rank of Colonel and chief of Surgical Consultants Division.

As a result of his military and medical experience, Dr. DeBakey made numerous recommendations to improve the military's medical procedures. His efforts led to the development of mobile army surgical hospitals, better known as MASH units, which earned him the Legion of Merit in 1945.

Following WWII, Dr. DeBakey continued his hard work by proposing national and specialized medical centers for those soldiers who were wounded or needed follow-up treatment. This recommendation evolved into the Veterans Affairs Medical Center System and the establishment of the commission on Veterans Medical Problems of the National Research Council.

In 1948, Dr. DeBakey joined the Baylor University College of Medicine, where it started its first surgical residency program and was later elected the first President of Baylor College of Medicine.

Adding to his list of accomplishments Dr. DeBakey performed the first successful procedure to treat patients with anyeurysms. In 1964, Dr. DeBakey performed the first successful coronary bypass surgery, opening the doors for surgeons to perform preventative procedures to save the lives of many people with heart disease. He was also the first to successfully use a partial artificial heart. Later that same year, President Lyndon B. Johnson appointed Dr. DeBakey as Chairman of the President's Commission on Heart Disease, Cancer and Stroke, which led to the creation of Regional Medical Programs. These programs coordinate medical schools, research institutions and hospitals to enhance research and training.

Dr. DeBakey continued to amaze the medical world when he pioneered the field of telemedicine by performing the first open-heart surgery transmitted over satellite and then supervised the first successful multi-organ transplant, where a heart, both kidneys and a lung were transplanted from a single donor into four separate recipients.

These accomplishments had led to national recognition. Dr. DeBakey has received both the Presidential Medal of Freedom with Distinction from President Johnson and the National Medal of Science from President Ronald Reagan.

Recently, Dr. DeBakey worked with NASA engineers to develop the

DeBakey Ventricular Assist Device, which may eliminate the need for some patients to receive heart transplants.

I stand here today to acknowledge Dr. DeBakey's invaluable work and significant contribution to medicine by offering a bill to award him the Congressional Gold Medal. His efforts and innovative surgical techniques have since saved the lives of thousands, if not millions, of people. I ask my Senate colleagues to join me in recognizing the profound impact this man has had on medical advances, the delivery of medicine and how we care for our Veterans. Although, Dr. DeBakey is not a native of Texas, he has made Texas proud. He has guided the Baylor College of Medicine and the city of Houston into becoming a world leader in medical advancement. On behalf of all Texans, I thank Dr. DeBakey for his lifetime of commitment and service not only to the medical community but to the world. I ask unanimous consent that the text of this bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, I rise today to acknowledge the lifetime achievements of Dr. Michael Ellis DeBakey, a public servant and world-renowned cardiologist, by offering legislation to award him the Congressional Gold Medal.

When he was only 23 years of age and still attending medical school, Dr. DeBakey accomplished what would be the first of many life saving accomplishments. He successfully developed a roller pump for blood transfusions--the precursor and major component of the heart-lung machine used in the first open-heart operation. This device later led to national recognition for his expertise in vascular disease.

Like many Americans of his generation, Dr. DeBakey put his practice on hold and volunteered for military service during World War II with the Surgeon General's staff. During this time, he received the rank of Colonel and chief of Surgical Consultants Division.

As a result of his military and medical experience, Dr. DeBakey made numerous recommendations to improve the military's medical procedures. His efforts led to the development of mobile army surgical hospitals, better known as MASH units, which earned him the Legion of Merit in 1945.

Following WWII, Dr. DeBakey continued his hard work by proposing national and specialized medical centers for those soldiers who were wounded or needed follow-up treatment. This recommendation evolved into the Veterans Affairs Medical Center System and the establishment of the commission on Veterans Medical Problems of the National Research Council.

In 1948, Dr. DeBakey joined the Baylor University College of Medicine, where it started its first surgical residency program and was later elected the first President of Baylor College of Medicine.

Adding to his list of accomplishments Dr. DeBakey performed the first successful procedure to treat patients with anyeurysms. In 1964, Dr. DeBakey performed the first successful coronary bypass surgery, opening the doors for surgeons to perform preventative procedures to save the lives of many people with heart disease. He was also the first to successfully use a partial artificial heart. Later that same year, President Lyndon B. Johnson appointed Dr. DeBakey as Chairman of the President's Commission on Heart Disease, Cancer and Stroke, which led to the creation of Regional Medical Programs. These programs coordinate medical schools, research institutions and hospitals to enhance research and training.

