Floor Statements

Mr. President, I thank my colleagues for yielding because of time constraints.

I came to the floor to thank Senator Murray for her extraordinary work on the bridge replacement amendment and for the colleagues--60-- who joined her in supporting this amendment. It is important to all of our States, but particularly for Louisiana, that is struggling, like so many of our other States are, to find funding for critical infrastructure. We, of course, 2 years ago, had the collapse of an infrastructure, of our levees. We have great impacts on many of our highways. Of course, the collapse of the bridge in Minnesota has caused us all to refocus on the importance of this issue.

Mr. President, I will submit my longer statement for the Record, but we have over 4,000 bridges in the State of Louisiana alone, that is including overpasses over highways. Nearly 30 percent of the total are categorized as structurally deficient or functionally obsolete. In fact, one of the bridges I have outlined in my statement is the Red River Bridge that was built in 1936. It alone will cost $100 million. This U.S. 71/165 bridge is in a very small parish in Louisiana. We are straddling the great Mississippi River, and it causes a great deal of strain on some of our poorer parishes that need to find ways to cross but have very little capacity.

The backlog of bridge replacement needs for bridges that are either structurally or functionally deficient and have a sufficiency rating of less than 50 in Louisiana is $2.1 billion. The I-35 West Bridge in Minneapolis was given a sufficiency rating of 50 in 2005.

A total of almost 4,000 bridges, or nearly 30 percent, of the total bridges in Louisiana are categorized as either ``structurally deficient'' or ``functionally obsolete.''

If all bridges categorized as ``structurally deficient'' or ``functionally obsolete'' in Louisiana were to be replaced, the total projected cost would be more than $10.5 billion today, not fully including other costs such as rights of way, engineering or utilities.

Louisiana is not unlike most other states with a backlog of transportation projects. The Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development alone has a total transportation backlog of over $14 billion. The funding in this amendment will help address a critical piece of that backlog by providing additional funds for bridges in the State.

I hope my colleagues will join me in supporting Senator Murray and this critical amendment for our Nation's bridge infrastructure.

Specific examples in Louisiana are:

The I-10 Calcasieu River Bridge in Lake Charles, built in 1952, is now functionally obsolete, with additional capacity needed in the corridor and estimated replacement cost several times the current annual funding of the entire bridge replacement program. This bridge is nationally significant because it is part of Interstate 10, a ``Corridor of the Future'' as designated by the Department of Transportation.

The Red River Bridge at Fort Buhlow, US 71/165, built in 1936, is structurally deficient and functionally obsolete, with an estimated replacement cost of greater than $100 million, a significant portion of our current annual funding of the entire bridge replacement program.

I thank Senator Murray, and my colleagues for yielding before we go on to the next debate, which is on trucks and trucking, and I am happy to cosponsor their amendment as well.

I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record a letter from the Department of Transportation.

Mr. President, I would like to take a moment to pay tribute to Peter A. Mayer Advertising, Inc., which on Friday celebrated its 40th anniversary.

This firm represents that Louisiana really is ``open for business'' following the devastating 2005 storms, Katrina and Rita. Not only is this agency profitable and strong, but part of its business practice is to contribute to our great city and region in the aftermath of the storms that completely destroyed 18,000 businesses in Louisiana alone.

When Katrina hit, the Agency evacuated to Baton Rouge and Monroe and provided housing and accommodations for employees and their families. Soon the firm was up and running again in New Orleans and promoting the city's recovery. For instance, it was the Peter A. Mayer agency that developed the ``Come fall in love all over again'' television and print tourism campaign. Tourism is our State's second largest industry, and the agency's help getting the word out that we are ready for tourists was invaluable.

Not only did the agency help the city and region, but it looked inward to create a support network for its own employees whose common thread was recovering from Katrina. The agency created a Web site, LivesConnected.com, where employees, though oral history, told their Katrina stories.

Peter Mayer founded the firm in 1967 with just three employees and $200,000 in billing. It has become one of the largest advertising, public relations and marketing agencies in the South

and an economic anchor in New Orleans, with a staff of 125 and annual billings of more than $75 million. The news media has recognized the agency's famed corporate culture, with New Orleans City Business and Gambit Weekly each naming it one of the top places to work in New Orleans.

In celebration of its 40th anniversary and in an effort to help beautify our city, the agency last week began planting 40 trees in City Park to replace those lost in Katrina. On Friday evening, the agency celebrated its history with all past and present employees at the Audubon Tea Room. I thank the Senate for recognizing this outstanding agency for its commitment to excellence and public service.

Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask my friend, the senior Senator from Massachusetts, for clarification of language in the conference report. On page 60, the report refers to the definition of an independent student for purposes of determining financial aid eligibility. The current law was amended to allow students who are orphans, in foster care or wards of the court or who were orphans, in foster care or wards of the court any time after the age of 13 to be considered independent students. I would like to ask the Senator to clarify that individuals who were orphans, in foster care or wards of the court when they were 13 years of age or older but no longer orphans in foster care or wards of the court when applying for college will still be considered independent students.

I appreciate that clarification. I believe we should modify the language to be more clear on this point. I believe it should read ``(B) is an orphan, in foster care, or a ward of the court, or was an orphan, in foster care, or a ward of the court at any time when the individual was 13 years of age or older;''.

Mr. President, I come to the floor today to speak about an important issue that will determine the success of long-term recovery efforts in the gulf coast. As you know gulf coast was devastated in 2005 by two of the most powerful storms to ever hit the U.S. in recorded history Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. We also experienced the unprecedented disaster of having a major metropolitan city, the city of New Orleans, under up to 20 feet of water for 2 weeks when there were 28 separate levee failures which flooded 12,000 acres, or 80 percent of New Orleans following Katrina.

I strongly believe that the Congress can provide vast amounts of tax credits, grants, loans, and waivers but all these benefits will not spur recovery if we cannot get people back into their homes. That is where recovery must start and end. In Louisiana alone, for example, we had over 20,000 businesses destroyed. However, businesses cannot open their doors if their workers have nowhere to live. Louisiana also had 875 schools destroyed. Again, teachers cannot come back to school and teach our children if they do not have a roof over their heads. So a fundamental piece of recovery in the gulf coast is to allow disaster victims to return home and rebuild.

