Floor Statements

Mr. President, I would like to announce for the information of the Senate and the public that a hearing has been scheduled before the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.

The hearing will be held on Thursday, June 1st, 2006 at 9:30 a.m. in the Grand Junction City Hall Auditorium located at 250 North 5th Street in Grand Junction, Colorado.

The purpose of the hearing is to receive testimony on the implementation of the oil shale provisions of the Energy Policy Act of 2005.

Because of the limited time available for the hearing, witnesses may testify by invitation only. However, those wishing to submit written testimony for the hearing record should send two copies of their testimony to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, United States Senate, Washington, DC 20510-6150.

For further information, please contact Dick Bouts at 202-224-7545 or Sara Zecher at 202-224-8276.

Mr. President, I understand the time is now reserved for the Senator from New Mexico to speak on the pending matter; is that correct?

Mr. President, I rise today to speak about border security and the immigration reform bill. I have some very strong views on this issue because my home State shares its southern border with Mexico. Every day I hear stories about the problems of lax border security, a cause for concern among my constituents. They tell me directly the problems this causes. I am convinced we must do more to secure our borders than we have been doing. However, I am very pleased we are making headway. I hope, in the not too distant future, the American people will see the fruits of that headway. I hope I can explain in my time allotted how we are going to do more and what we are doing.

Border security and immigration enforcement should be top priorities in our debate this week. Whether they are top priorities will influence my vote on any border and immigration package considered in the Senate.

The first step to secure our border is more border security funding. I believe Senator Judd Gregg, as chairman of the Appropriations Subcommittee on Homeland Security, understands this. Sometimes it has been difficult to let the American people hear what is going on, what he is doing in his subcommittee, what the Senate is doing when it follows his lead, and what happens when we finish work with the House on the bills that start out in his committee.

He helped us provide $635 million for border security in fiscal year 2005 in an emergency supplemental appropriations bill. With his efforts, we provided more than $9 billion for border security and immigration enforcement in the fiscal year 2006 Homeland Security appropriations bill. He worked to include $1.9 billion for border security in the Senate fiscal year 2006 emergency supplemental appropriations bill. Add that up, and one can understand that Congress is finally responding to the gigantic needs of making our international borders secure.

The fiscal year 2006 emergency supplemental funding I have alluded to includes such items as $100 million for sensors and surveillance technology; $120 million for new Border Patrol stations, checkpoints, and vehicle barriers; $80 million for Border Patrol vehicles; and $790 million for border security helicopters and other air assets. Believe it or not, until recently, while we have talked a great deal about the Border Patrol and what they must do, they had helicopters from the Vietnam era. We have finally decided to buy them a new fleet of helicopters. After all these years of talking, we are finally doing something. Also, we included $50 million for an upgraded CBP communications system.

Many Americans must be wondering, what have we been doing all these years in all these appropriations bills when we have talked so much? The truth is, we have done little. But we are doing more now.

Second, we need more border security provisions as part of border security and immigration reform legislation. Many security provisions in the current border and immigration bill are good, but they are not enough. I have filed three amendments to the bill which I will discuss shortly. I understand and think once Senators have heard these amendments and the managers have had a chance to review them, they may be accepted.

Lastly, we should try to address what to do with the millions of undocumented workers in America today. In March, I joined with a bipartisan group of Senators to support what has been called the Hagel- Martinez compromise. I supported the compromise in hopes that it would allow a border security and immigration bill to move forward. I also supported it because, as I understand the bill, anyone who came to the United States illegally after January 7 of 2004 receives no special treatment; that is, those hundreds of thousands of people who have been running to the border or who have been taken to the border, who have purchased their way to the border in the last few months, will receive no special treatment. It is my understanding these individuals--that is, post-January 7, 2004 illegal entrants--would be subject to removal and deportation under existing immigration laws. The record needs to clearly reflect that.

That means one group of people that Americans are wondering about will not receive any special privileges under this bill. They are sort of the Johnny-come-latelies who have run to the border thinking if they can get here quick enough they will be included in our immigration reform efforts. But it is my understanding that these individuals would be subject to removal and deportation under existing immigration law. I repeat that because I believe a number of Senators, on this side of the aisle at least, are indicating their support for this bill because they believe that is in the bill.