Dr. DeBakey continued to amaze the medical world when he pioneered the field of telemedicine by performing the first open-heart surgery transmitted over satellite and then supervised the first successful multi-organ transplant, where a heart, both kidneys and a lung were transplanted from a single donor into four separate recipients.

These accomplishments had led to national recognition. Dr. DeBakey has received both the Presidential Medal of Freedom with Distinction from President Johnson and the National Medal of Science from President Ronald Reagan.

Recently, Dr. DeBakey worked with NASA engineers to develop the

DeBakey Ventricular Assist Device, which may eliminate the need for some patients to receive heart transplants.

I stand here today to acknowledge Dr. DeBakey's invaluable work and significant contribution to medicine by offering a bill to award him the Congressional Gold Medal. His efforts and innovative surgical techniques have since saved the lives of thousands, if not millions, of people. I ask my Senate colleagues to join me in recognizing the profound impact this man has had on medical advances, the delivery of medicine and how we care for our Veterans. Although, Dr. DeBakey is not a native of Texas, he has made Texas proud. He has guided the Baylor College of Medicine and the city of Houston into becoming a world leader in medical advancement. On behalf of all Texans, I thank Dr. DeBakey for his lifetime of commitment and service not only to the medical community but to the world. I ask unanimous consent that the text of this bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, I think the administration has begun to address the overseas basing issue. I have visited bases, as have many of my colleagues. I have seen training constraints where you don't have the airspace to stay in training or you don't have the artillery range to stay in training. We have not had enough time to fully look at overseas bases and also know what our end strength is going to be. We don't know right this minute what our end strength is going to be and our force structure because we are having to adapt to some incredible changes in our security environment.

We are going to have the last round of BRAC at some point, but it needs to be at the right time, and it needs to be done right. The Lott amendment would give us that extra time to make sure we do it right.

Mr. President, I rise today with Senator Nelson to introduce an important piece of legislation that will dramatically improve the quality of diabetes care under the Medicare program.

Diabetes is a serious, debilitating chronic illness that afflicts more than 18 million Americans, including eight million Medicare beneficiaries. An additional eight million seniors suffer from a condition known as ``pre-diabetes'' that, when left untreated, will develop into diabetes. Diabetes' devastating complications--kidney failure, blindness, lower extremity amputation, heart disease and stroke--result in significant costs to the program. Although beneficiaries with diabetes comprise only 20 percent of the Medicare population, diabetes related complications account for more than 30 percent of medicare expenditures.

This is indeed troubling, and there is much that can be done to reduce the burden of diabetes and prevent these costly complications. Diabetes self-management training, DSMT, helps people with diabetes learn the skills they need to manage the daily regimen of diet, exercise, meal planning, medication and monitoring necessary to keep blood sugar under control. Certified Diabetes Educators, CDEs, are highly trained healthcare professionals--often nurses, pharmacists, or dieticians--who specialize in helping people with diabetes develop these skills. A CDE must be a licensed health care professional, possess a minimum of two years of professional practice experience in DSMT, have provided a minimum of 1,000 hours of DSMT to patients in the past five years, and have passed a rigorous national examination.

The value of DSMT is well documented. The Diabetes Prevention Program study of 2002 demonstrated that participants, all of whom were at increased risk for developing type 2 diabetes, were able to reduce that risk by implementing the lifestyle changes taught as part of DSMT. Additional studies have found that patients with diabetes achieved significantly better outcomes when taking part in comprehensive diabetes management programs.

Congress recognized the value of DSMT when it provided for this benefit under the Balanced Budget Act of 1997. At that time, CDEs were able to provide DSMT through hospital-based programs, billing under the hospital's provider number. Unfortunately, hospital-based DSMT programs are closing at a rate of two to five per month, leaving people with diabetes without access to this life-saving benefit. Our legislation would correct this problem by allowing CDEs to be recognized as providers under the Medicare program for the purposes of providing DSMT. This would provide CDEs with the flexibility they need to ensure that beneficiaries can access these critical services.