Today, I am proud to introduce legislation which is extremely important to the recovery in the State of Louisiana. This is because, over the past few months, we have learned that the Road Home is facing a shortfall of billions of dollars due to various reasons. There is certainly more than enough blame to go around for the mistakes in the creation and management of the Road Home program, and fixing them will be a shared responsibility. But a significant initial flaw can be found in the inadequate and unfairly distributed funding which represented all the administration was willing to commit towards Louisiana recovery. At this stage, the funding shortfall threatens to stall recovery in Louisiana and leave homeowners without the vital funds they need to rebuild their homes. To address this important issue, the bill we introduce today includes an authorization of funds so that if the State of Louisiana puts up $1 billion towards the Road Home shortfall, additional funds necessary to shore up the program would be available. I strongly believe this bill will serve as a hand up, not a hand out. The State of Louisiana shares a financial obligation to address the shortfall and this bill would hold it accountable, but with the State meeting their obligation the Federal Government also would step in to help.

In closing, let me reiterate that this bill addresses one of the most fundamental needs following a disaster: the need to return home. Whether residents live in million dollar mansions, rental housing, or public housing they all share a desire to return to their communities and, in particular, their homes. I urge my colleagues to support this important legislation as now these disaster victims are counting on the Congress for action.

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

Mr. President, I come to the floor today to speak about an important issue that will determine the success of long-term recovery efforts in the gulf coast. As you know gulf coast was devastated in 2005 by two of the most powerful storms to ever hit the U.S. in recorded history Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. We also experienced the unprecedented disaster of having a major metropolitan city, the city of New Orleans, under up to 20 feet of water for 2 weeks when there were 28 separate levee failures which flooded 12,000 acres, or 80 percent of New Orleans following Katrina.

I strongly believe that the Congress can provide vast amounts of tax credits, grants, loans, and waivers but all these benefits will not spur recovery if we cannot get people back into their homes. That is where recovery must start and end. In Louisiana alone, for example, we had over 20,000 businesses destroyed. However, businesses cannot open their doors if their workers have nowhere to live. Louisiana also had 875 schools destroyed. Again, teachers cannot come back to school and teach our children if they do not have a roof over their heads. So a fundamental piece of recovery in the gulf coast is to allow disaster victims to return home and rebuild.

Today, I am proud to introduce legislation which is extremely important to the recovery in the State of Louisiana. This is because, over the past few months, we have learned that the Road Home is facing a shortfall of billions of dollars due to various reasons. There is certainly more than enough blame to go around for the mistakes in the creation and management of the Road Home program, and fixing them will be a shared responsibility. But a significant initial flaw can be found in the inadequate and unfairly distributed funding which represented all the administration was willing to commit towards Louisiana recovery. At this stage, the funding shortfall threatens to stall recovery in Louisiana and leave homeowners without the vital funds they need to rebuild their homes. To address this important issue, the bill we introduce today includes an authorization of funds so that if the State of Louisiana puts up $1 billion towards the Road Home shortfall, additional funds necessary to shore up the program would be available. I strongly believe this bill will serve as a hand up, not a hand out. The State of Louisiana shares a financial obligation to address the shortfall and this bill would hold it accountable, but with the State meeting their obligation the Federal Government also would step in to help.

In closing, let me reiterate that this bill addresses one of the most fundamental needs following a disaster: the need to return home. Whether residents live in million dollar mansions, rental housing, or public housing they all share a desire to return to their communities and, in particular, their homes. I urge my colleagues to support this important legislation as now these disaster victims are counting on the Congress for action.

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

Mr. President, today I rise to discuss the All Students Can Achieve Act that I am introducing today with Senators Lieberman and Coleman.

I was proud to have been a part of developing the No Child Left Behind legislation 5 years ago, which made strides in holding schools accountable and drawing attention to the students who had fallen between the cracks. Senators Lieberman, Coleman, and I have come together to build upon the successes of No Child Left Behind, to improve it, and to help our Nation's schools take the next step to help all of our students to achieve and to succeed. Louisiana has made great progress in its standards and accountability, now ranking number one in the Nation. However, of the more than 650,000 students in Louisiana, many are not meeting academic achievement goals. We need to help all of our students meet and exceed achievement expectations.

The All Students Can Achieve Act focuses on the achievements of all students. Recognizing that quality data systems are crucial to measuring the progress of student achievement, we have included a requirement to establish data systems and provided funding authorizations and incentives to support the development of such systems. In order to ensure that all students are achieving, states must create comprehensive data systems that track students' academic progress and other factors that affect their success.

One of the most important factors in school and student achievement is teachers. The quality of teachers should be determined by their effect on students' learning, not just their qualifications. All students should have effective teachers. Thus, these data systems must link student achievement data to teachers, allowing states to

measure teacher effectiveness. In addition, this bill requires the equitable distribution of effective teachers and non-federal funding.

States should be held accountable for student achievement. However, students do not progress at the same pace. Louisiana has recognized this and has incorporated growth labels in its accountability system. Louisiana looks at the level of growth achieved by a school and each school's success in meeting its growth targets. The All Students Can Achieve Act allows states to use growth models in calculating adequate yearly progress. It allows states the flexibility to measure student academic growth, rather than strictly looking at test scores.

We must have high expectations for all students. To ensure that all elementary though secondary school students, regardless of where they live, are prepared for success in college or the workplace, states must set high expectations for all students. Academic standards must be designed to prepare students to succeed and assessments must be effective tools to measure students' progress toward meeting these standards. In addition, we need to continue to properly measure the achievement of all students. Thus, this bill will close current loopholes in the law that allow states to avoid counting students or skew achievement data.

The All Students Can Achieve Act aims to close the achievement gap. States need to focus resources on closing the achievement gap. This includes directing their attention to comprehensive interventions where more than 50% of students are not making Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) or focused interventions where less than 50% of students are not making AYP. The All Students Can Achieve Act increases the amount of funding authorized for these interventions and focuses support where the need is greatest.