As the most senior Senator representing a southwest border State, I would like to now discuss the amendments I have filed, which I believe make eminent sense and should be accepted by the Senate.

The first is an amendment regarding Mexican cooperation. This amendment will require the Secretary of State to cooperate with Mexico to improve border security and to reduce border crime. The amendment is the result of a lot of hard work and is cosponsored by the distinguished Senator from Connecticut, Mr. Dodd, who is very familiar with the border problems and the problems with Mexico.

I would like to read that amendment because a reading of it does more than

I could do by trying to summarize it. This amendment has as its purpose:

To improve coordination between the United States and

Mexico regarding border security, criminal activity, circular

migration, and for other purposes.

(a) Cooperation Regarding Border Security.--The Secretary

of State, in cooperation with the Secretary of Homeland

Security and representatives of Federal, State, and local law

enforcement agencies that are involved in border security and

immigration enforcement efforts, shall work with the

appropriate officials from the Government of Mexico to

improve coordination between the United States and Mexico

regarding--

(1) improved border security along the international border

between the United States and Mexico;

(2) the reduction of human trafficking and smuggling

between the United States and Mexico;

(3) the reduction of drug traffic and smuggling between the

United States and Mexico;

(4) the reduction of gang membership in the United States

and Mexico;

(5) the reduction of violence against women in the United

States and Mexico; and

(6) the reduction of other violence and criminal activity.

Next:

(b) Cooperation Regarding Education On Immigration Laws.--

The Secretary of State, in cooperation with other appropriate

Federal officials, shall work with the appropriate officials

from the Government of Mexico to carry out activities to

educate citizens and nationals of Mexico regarding

eligibility for status as a non-immigrant under United

States' law to ensure that the citizens and nationals are not

exploited while working in the United States.

(c) Cooperation Regarding Circular Migration.--The

Secretary of State, in cooperation with the Secretary of

Labor and other appropriate Federal officials, shall work

with the appropriate officials from the Government of Mexico

to improve coordination between the United States and Mexico

to encourage circular migration, including assisting in the

development of economic opportunities and providing job

training for citizens and nationals in Mexico.

(d) Annual Report.--Not later than 180 days after the date

of enactment of this Act, and annually thereafter, the

Secretary of State shall submit to Congress a report on the

actions taken by the United States and Mexico under this

section.

I believe this amendment is absolutely necessary, and I am very pleased Senator Dodd has joined me in supporting the amendment. I hope this will become part of this bill. My amendment will require an annual report which I think will push the leaders of Mexico to do the kinds of things that Americans expect these two countries to do. If we do not work together, we will have chaos. But with an agreement to work together on these issues, annually the people of both countries should know what is going on in terms of cooperation in the areas I have just spoken to.

Now, sources estimate that as much as 85 percent of apprehended illegal immigrants are from Mexico. So we must work with Mexico to address the security of our southern border and the number of illegal entries from Mexico.

My amendment calls on the Secretary of State to work with Mexico to improve border security; reduce human smuggling, drug trafficking, violence against women, and to inform Mexican nationals of the benefits of U.S. immigration. I have just read the amendment in its entirety on each of these subjects.

Mexico must do its part in this initiative.

On Sunday, there was an Associated Press article titled ``Mexico Works to Bar Non-Natives from Jobs.'' That article says--and I quote--

Even as Mexico presses the United States to grant

unrestricted citizenship to millions of undocumented Mexican

migrants, its officials at times calling U.S. policies

``xenophobic,'' Mexico places daunting limitations on anyone

born outside its territory.

Mexico expects us to have much more humane, much more liberal, and much more constructive immigration policies in our Nation than it is willing to implement within its own borders. Can you imagine the uproar if we were to try to make our immigration policies anything like the policies of Mexico?

In addition to changing its own immigration policies, Mexico has some other responsibilities, in my view. How many of its citizens, seeking economic sustenance, does Mexico expect us to take before it reforms its own economic policies?

Estimates released over the weekend reveal that about 10 percent of the Mexican workforce now works not in its homeland but in the United States, and that 10 percent provides about 15 percent of the Mexican national income.