As it is, the Centers for Medicaid and Medicare Services, CMS, estimates that only 30 percent of beneficiaries are utilizing the benefit. More must be done to increase access to life-saving DSMT programs. Our legislation will help to accomplish that goal.

Diabetes already poses a serious burden for the Medicare program. As the 76 million baby-boomers age into the Medicare program, the cost of diabetes related complications could seriously undermine the financial stability of the Medicare program. We must act now to strengthen Medicare to ensure that beneficiaries with diabetes have the tools they need to prevent diabetes complications.

Mr. President, I rise today with Senator Nelson to introduce an important piece of legislation that will dramatically improve the quality of diabetes care under the Medicare program.

Diabetes is a serious, debilitating chronic illness that afflicts more than 18 million Americans, including eight million Medicare beneficiaries. An additional eight million seniors suffer from a condition known as ``pre-diabetes'' that, when left untreated, will develop into diabetes. Diabetes' devastating complications--kidney failure, blindness, lower extremity amputation, heart disease and stroke--result in significant costs to the program. Although beneficiaries with diabetes comprise only 20 percent of the Medicare population, diabetes related complications account for more than 30 percent of medicare expenditures.

This is indeed troubling, and there is much that can be done to reduce the burden of diabetes and prevent these costly complications. Diabetes self-management training, DSMT, helps people with diabetes learn the skills they need to manage the daily regimen of diet, exercise, meal planning, medication and monitoring necessary to keep blood sugar under control. Certified Diabetes Educators, CDEs, are highly trained healthcare professionals--often nurses, pharmacists, or dieticians--who specialize in helping people with diabetes develop these skills. A CDE must be a licensed health care professional, possess a minimum of two years of professional practice experience in DSMT, have provided a minimum of 1,000 hours of DSMT to patients in the past five years, and have passed a rigorous national examination.

The value of DSMT is well documented. The Diabetes Prevention Program study of 2002 demonstrated that participants, all of whom were at increased risk for developing type 2 diabetes, were able to reduce that risk by implementing the lifestyle changes taught as part of DSMT. Additional studies have found that patients with diabetes achieved significantly better outcomes when taking part in comprehensive diabetes management programs.

Congress recognized the value of DSMT when it provided for this benefit under the Balanced Budget Act of 1997. At that time, CDEs were able to provide DSMT through hospital-based programs, billing under the hospital's provider number. Unfortunately, hospital-based DSMT programs are closing at a rate of two to five per month, leaving people with diabetes without access to this life-saving benefit. Our legislation would correct this problem by allowing CDEs to be recognized as providers under the Medicare program for the purposes of providing DSMT. This would provide CDEs with the flexibility they need to ensure that beneficiaries can access these critical services.

As it is, the Centers for Medicaid and Medicare Services, CMS, estimates that only 30 percent of beneficiaries are utilizing the benefit. More must be done to increase access to life-saving DSMT programs. Our legislation will help to accomplish that goal.

Diabetes already poses a serious burden for the Medicare program. As the 76 million baby-boomers age into the Medicare program, the cost of diabetes related complications could seriously undermine the financial stability of the Medicare program. We must act now to strengthen Medicare to ensure that beneficiaries with diabetes have the tools they need to prevent diabetes complications.

Mr. President, I am going to offer an amendment, but I first want to commend the committee for producing a very good bill. I cannot think of anything more important while our troops are in harm's way. We see on television and read in the newspapers every day about what our troops are doing for our country. Now they know they are going to be fully funded. The priorities in this bill are the right priorities.

I commend the distinguished chairman, the Senator from Virginia, and the distinguished ranking member, the Senator from Michigan, for producing this bill. Sometimes producing this bill has been very difficult, but it looks as though the committee came together knowing how important this was for our military to see that it would not be minor skirmishes that would submarine this very important legislation. So I commend the committee.

I say on a couple of points with which I am particularly involved that I think the committee has done a terrific job. First, I am chairman of the Military Construction Subcommittee, which is part of the Appropriations Committee. The administration requested approximately $9.5 billion for military construction and family housing, and the committee went up to $9.82 billion, increasing the administration's request, because family housing is so very important right now.