Another important measure of academic achievement is high school graduation rates, which should be tracked and reported for all groups of students. High school graduation rates are an important measure of academic achievement, but they must be calculated consistently and accurately. Like other assessments, these rates should be tracked and reported for all groups of students. Nearly 1.2 million students did not graduate from American high schools in 2006; the lost lifetime earnings in America for that class of dropouts alone totals more than $309 billion.

The All Students Can Achieve Act also increases focus on and support for high need students. For example, we have also included foster children and youth. There are over 800,000 foster children and youth. They face many of the same challenges as homeless children and youth. They go through numerous changes in where they live and go to school. They lack stability and permanency. Thus, we have added them to the McKinney-Vento Act, in order to ensure that they do not fall through the cracks. We hope that by giving them access to the services and protections of McKinney-Vento, their schools will become a safe and permanent place in their lives.

Public education is important to Senators Lieberman, Coleman, and me. We want our Nation's children to be prepared to compete and succeed once they graduate. We need to improve our schools and hold them accountable for the achievement of all students. Though there has been much discussion about No Child Left Behind Act, there has been little action toward the reauthorization of this law. We have heard from our constituents about the parts of NCLB that work and the parts that do not work for our students at home. Through a nationwide public process, the Aspen Institute has generated concrete, actionable recommendations that will improve schools for the Nation's children. We wanted to take this opportunity to help begin the process of improving this law. We have come together to take a bipartisan approach to improving the education of all students. We have pulled together the proposals that we think will best serve our students and improve public education in America. We want people to actively discuss our proposal. We hope that people will support what we have done or build upon it.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Home Ownership Made Easier Act, or the HOME Act. This bill will revitalize our Nation's rural communities by making it easier to become a homeowner and to provide opportunities to refinance high interest and subprime loans.

Our country has provided many excellent opportunities over the years to individuals living in rural areas to become a homeowner. One of these programs is what is commonly referred to as the 502 program administered by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. This program administers guaranteed loans to low-income families that are backed by the U.S. Government. Families must be able to show that they are without adequate housing and not exceed certain income limits. Currently, these loans last 30 years and do not require a down payment, however the applicant must be able to afford mortgage payments, including taxes, and insurance.

I applaud the success of the 502 program. In Louisiana alone, the program has already administered 1,212 loans for 2007 and nationwide, the program has administered 27,643 loans. While the program does cost the taxpayer approximately $42 million a year, it administers over $3 billion in loans a year. Let me repeat that again, for $42 million a year, our Government is able to provide $3 billion in loans a year to low-income families to become homeowners. The risk extremely low. In 2006, the 502 program has a foreclosure rate of 1.36 percent. Again, I applaud the success of our Government to provide this much-needed help to rural Americans.

Some might ask why should the Federal Government help low-income families become homeowners? The answer is simple. Homeownership provides financial advantages to owners and to their communities. Individuals who own homes have an investment, of those that own homes, on average, one-half of the equity in their homes is one-half of their net worth. Homeowners enjoy tax benefits and they also enjoy financial stability if they are locked into a permanent interest rate. Communities also benefit, those that have a high percentage of homeownership see increased involvement with the community and with the local schools.

Also, maybe most importantly, homeownership by low-income households is linked to a child's educational advancement and future success.

My HOME Act will build upon the success of the 502 program and update the program to reflect current conditions. In some instances, this law hasn't been updated in nearly 30 years.

The HOME Act will do five things. First, it will increase the qualifying income limits for families and set out a three-tiered level of income standard instead of the current eight tiered standard. The first tier will be for families that have one to four individuals, the second tier is established for families of 5 to 8 persons and the third tier is for families larger than eight.

The second change will affect the qualifying population limit. Currently, the population limit is tied to communities of 10,000 or less in an areas contained within a standard metropolitan statistical area, MSA, and communities less than 20,000 if they are not contained within a MSA. My HOME Act will expand the qualifying population limit to encompass rural communities of 40,000 or less.

HOME Act legislation will maintain the guaranteed fee that an applicant is required to pay at 2 percent, instead of raising the fee to 3 percent. This is to keep costs low for the borrower. It will also reduce the redtape involved by allowing an applicant that qualifies for a 502 loan to receive that loan regardless of whether or not the applicant can qualify for another Federal Government housing loan.

Finally, my bill will provide opportunities for individuals inside and outside the 502 program to refinance their loans. These opportunities include refinancing to pay for a first or second purchase mortgage, for repairs to structural deficiencies, to pay for closing costs, and allow a borrower to consolidate debts up to the greater of $10,000 or 10 percent.

The 502 program is an excellent program that has helped many individuals and families afford to purchase a clean, affordable home that increases their quality of life. I want to expand this program and allow more opportunities for low-income rural Americans to become homeowners. This is a good bill and I look forward to working with my colleagues to make this bill a reality.

Mr. President, today I rise to discuss the All Students Can Achieve Act that I am introducing today with Senators Lieberman and Coleman.

I was proud to have been a part of developing the No Child Left Behind legislation 5 years ago, which made strides in holding schools accountable and drawing attention to the students who had fallen between the cracks. Senators Lieberman, Coleman, and I have come together to build upon the successes of No Child Left Behind, to improve it, and to help our Nation's schools take the next step to help all of our students to achieve and to succeed. Louisiana has made great progress in its standards and accountability, now ranking number one in the Nation. However, of the more than 650,000 students in Louisiana, many are not meeting academic achievement goals. We need to help all of our students meet and exceed achievement expectations.

The All Students Can Achieve Act focuses on the achievements of all students. Recognizing that quality data systems are crucial to measuring the progress of student achievement, we have included a requirement to establish data systems and provided funding authorizations and incentives to support the development of such systems. In order to ensure that all students are achieving, states must create comprehensive data systems that track students' academic progress and other factors that affect their success.

One of the most important factors in school and student achievement is teachers. The quality of teachers should be determined by their effect on students' learning, not just their qualifications. All students should have effective teachers. Thus, these data systems must link student achievement data to teachers, allowing states to

measure teacher effectiveness. In addition, this bill requires the equitable distribution of effective teachers and non-federal funding.