We are beginning to give a better quality of life to all of our military personnel. Whether they are single and live in barracks or whether they have family housing requirements, they are getting better quality. I am very pleased about that, and particularly that the committee also fully funded all of the requirements of the very critical military construction of the Department of Defense for overseas locations.

As we look at our military construction budget, we are making sure the military construction we do overseas, not counting in our combat zones, but in places where we have facilities, that we are focusing now on only putting money in facilities we know are going to endure. Part of the overseas basing commission Senator Feinstein and I passed, along with the help of the authorization committee, to assure that we look at all of those bases, that we not put one military construction dollar where we do not know absolutely that is going to be an enduring facility so our taxpayers know we are not going to be building some big cafeteria, fitness center, or headquarters in a place we are going to abandon in the next 2 to 3 years. So we are trying to spend wisely and the authorization committee did an excellent job of funding the military construction authorization, working with our subcommittee that will be appropriating funds.

The second area they should be commended for addressing is our military compensation. Certainly increasing our military pay by 3.5 percent, which the President requested, it will be fully funded and assure everyone in the military. Then adding to the combat pay and adding to the separation allowance, these are very important items to increase the quality of life for those serving our country today, and their families.

It was mentioned earlier by the Senator from Maine that there should be an addressing of the issue of sexual assault in our military. It is important that there will be a comprehensive policy and procedure for prevention and response to incidents of sexual assault involving military members. It is required that that be done in the next year. I am very pleased the committee chose to do this because we have been reading disturbing reports about this subject. All of us are concerned that our young women who agree to serve in our military and who are performing so well be able to serve knowing they will be protected from any kind of physical assault.

Last, I want to mention the Joint Strike Fighter, which is a very important future fighter airplane I am very excited about and have been involved in as it has evolved from the drawing board. It will be made in Texas, so I am more familiar with it. I am very pleased the committee chose to fully fund the research, development, and testing of future fighter planes that will give us the total dominance of the air in future years. I think the committee did an outstanding job.

Before I go to my amendment, there is one area I also want to bring up with

the chairman. I would like to try to come up with an appropriate amendment, working with the committee, that deals with reaching the cap on privatized housing for our military personnel. We have been able to do so much more by having an association with private housing builders and contractors. We could never, ever have put the housing we have on the ground if we had had to fully fund this from our Department of Defense funds.

We have been able to have partnerships with private companies where they would do the building and we would lease back those facilities through the years. We have been able to increase the quality of housing in that respect. We are soon going to reach the $850 million cap. We were very concerned we would be bumping against that, and stopped some of the projects that are on the drawing boards today, projects our military personnel have looked forward to coming to fruition, places like Fort Hood where we have severe housing shortages.

The military personnel have been relying on the family housing projects that have been built by private companies and now we are looking at hitting that cap and not being able to go forward with those projects. I would like to ask the distinguished chairman of the committee if he would work with me and see if we could come up with some appropriate language that would raise that cap maybe by $300 million, $400 million, or $500 million, so we would not have any danger of bumping against the cap before we have the opportunity to address it in the next authorization appropriations bill.

I ask the distinguished chairman if this is also a concern of his and if he would try to work with me, if there is an amendment we could offer together or somehow assure that we will not stop the planning that is going on now for some very important military housing projects.

I was going to send my amendment to the desk, and I am now prepared to do that.

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

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

Mr. President, this amendment attempts to solve a problem facing not this generation of military leadership but our future generation of military leadership.

Current law established in the Career Compensation Act of 1949 denies cadets and midshipmen the disability benefits that would be provided to any other member of the Armed Forces, especially when they are injured in the line of duty. With respect to health benefits, cadets and midshipmen who are separated for medical disability after being injured during military training now face unnecessary and unfair burdens in maintaining the continuity of their health care.

In addition, Reserve Officer Training Corps, ROTC cadets are in many cases required to pay for their own medical care after being injured during military training. Even though ROTC cadets are covered under the Office of Workers Compensation within the Department of Labor, medical care providers, many of whom have not been compensated for their prior work, decline to treat ROTC patients unless they use private medical insurance.

This is not something that we should allow to remain a problem. In 2001, when I became aware of the plight of some seriously disabled cadets and midshipmen from the service academies, I asked for a study. These cadets were discharged from the Armed Forces without any entitlement to future medical care or disability benefits. In each of these cases, the cadets and midshipmen had been injured in the line of duty.

I asked for a report, and the Department of Defense did find that the ROTC also had examples of how the health care system, which currently operates under the Department of Labor, does not adequately serve these former cadets whose care was under their charge.

In one case, a ROTC cadet received dental injuries during training at the Fort Lewis advanced camp for the U.S. Army. As a result of his injuries, he received emergency medical treatment at Fort Lewis but required followup treatment at a civilian treatment facility. The only dentist who would see the cadet treated him and received $13 on the $1,200 bill that was submitted. The dentist attempted to work in conjunction with the cadet and the ROTC unit for nearly a year to receive full payment for his work, and he never did.

So the amendment I offer today would include academy cadets and midshipmen in the military disability discharge and retirement system so that they can also receive necessary health and dental benefits, and for ROTC cadets it would transfer responsibility for medical claims from the Department of Labor to the Department of Defense, authorizing the use of supplemental health care programs in the TRICARE management agency. While no additional benefits would be provided to ROTC participants, the change would ensure a better quality of health care.

This amendment is fair to academy cadets, midshipmen, and ROTC cadets

who are injured while in the performance of military training. It would provide health and disability benefits to those who currently receive none if they are midshipmen and academy cadets. It also ensures a credible health care system widely accepted by health care providers for those currently covered under the less effective OWC program.

The Congressional Budget Office and Department of Defense estimate these changes will cost approximately $460,000 a year. So this is a very small amount of money required to provide care for those who are in training to serve our country.

The bottom line is these ROTC cadets who are injured in military training would be able to receive health care if they need it as a followup, after the emergency treatment from that training accident. This provides that they can go from the Department of Labor to the Department of Defense to receive better quality and more experienced health care coverage.

Regarding those midshipmen and cadets in our military academies, it would allow those who have to be severed from the academies because of their injuries, because they are no longer physically able to become members of the armed services, if they are injured in military training, that they would be able to receive the health care and the disability payments to which they would be entitled. It would go to the Veterans Affairs Department for them to determine what kind of disability and how much of a disability, just as those in the armed services do today. I think it is the fair thing.

It is the result of a study that I requested. So I believe it is my responsibility to try to correct the problems that were found in the study and treat these young ROTC cadets and those wonderful young people who are in our military academies and in the Naval Academy and Coast Guard--that they would also be able to receive health care if they are injured and would be able to receive a disability payment if they are severed from the academy.

I ask at the appropriate time I have a vote on my amendment.

Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.

Yes. First, let me say with regard to the academy----

Let me say, as regards the academy members first----

Of course they get health care--treatment for their injury. But assume their injury then keeps them from being able to stay at the academy; they have to be let go because they no longer can perform the physical functions. Then they go into the private sector and their health care continuity would be assured under this amendment as they would get a small disability as well because they were in training.

ROTC, today, does give health care benefits if they are injured in training, but it is under the Department of Labor, and it is under workers' compensation. There has been a dissatisfaction with the kind of treatment they have been able to receive, and the Department of Labor and workers' compensation doesn't have the same understanding of a military injury. All we are doing--and this costs absolutely nothing--we are just transferring the benefit from the Department of Labor to the Department of Defense so these young people would be able to get continued health care for whatever their injury was when it was in the line of duty.

I thank the chairman. I appreciate that very much. I appreciate very much the ability to work with his staff and with the minority staff as well to assure that we were doing exactly what we wanted to do in the narrow area to which this corresponds. I thank the chairman and look forward to having a favorable vote on my amendment.

Mr. President, I very much appreciate the remarks of the distinguished Senator from Michigan. I also commend the distinguished Senator from Michigan as well as the distinguished chairman of the committee for producing an excellent bill.

Mr. President, I commend the Senator from New Hampshire for his work on the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, IDEA, reauthorization bill. In particular, I appreciate his amendment to address the issue of attorneys' fees. I agree wholeheartedly that every child should be adequately represented, but we must ensure people do not take advantage of the system. As a member, and former chairman, of the DC Appropriations Subcommittee, I became aware of how the District of Columbia Public Schools has experienced large numbers of lawsuits filed against it under IDEA and had to pay millions in attorneys' fees.