States should be held accountable for student achievement. However, students do not progress at the same pace. Louisiana has recognized this and has incorporated growth labels in its accountability system. Louisiana looks at the level of growth achieved by a school and each school's success in meeting its growth targets. The All Students Can Achieve Act allows states to use growth models in calculating adequate yearly progress. It allows states the flexibility to measure student academic growth, rather than strictly looking at test scores.

We must have high expectations for all students. To ensure that all elementary though secondary school students, regardless of where they live, are prepared for success in college or the workplace, states must set high expectations for all students. Academic standards must be designed to prepare students to succeed and assessments must be effective tools to measure students' progress toward meeting these standards. In addition, we need to continue to properly measure the achievement of all students. Thus, this bill will close current loopholes in the law that allow states to avoid counting students or skew achievement data.

The All Students Can Achieve Act aims to close the achievement gap. States need to focus resources on closing the achievement gap. This includes directing their attention to comprehensive interventions where more than 50% of students are not making Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) or focused interventions where less than 50% of students are not making AYP. The All Students Can Achieve Act increases the amount of funding authorized for these interventions and focuses support where the need is greatest.

Another important measure of academic achievement is high school graduation rates, which should be tracked and reported for all groups of students. High school graduation rates are an important measure of academic achievement, but they must be calculated consistently and accurately. Like other assessments, these rates should be tracked and reported for all groups of students. Nearly 1.2 million students did not graduate from American high schools in 2006; the lost lifetime earnings in America for that class of dropouts alone totals more than $309 billion.

The All Students Can Achieve Act also increases focus on and support for high need students. For example, we have also included foster children and youth. There are over 800,000 foster children and youth. They face many of the same challenges as homeless children and youth. They go through numerous changes in where they live and go to school. They lack stability and permanency. Thus, we have added them to the McKinney-Vento Act, in order to ensure that they do not fall through the cracks. We hope that by giving them access to the services and protections of McKinney-Vento, their schools will become a safe and permanent place in their lives.

Public education is important to Senators Lieberman, Coleman, and me. We want our Nation's children to be prepared to compete and succeed once they graduate. We need to improve our schools and hold them accountable for the achievement of all students. Though there has been much discussion about No Child Left Behind Act, there has been little action toward the reauthorization of this law. We have heard from our constituents about the parts of NCLB that work and the parts that do not work for our students at home. Through a nationwide public process, the Aspen Institute has generated concrete, actionable recommendations that will improve schools for the Nation's children. We wanted to take this opportunity to help begin the process of improving this law. We have come together to take a bipartisan approach to improving the education of all students. We have pulled together the proposals that we think will best serve our students and improve public education in America. We want people to actively discuss our proposal. We hope that people will support what we have done or build upon it.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Home Ownership Made Easier Act, or the HOME Act. This bill will revitalize our Nation's rural communities by making it easier to become a homeowner and to provide opportunities to refinance high interest and subprime loans.

Our country has provided many excellent opportunities over the years to individuals living in rural areas to become a homeowner. One of these programs is what is commonly referred to as the 502 program administered by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. This program administers guaranteed loans to low-income families that are backed by the U.S. Government. Families must be able to show that they are without adequate housing and not exceed certain income limits. Currently, these loans last 30 years and do not require a down payment, however the applicant must be able to afford mortgage payments, including taxes, and insurance.

I applaud the success of the 502 program. In Louisiana alone, the program has already administered 1,212 loans for 2007 and nationwide, the program has administered 27,643 loans. While the program does cost the taxpayer approximately $42 million a year, it administers over $3 billion in loans a year. Let me repeat that again, for $42 million a year, our Government is able to provide $3 billion in loans a year to low-income families to become homeowners. The risk extremely low. In 2006, the 502 program has a foreclosure rate of 1.36 percent. Again, I applaud the success of our Government to provide this much-needed help to rural Americans.

Some might ask why should the Federal Government help low-income families become homeowners? The answer is simple. Homeownership provides financial advantages to owners and to their communities. Individuals who own homes have an investment, of those that own homes, on average, one-half of the equity in their homes is one-half of their net worth. Homeowners enjoy tax benefits and they also enjoy financial stability if they are locked into a permanent interest rate. Communities also benefit, those that have a high percentage of homeownership see increased involvement with the community and with the local schools.

Also, maybe most importantly, homeownership by low-income households is linked to a child's educational advancement and future success.

My HOME Act will build upon the success of the 502 program and update the program to reflect current conditions. In some instances, this law hasn't been updated in nearly 30 years.

The HOME Act will do five things. First, it will increase the qualifying income limits for families and set out a three-tiered level of income standard instead of the current eight tiered standard. The first tier will be for families that have one to four individuals, the second tier is established for families of 5 to 8 persons and the third tier is for families larger than eight.

The second change will affect the qualifying population limit. Currently, the population limit is tied to communities of 10,000 or less in an areas contained within a standard metropolitan statistical area, MSA, and communities less than 20,000 if they are not contained within a MSA. My HOME Act will expand the qualifying population limit to encompass rural communities of 40,000 or less.

HOME Act legislation will maintain the guaranteed fee that an applicant is required to pay at 2 percent, instead of raising the fee to 3 percent. This is to keep costs low for the borrower. It will also reduce the redtape involved by allowing an applicant that qualifies for a 502 loan to receive that loan regardless of whether or not the applicant can qualify for another Federal Government housing loan.

Finally, my bill will provide opportunities for individuals inside and outside the 502 program to refinance their loans. These opportunities include refinancing to pay for a first or second purchase mortgage, for repairs to structural deficiencies, to pay for closing costs, and allow a borrower to consolidate debts up to the greater of $10,000 or 10 percent.

The 502 program is an excellent program that has helped many individuals and families afford to purchase a clean, affordable home that increases their quality of life. I want to expand this program and allow more opportunities for low-income rural Americans to become homeowners. This is a good bill and I look forward to working with my colleagues to make this bill a reality.