In an effort to keep these expenditures under control, the District of Columbia Appropriations Acts for fiscal years 1999, 2000 and 2001 limited the amount of appropriated funds that could be paid to prevailing parties for attorneys' fees. However, in fiscal year 2002 these caps were lifted. It quickly became clear this was a mistake.

After lifting the cap, the number of special education related administrative hearings increased in one year by 20 percent. In 2002, the city received 2,750 hearing requests, up from 1,500 3 years earlier. The backlog of assessments increased significantly and the backlog of hearings tripled. Attorneys' fees as a percentage of total special education spending tripled to almost 6 percent, increasing by $10 million in 1 year.

The problem in DC was uniquely egregious. There are numerous instances in which DC had to pay outrageous sums. In one case a lawyer charged $43,500 for a case that was settled and never actually went to a hearing. On other occasions when the case was settled prior to a hearing ever being held, lawyers charged as much as $22,000. Some firms apparently have split one case into multiple hearings, rather than addressing them in a single complaint, in order to generate excess fees. In addition, the DC Auditor issued a report in May 2003, on legal fees paid

in relation to special education and concluded that certain law firms had relationships with advocacy groups that appear to have been unethical or illegal.

Clearly, some people have been using a system intended to help children in need of special education assistance for their personal gain. The rule that allows parents to receive payment to cover attorneys' fees when they win is intended to ensure parents who may not have the means can get representation. It is not intended to be a cash cow for attorneys, soaking up money that would otherwise be spent on educating children.

I am happy to yield.

I thank the Senator. The Federal Government has a particular interest in this issue for DC because of its constitutional responsibility to oversee the Nation's Capital and because it provides approximately twice as much in education funding, in percentage terms, for DC as for the country overall.

In FY2003, we reinstated attorney fee caps, and they have been successful in curbing the problem. In FY03, DCPS saved $4.4 million, or 30 percent, due to the attorneys' fees cap. Based on those savings, DCPS was able to create 550 new classroom seats at 50 schools during the 2003-2004 school year to serve children with special needs, including children with autism, students who are hearing or vision impaired, mentally retarded, learning disabled or emotionally disabled, and early childhood special education students. The conflicts of interests between attorneys and companies providing special education services also appear to have ended as a result of this law.

FY04 savings from the cap can again be reinvested into capacity building. In the 2004-2005 school year, DCPS expects to create 450 additional classroom seats with the savings.

While the changes made by Senator Gregg's amendment make good sense for most of the country, I believe in extreme circumstances, such as in DC caps may be necessary. That is why I supported clarifying in the amendment that the measures for which I have fought so hard with the support of the school board president to protect DC are not intended to be replaced by this provision.

Mr. President, how much time is remaining on our side?

Thank you, Mr. President. I will yield 7\1/2\ minutes to the Senator from Mississippi. Before I do that, though, I do want to thank the Senator from Utah, the distinguished chairman of the Joint Economic Committee. He has been looking at the economy every month and really looking at that progress. I think you can see from his remarks that the trend is up on all fronts. All of us knew when the recovery was coming, it would not be a true recovery unless it had jobs with it. Now we are seeing the jobs coming online following the outstanding performance of the stock market, and now consumer confidence is up.

I think the distinguished Senator from Utah was on this trend for a long time before others were focusing on it. We certainly appreciate his leadership.

Mr. President, I call up amendment No. 3138 and ask for its immediate consideration.

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

Mr. President, this is an amendment that is a matter of fairness and equity. It is cosponsored by Senator Landrieu, Senator Smith, and myself. It is to put one sector that was in the original FSC/ETI coverage back into the bill. It is architects and engineers. We know there has been a huge outsourcing of professional jobs overseas. This is becoming more common. Our architectural and engineering firms are particularly vulnerable to foreign competition. This amendment is a pared-down amendment that would give them some of the tax deduction back. It is the only sector that was originally covered that is not covered in the bill before us.

My amendment would phase in the coverage over a 10-year period. It is offset, so there will be no cost. It is a matter of fairness. We should not lose our engineering and architectural jobs in this country. They have lost 31 percent of their margins in the last year.

I hope we will be able to agree to this amendment. It is a matter of simple equity. I believe with this phased-in tax deduction we will have an incentive to do our designing and engineering in our country, for buildings that are in our country. This is not applied to buildings built overseas, only buildings built in our country.

I urge the adoption of the amendment, but if it needs to be set aside for further consideration----

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

Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Virginia for helping to explain to the world how sad all of us are about the developments in Iraq with the prisoners. I appreciate the distinguished Senator, the chairman of the Armed Services Committee, moving forward and asking Secretary Rumsfeld to come and testify in public. It is our hope that Secretary Rumsfeld will also brief the entire Senate, along with the distinguished committee. I appreciate the leadership of the Senator from Virginia very much.

I thank the Senator from Virginia and also agree that would be proper. The President should have the ability to represent the American people and the world. I know that he is going to do that in a very effective way. Thank you, Mr. President.

Mr. President, I ask the Senator from Iowa to take the next 10 minutes.

How much time do we have remaining?

Mr. President, I would like to be notified when I have used 2 minutes and 40 seconds, after which I am going to yield the final 5 minutes to the Senator from Minnesota.

I thank the Senator from Iowa for talking about the Medicare discount drug card. I think it is so important that seniors know they can easily compare prices; they can determine which is the best card for them. This is going to help anyone who does not have other coverage.

I hope our seniors know they can call 1-800-MEDICARE and get further information. If they call their local Medicare office, the Medicare people are going to be very accommodating. I am appreciative that the Senator from Iowa clarified that because all the rhetoric we are hearing could scare our seniors.

I want to address the energy issue. I heard Senators on the floor earlier today talking about the high price of gasoline, as if it is the President's fault. I would remind everyone we have an energy bill we are two votes short of having cloture to pass. We passed it in the Senate. We passed it in the House. We have 58 votes to move it forward and we can't get the 60 votes it takes to break a filibuster. I ask the Senators who are concerned about high energy prices if they would consider voting to get the energy conference report agreed to so the President can sign it because it is a bill that will provide incentives for exploring, incentives for creating new energy resources, incentives for bringing Alaska gas down--which will be a huge help toward self-sufficiency in our country. It has incentives for renewable fuel, for the kind of fuel that will be burning clean, such as nuclear powerplants, and to have clean coal- burning and other new technologies.

There is so much in the Energy bill that would bring our country into self-sufficiency and we can't get the Energy bill passed. I think Congress should take the responsibility to see this bill goes through. We have tried to pass an energy bill for 10 years and we need to do it. We need to take control ourselves. It is time for us to do this for the American people. The high price of gasoline is set at our feet, and we can do something about it.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I ask the distinguished Senator from Alaska if I could do a colloquy, without delaying him?

Mr. President, I voted for the bill that has just passed because I have said all along I am against taxing Internet access. I think it is a disruption of interstate commerce. I have said that all along.

The reason I have been concerned about this bill is I have been very afraid that the city franchise taxes that are collected in my State of Texas were somehow going to be brought into the bill. I have now been working with the Senate leaders, the managers of the bill, Senators McCain, Allen, Wyden, and Senator Dorgan, to assure that it was not the intent to take the Texas franchise fee, which is called an access line fee in Texas, to be included in the ban on Internet access. It is not Internet access; it is a franchise fee.

I very much hope we can clarify the record on this point and assure that in conference the definition will be clear so it will be recognized under Federal law 47 U.S.C., section 1104(8)(B), that the Texas access line fee is included as a franchise fee or similar fee, and included in the exceptions from the definition of tax.

I hope we have an assurance from the managers of the bill that this Texas access line fee, which is a franchise fee, would not be included within the definition of Internet access tax.

I am happy to yield.

I am happy to yield to the Senator from Virginia.

Mr. President, I thank the Senators from Virginia and Oregon, and say that I also have the assurance from Senator McCain and Senator Dorgan that in the conference this issue will be addressed. It is a Texas-only issue, as I understand. It is a franchise fee but it is called an access line fee after Texas law was changed in 1999, which is why the moratorium puts it in question.

I would like to assure that we get this definition in conference. I know now, from talking to the four managers, that it was not the intention to take our access fee as a part of the major bill, but in fact treat it as a franchise fee, which is what it is.

I yield the floor.