Mr. President, as we all know, there was a tremendous amount of criticism of the Federal Government's response to Hurricanes Katrina and Rita of 2005. Things are better now, and the region is slowly recovering. But as I stand here tonight, we are exactly 63 days into the 2007 Atlantic hurricane season. Two years ago, the U.S. Small Business Administration's, SBA, response to Hurricanes Katrina and Rita was too slow and lacking in urgency, threatening the very survival of impacted businesses and homeowners. This failure occurred because SBA lacked the necessary tools and resources to respond swiftly and effectively to a large-scale disaster. Thanks in part to the efforts of Administrator Steven Preston, much has been done to improve the SBA disaster assistance program in the past

year. However, many in Congress remain concerned that despite these efforts, the agency lacks the additional legislative authority and resources required to respond to a large-scale disaster. This is because we must be sure that if we have another disaster, the Federal Government's response will be better this time around. Disaster response agencies have to be better organized, more efficient, and more responsive in order to avoid the problems, the delays, mismanagement, and the seeming incompetence that occurred in 2005.

I am proud that legislation, of which I am an original cosponsor, is passing the Senate tonight. This is because I strongly believe that we cannot afford to adjourn for August, the heart of hurricane season, without moving this important legislation forward--legislation which would immediately provide SBA with the resources it needs to effectively respond to natural or manmade disasters. In particular, this legislation improves the disaster response of one agency that had a great deal of problems last year, the SBA. This bill, S. 163, the Small Business Disaster Response and Loan Improvements Act, makes major improvements to the SBA's disaster response and provides them with essential tools to ensure that they are more efficient and better prepared for future disasters--big and small.

I should also note that this bill is a result of intensive bipartisan work over 2 years and was introduced shortly before the 109th Congress adjourned as S. 4097 by Senator Snowe. Unfortunately, there was no action on that bill, so it was reintroduced in January 2007, at the start of the 110th Congress, by Senator Kerry as S. 163. On May 7, 2007, the Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship unanimously reported out S. 163 and sent it to the full Senate for consideration. This bipartisan legislation features comprehensive SBA reforms as outlined in the attached summary. S. 163 also has the full support of the SBA, who assisted the committee in drafting many of the provisions as well as the support of our Louisiana business community. As mentioned above, although this bill was reported out of committee 86 days ago, S. 163 was blocked from passage, most recently on July 17 due to a Republican objection. The committee worked closely with the Republican Senator to address his specific concerns, but unfortunately after this hold was lifted last night, it appeared as if there would be an additional hold from the Republican side. Given the urgent nature of this legislation, in addition to the fact that the House of Representatives passed companion legislation on April 18, 2007, my colleagues and I were pleased that we could work out these remaining issues and pass this bill tonight because stalling this legislation would send the wrong signal to America's small businesses.

As mentioned previously, this bill is reflective of my priorities as well as those from Senators Kerry and Snowe, respectively chair and ranking member of the Senate Small Business Committee. For my part, I have heard loudly and clearly from our impacted businesses that SBA reforms should be implemented as soon as possible. In fact, as of August 29, 2007, these reforms will be 2 years overdue. That is why I have worked tirelessly alongside my colleagues on the Small Business Committee to secure passage of this legislation. Like my colleagues, I have led when appropriate, pushed back when pushed, and negotiated when needed so that S. 163 could pass the Senate before we adjourn for August recess.

This legislation offers new tools to enhance SBA's disaster assistance programs. In every disaster, the SBA disaster loan program is a lifeline for businesses and homeowners who want to rebuild their lives after a catastrophe. When Katrina hit, our businesses and homeowners had to wait months for loan approvals. I do not know how many businesses we lost because help did not come in time. Because of the scale of this disaster, what these businesses needed was immediate, short-term assistance to hold them over until SBA was ready to process the tens of thousands of loan applications it received.

That is why this legislation provides the SBA Administrator with the ability to set up an expedited disaster assistance business loan program to make short-term, low-interest loans to keep them afloat. These loans will allow businesses to make payroll, begin making repairs, and address other immediate needs while they are awaiting insurance payouts or regular SBA disaster loans. However, I realize that every disaster is different and could range from a disaster on the scale of Hurricane Katrina or 9/11, to an ice storm or drought. This legislation gives the SBA additional options and flexibility in the kinds of relief they can offer a community. When a tornado destroys 20 businesses in a small town in the Midwest, SBA can get the regular disaster program up and running fairly quickly. You may not need short- term loans in this instance. But if you know that SBA's resources would be overwhelmed by a storm--just as they were initially with Katrina-- these expedited business loans would be very helpful.

This legislation also would direct SBA to study ways to expedite disaster loans for those businesses in a disaster area that have a good, solid track record with the SBA or can provide vital recovery efforts. We had many businesses in the gulf coast that had paid off previous SBA loans, were major sources of employment in their communities, but had to wait months for decisions on their SBA disaster loan applications. I do not want to get rid of the SBA's current practice of reviewing applications on a first-come first-served basis, but there should be some mechanism in place for major disasters to get expedited loans out the door to specific businesses that have a positive record with SBA or those who could serve a vital role in the recovery efforts. Expedited loans would jump-start impacted economies, get vital capital out to businesses, and retain essential jobs following future disasters.

This bill also makes an important modification to the collateral requirements for disaster loans. The SBA cannot disburse more than $10,000 for an approved loan without showing collateral. This is to limit the loss to the SBA in the event that a loan defaults. However, this disbursement amount has not been increased since 1998 and these days, $10,000 is not enough to get a business up and running. That is why this bill increases this collateral requirement to $14,000 and gives the administrator the ability to increase that amount, in the event of another large-scale disaster. I believe this is a reasonable and fiscally responsible increase, and at the same time gives the administrator flexibility for future disasters which will inevitably occur.

As you may know, I pushed to get language in the last hurricane supplemental appropriations bill in June 2006 to require SBA to develop a disaster plan and report to Congress on its contents by July 15, 2006. SBA provided this status report in July, and I am pleased that, due to my request, the agency provided the completed disaster response plan to our committee on June 1, 2007. That said, it is one thing to draft up a plan but it is not worth the time and effort if there is no one to monitor its implementation and update it when needed. For this reason, I included a provision in this bill to require the administrator to designate one agency employee, who would report directly to him/her, to be responsible for this plan. This disaster planning designee would be responsible for the plan, and more importantly, would be accountable to Congress if it fails. Following Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, not only is execution important but also just as important is clear accountability if these best laid plans fail.

The Small Business Disaster Response and Loan Improvements Act will provide essential tools to make the SBA more proactive, flexible, and most important, more efficient during future disasters. Again, I look forward to working with both Senator Snowe and Senator Kerry in the coming weeks to begin discussions with our House colleagues to resolve differences on both the Senate-passed bill and the House-passed bill. The goal of both these bills is to ensure that the SBA has everything it needs to better respond following future disasters, so I am hopeful that we can work out a reasonable agreement.

I ask unanimous consent that a copy of a June 29, 2007, letter of support from Administrator Preston, along with a July 31, 2007, letter from Greater New Orleans, Inc. be printed in the

Record at the conclusion of my statement.

Will the Senator from Montana yield?

Mr. President, I missed the previous vote because we were in a markup in committee. About six other Members did as well. Could I please be recorded as having voted no? If I were here, I would have voted no on the previous amendment.

I thank Senator Byrd, because I am extremely concerned about this situation and hope we could find a remedy. I commend the Senator for his work over many years, to try to make sure our trade laws are fairly enforced and that agreements we have entered into, with countries such as China and others, are followed. But in this instance, as the Senator has so eloquently stated in this discussion this morning on the floor, this situation is not being handled correctly. Our industries, particularly in Louisiana, that he has mentioned, our crawfish producers have lost more money from the failure of U.S. importers to pay duties owed by China than any industry in our Nation. In Louisiana alone--I know it might be hard for people to believe this, but as spring rolls around, it will become quite evident--we have 3,300 crawfish farmers in our State and over 40 processors who employ a tremendous number of people and contribute hundreds of millions of dollars to our economy. The Senator from West Virginia understands our Government has failed to collect almost $70 million for this industry alone. This is antidumping duties on crawfish tail meat from China owed to the processors in my State and to our crawfish

farmers. There are additional funds that are owed.

It is my understanding--and the Senator from West Virginia is very aware--that our Customs officials are required to collect these duties, but they are not being collected. Many of these importers simply close up shop, they change their names, they move offshore, they reorganize, and evidently we are not able to collect the money that is owed to us. It is a great detriment to this particular industry and to others.

I have expressed concern over the years. We are going to continue to press this issue. We will continue in Congress to work to solve this problem. I feel very strongly that our U.S. Secretary of Commerce, Secretary Gutierrez, and the U.S. Trade Ambassador, Susan Schwab, should take this up directly with the China Ministry of Foreign Trade and Economic Cooperation. China sought to become a WTO member. It is my firm belief, if China wants to receive the benefits that accrue to them through WTO, they should enforce them and help us, and we should do a better job of making sure the importers abide by the rules we have agreed to.

I was very pleased to see in response to concerns raised by the Senate, GAO recently announced it has begun an indepth investigation as to why our Government cannot seem to collect duties owed to U.S. industries on goods imported from China.

Since 2003, the total amount of uncollected duties on all antidumping countervailing duty orders for all countries totaled $630 million. Of this amount, $485 million, or 77 percent of the total, relates to 34 specific antidumping and countervailing duty orders that have been imposed by the United States on agriculture and aquacultural imports from all countries. Of that $485 million, 73 percent relate to six antidumping orders that have been imposed on U.S. agricultural and aquacultural imports from China alone.

While the biggest duty noncollection problem in my State relates to the crawfish industry, as the Senator from West Virginia most certainly knows, Louisiana also is experiencing a problem with our catfish farmers. I see the senior Senator from Mississippi. This affects Mississippi, it affects Arkansas, it affects Alabama. We were unable to collect almost one-third of the fees that are owed to our catfish farmers.

These are hard-working businesspeople who work long hours, who are trying to run these industries and abide by all environmental regulations, pay their taxes, abide by all the wage and hour laws in this country. When we enter into trade agreements, the least our Government can do is enforce them. That is what I come to the floor to express my concern about, through this colloquy with the distinguished Senator from West Virginia.

I commend the Senator for his tireless work. We are going to press on this issue of noncollection. I hope, even if this Subsidy Offset Act expires, our Government will continue to collect the money that is owed to us during the time this act was in effect. It means a great deal to the small businesses in my State, to crawfishers and catfish producers equally. I am hoping we can make some progress and do not continue to have our trade laws undermined in this way.

I thank the Senator for this time on the floor and I thank him for his continued work on this issue.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent for 2 more minutes on this subject, and then we can go to the vote.

I withdraw my request.

Mr. President, how much time do I have to speak on the amendment? Is there any time allocated on the amendment?

Mr. President, reserving the right to object, let me ask the distinguished minority manager of the bill for just 10 minutes to speak on my amendment, and then he can speak on the point of order?

I ask unanimous consent to speak for 5 minutes on my amendment.

I thank the Chair.

I thank the Chair, and I can appreciate the situation we are in with the point of order being raised against the amendment, but as you know, Mr. President, I offered this amendment in good faith last night and spoke at some length on the amendment. I was under the impression that before we voted I would have the opportunity to speak on the amendment. Since that didn't happen, I appreciate the goodwill of my colleagues to at least allow me 5 minutes to speak, although the amendment has a point of order called against it.

My amendment actually proposes $25 million on this appropriations bill. I don't know where else to appropriate money except on an appropriations bill, and that is basically what my amendment does. It is a two-page bill, and it appropriates $25 million to the CIA to give them some extra resources to try to track down the No. 1 terrorist and his network that is threatening our country.

This amendment was prompted not out of politics or spite, it was prompted out of last week's National Intelligence Estimate that has been referred to now several times on both sides of the aisle. This did not come from a Democratic think tank or a Republican think tank, it came from the National Intelligence Estimate that says the al-Qaida network is as strong as it was before 9/11 and that Osama bin Laden is still the No. 1 target.

I offered an amendment in good faith and reached out to my colleagues to say we are on homeland security, could we find $25 million to appropriate some additional funding to the CIA? I know there are other resources, some of them are classified and some of them are not--and to clearly restate the policy that Osama bin Laden remains the foremost objective of the United States in the global war on terror and protecting the U.S. homeland, the foremost is to capture and kill Osama bin Laden.

I understand the point of order. I understand technically the Parliamentarian would probably rule against me.

But for the purposes of the constituents I am representing I wish to say I am trying but am blocked to appropriate $25 million more on a Homeland Security bill to give it to the CIA to help protect us from the No. 1 terrorist, according to our intelligence reports. That is all I wished to say.

I thank my colleagues for allowing me that moment of the record. I know the Senator wants to go back to regular order.

Reserving the right to object.

Reserving the right to object, I ask the managers of the bill if there is going to be another set of amendments on which we are going to vote tonight.

Reserving the right to object, are there only two other amendments that are to come up?

Reserving the right to object.

Reserving the right to object.

Mr. President, I would like to be added to the unanimous consent request. I am very unclear as to whether there will be an objection to me offering an amendment. I would like it added to the list. The Senator from Mississippi said we don't need unanimous consent to file my amendment. I want my amendment to be filed and will take a vote up or down.

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

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to send an amendment to the desk.

Mr. President, in the underlying bill, which makes a tremendous amount of progress, in my opinion, with protecting the homeland--increasing funding for port security, transportation, et cetera, and I have said publicly and privately my great thanks, on behalf of the people of Louisiana whom I represent, to the leaders managing this bill--in the underlying bill, there is a provision that some of us have worked very hard on to help expedite the rebuilding of schools in the gulf coast area.

As you know, 2 years this August is the anniversary of Katrina and Rita. Literally hundreds of schools were destroyed. As I said a thousand times on this floor and will continue to say, the Federal Government was simply overwhelmed by the catastrophic nature of this event, the scope of which had never been seen. So I offer this amendment, and send one to the desk that I am speaking of now to help fix one very small problem with actually one school.

The underlying bill sets up a process--and I am very grateful to the committee, Republicans and Democrats, who supported a new process--and actually FEMA was very helpful in supporting a new process--to help us rebuild the schools faster, better; not at greater expense to the taxpayer but a better way to deal with this catastrophic disaster.

However, if this amendment I am offering right now does not pass, there will be one school that is left out of this fix, and that is why I offer it, on behalf of a very small parish in south Louisiana, a school I happened to visit, a school that thought they had one agreement with FEMA but, evidently, there was a great misunderstanding.

This school has 500 children who go here, and they have had a very difficult time over the last 2 years, so I offer this amendment for them. It is extremely small, when compared to all the amendments my colleagues are offering, but it would help them to get their small school district back up and running. That is the essence of what the amendment does. As I say, it will affect basically one school in New Iberia Parish.

Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to dispense with the reading of the amendment.

Reserving the right to object.

Reserving the right to object.

Reserving the right to object.

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

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent to dispense with the reading of the amendment.

Madam President, the underlying bill that Chairman

Byrd and Ranking Member Cochran have put together is really good work. As a member of the Appropriations Committee, I am pleased to have worked on this bill. Senator Murray has provided some extraordinary leadership to add to this appropriations bill some resources to match the words that come out of this Capitol about securing our ports, securing our rail, and stepping up additional resources for our airports.

This underlying bill, the Homeland Security appropriations bill, reflects this goal and objective. For the most part, it meets it in a substantial way. But I would like to remind all of us here, my colleagues, though it is hard to remember or to put in perspective, but a few years ago, just over 5, we didn't have a Homeland Security appropriations bill. Until Osama bin Laden and al-Qaida established a network and put 19-plus men on planes that took out buildings in New York, a section of the Pentagon here in Washington, and crashed into a field in Pennsylvania, this department didn't even exist.

This department has been put together to try to help this country stand up against a great and growing threat--a great and growing threat. Unfortunately, according to the latest intelligence report--and I have the unclassified summary--this is not a diminishing threat. One would think that, after the money we have spent prosecuting the war, the diplomacy, and all the other things we are doing, this report would say that al-Qaida is weakened. But it doesn't say that. It says al- Qaida is strengthening. Of course, we know that Osama bin Laden is still on the loose.

So I come to the floor to offer an amendment to the Homeland Security bill to try to refocus our attention on how this whole thing got started. It all got started by a guy named Osama bin Laden and the al- Qaida network. My amendment says it should be the policy of the United States to refocus our efforts to find him, to destroy him, and to focus on the al-Qaida network wherever it is found.

There are pieces of it in Iraq, I am not going to debate that here. But there are pieces of al-Qaida that are still focused, according to this National Intelligence Estimate, right here in our homeland. So my amendment is substantive in the sense that it simply restates, or states for the first time but clearly, that it is the policy of the United States that the foremost objective of the global war on terror and protecting the homeland of the United States is to capture or kill Osama bin Laden and to destroy his network and other members of his network. I understand this is not just the work of one person. It adds $25 million to the Central Intelligence Agency for that purpose. I know there are other amounts of money that are being spent, and resources, some readily obtainable and some that are classified. But there are additional resources that need to be brought to bear on this and, most importantly, a focus to help us remember how we got here in the first place and what this Homeland Security bill should be doing, by protecting our Nation and keeping focus on al-Qaida. That is the essence of my amendment.

I thank the leader for allowing me to offer it tonight. Anytime the Senate feels we can vote on this in accordance with the schedule will be fine by me.

Yes, I will.

I thank the Senator from North Dakota. He has been a leader in helping us to stay focused by increasing the reward. We have to remember--I wish I had my poster but I don't, but this is what a small version of it looked like. I know the Chair may have a hard time seeing it, but this is what Osama bin Laden looks like. It is important for us to continue to see his picture. He is on the FBI's ``Most Wanted'' list. This was before he organized the attack against our country that has killed over 3,000 innocent civilians and, as we know, now 4,000 of our soldiers, approximately, have lost their lives and 38,000 to 40,000 wounded, trying to retaliate against this attack.

I thank the Senator from North Dakota. I intend to be a cosponsor of his amendment. It is complementary to this one. Again, I offer it as I think appropriate on this bill which lays out the resources to protect our homeland. Let's make sure those resources are used so there is a big target on the back of this man Osama bin Laden and his very dangerous network that is still alive, unfortunately well, and according to our own estimates growing as a threat.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, on rollcall vote 273, I voted ``yea.'' It was my intention to vote ``nay.'' I ask unanimous consent that I be permitted to change my vote since it will not affect the outcome of the vote.

Mr. President, I would like to offer a second-degree amendment.

Mr. President, I offer this second-degree. I appreciate the Senator's compliments about the work we have done to put this tax credit on the books. It is a very important tax credit, but if we are going to have it, we need to pay for it.

The problem with the first-degree amendment is it is not paid for and it is going to jeopardize the underlying bill. So, yes, we do need to extend this tax permanently but not on this bill and not tonight, and we need to find a way to pay for it. That is why I am offering this amendment as a second-degree.

I ask all of us who are supporting it to vote for the second-degree amendment.

Mr. President, pursuant to section 904 of the Congressional Budget Act, I move to waive the applicable sections of the act for the purposes of the pending amendment.

I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Massachusetts. I begin by saying that his leadership has been on point and so focused for the last 2 years in trying to help lead his committee, with the support and cooperation of his ranking member, the Senator from Maine, Ms. Snowe, to move Congress to adopt this important legislation.

The Senator is absolutely correct that the SBA was one of several important Federal agencies that was caught flatfooted when Katrina and Rita hit the gulf coast and subsequently when the Federal levee system failed in multiple places, as the Senator from Massachusetts knows because he has walked through neighborhood after neighborhood, mile after mile, having visited with business owners and homeowners who lost everything they had, that took them generations to build. The Senator knows very well that this particular administration was anemic and very slow in its response. In fact, the gentleman leading it at the time was not the appropriate leader. To the President's credit, they have nominated and we have confirmed a new leader for the SBA.

I think the Senator from Massachusetts will agree with me that the Director, Steve Preston, is making some very good and fundamental changes. But there is just so much this administrator can do without Congress doing its job to give him the tools he needs to get the job done.

Why this legislation is being held up by the Republican side I am not sure. It is very disappointing, not just to me but to the millions of people who are affected and are still struggling, having lost everything or having at risk everything they own because we cannot seem to get legislation passed because of obstructionist tactics.

I repeat, this bill is supported not only by the Chair but by the ranking member. In addition, both Senators from Louisiana are cosponsoring this bill, Senator Bill Nelson from Florida, who has experienced the disasters of hurricanes in Florida, and Senator Johnny Isakson from Georgia, who also has experienced disasters. This is not a Democratic bill being rammed down the Republican side of the aisle. This is a good Government efficiency, effective measure to try to reform the SBA. But because of bureaucratic delays, because of the inadequacy of the current law, we were not able to help the 18,000 businesses that were destroyed, many of them--I would say 97 percent of them--small businesses.

The Senator from Massachusetts and I together visited a cleaning business for hospital bedding and other items that was--I cannot think of the name of the business, but the Senator from Massachusetts and I walked throughout New Orleans East. This is one of hundreds of businesses that not only found themselves flooded, but when the waters receded, the hospitals they had serviced had closed. So basically through no fault of their own, they were struggling as well. This legislation will help them.

This is not only important to the gulf coast and to the 18,000 businesses, many of them small businesses, that need help and assistance, but it is for the future. The Senator from Massachusetts is saying let this Federal Government do better. If we believe business is important, and we do, and if we believe small business is important, and it is, then let's at least have our response honed and tuned to the point where if, God forbid, another huge disaster happens, we will be much more prepared than we were last time.

Our constituents depend on us to be responsive. I say to the Senator from Massachusetts, that is exactly what this bill does. I again thank him for his leadership and express truly my outrage that this is being held up for no apparent good reason at the expense of thousands of business owners who are looking to us for help and support.

May I add something, if the Senator will yield?

We have all learned many things since this disaster happened, and one of the things we have learned, I guess rather painfully, is that it is not only the geographic area that is struck by the high wind, the high waters or the flood waters that is impacted by a catastrophic disaster, but it is also the perimeter of the area, the towns that absorb people fleeing to higher ground and trying to settle where they can find work and schools for their children, and businesses that might not have been directly impacted but have lost half or 75 percent of their customer base.

Right now, without Senator Kerry's bill, there is virtually no authorization on the Federal books to allow loans to be made to these kinds of businesses. So because we don't have that authorization, we are, right now, basically making the disaster worse. I hope people can understand this. We, by our inaction, by our hardheadedness--and it is not me, although I can be hardheaded but not on this issue--because of some leadership decision on the Republican side, we are literally, right now, making this matter worse. Businesses are continuing to go out of business; businesses that didn't have a drop of water, businesses that didn't have one shingle let loose from the high wind continue to file bankruptcy and put up out-of-business signs because there is no provision to allow low-interest loans to them if they weren't directly impacted. Unfortunately, they are directly impacted in terms of loss of customers, et cetera.

In addition, it is going to bring in the private sector. We heard a lot from the other side about Government can't do everything; let the private sector be engaged. Well, your bill allows for more private- sector involvement; does it not? It allows the banks that know these small businesses to be a part of helping them. This is what the business community wants, this is what the banks want, and this is what we recognized was a problem initially.

Yet we are being blocked, I understand, by the Senator from Oklahoma, who has not made his specific objections clear to us. So I hope they can be made clear, and if we can fix it, fine. If not, then the leadership on the Republican side, I would say to the Senator from Massachusetts, has a decision: Do they want to be part of the nonsensical opposition by a Senator who is in Oklahoma, who is never going to have a hurricane or do they want to stand with the people in America from New York to Texas who are threatened every 9 months with a hurricane season.

That is the decision the Republican leader from Kentucky is going to have to answer. Is he going to support a bipartisan piece of legislation that aids businesses that are literally threatened from New York to Texas or is he going to stand with some nonsensical opposition coming from the middle of the country that will never be hit by a hurricane.

I hate to be so pointed about it, but that is basically where it is. This is 2 years after the storm. This isn't 2 months or 6 months after. This is a bill that Senator Snowe herself started and Senator Kerry is finishing, and the people of the gulf coast are still waiting. So this is a real leadership question, and I hope that as the day goes by and the week goes by, we can make some progress, and I thank the Senator for his leadership.