We have an unusual, perhaps unique, situation along the border between the United States and Mexico. On no other border of this length in the world does such a disparity exist between the economic prowess and programs of the two nations sharing such a border.

Here is America, the leading economy in the world, bordered for almost 2,000 miles by a nation that persists in economic policies that have failed to provide sufficient jobs or salaries for much of its people. No similar situation exists anywhere on the globe. So we have a unique challenge that is attendant to this unique situation.

That challenge needs to be met not just by the United States, but by Mexico, too. They must join us in an effort to solve this challenge. Economic reform, greater emphasis on the private economy, and modernizing more of its facilities remain great challenges that Mexico must face.

We are forced to tighten our borders not because we are a mean nation, but because the economy to the south of us is driving millions to our country's economy. I believe my amendment will provide for more cooperation between the United States and Mexico. As a result, I believe our border could be more secure.

I have another amendment that has to do with Federal judges. I note the distinguished Senator from California, Mrs. Feinstein, is on the Senate floor, and her state is impacted by this amendment. It has to do with the inadequate number of Federal judges that is going to result when this new law is put into effect. The U.S. district courts in the southwest are overly burdened with immigration caseloads. We must have additional judges, as recommended by the 2005 Judicial Conference.

Let me explain. While immigration cases typically go before immigration judges, repeat offenders can be charged with felonies and tried in Federal district court. As a result, four of our district courts have immigration caseloads that total more than 50 percent of their total criminal filings.

The fiscal year 2004 immigration caseload for the Southern District of Texas totaled 3,668 filings. This is more than 65 percent of the district's 5,599 criminal filings.

The District Court for Arizona had 2,404 immigration filings, more than 59 percent of the district's 4,007 criminal filings.

The Southern District of California had 2,206 immigration filings. That is more than 64 percent of its total 3,400 criminal filings.

The district court for my home State of New Mexico had 1,502 immigration filings. That is more than 60 percent of its total of 2,497 criminal filings.

I am glad we are improving border security and interior enforcement with this legislation. But, obviously, we must also provide the adequate machinery to go along with that, and that means enough Federal judges to handle the caseload that will be generated.

In short, if we put more Border Patrol agents and immigration personnel on the southwestern border, we need to provide more resources to the other Federal agencies that also deal with immigration.

The immigration bill recognizes this to some degree by calling for more DHS and DOJ attorneys, public defenders, and immigration judges. But we must add new district judges necessary to hear the cases of repeat immigration law violators. Failure to do that means we will create even more of an unworkable situation that already involves mass arraignments and sentencings.

As we work on this bill to provide more resources to the Departments of Homeland Security and Justice, we must also address related needs, so I am proud to offer this amendment with Senators Kyl, Cornyn, and Hutchison.

I also address a related need for more deputy marshals in an amendment. We have a dramatic shortage of deputy marshals to handle the increased caseload that will be associated with repeat immigration law violators. My third amendment, offered with Senators Bingaman, Kyl, Cornyn, and Hutchison, awaits consideration. It adds 50 new deputy marshals each year for 5 years.

Lastly, I would just comment on a very important part of the bill, the land port-of-entry improvements sections. Those provisions are based on

legislation I authored in the 108th Congress with Senator Dorgan and which 13 other border state Senators cosponsored.

These provisions address the needs of our land ports of entry.

I am grateful that the managers of the bill have adopted that legislation as part of their bill. These sections are critical because neither American border has undergone a comprehensive infrastructure overhaul since Senator DeConcini, a Senator from Arizona, and I put forth an effort to modernize the southwest border 20 years ago. We have done nothing comprehensive since 1986 on either the north or south international border. A great deal has changed since then, including the passage of legislation to improve security of our airports and seaports, following September 11, 2001.

I appreciate Chairman Specter including my legislation to identify port-of-entry infrastructure and technology improvement projects, prioritize and implement these projects based on need, require a plan to assess the vulnerabilities of each of the ports of entry located on the northern and southern borders of our great Nation, implement a technology demonstration program to evaluate new ports of entry technologies, and provide training necessary for personnel who must implement these new technologies. I believe these provisions are essential for border security. I am glad and appreciative that they are in the bill.

Mr. President, we must secure our international borders. I believe with Chairman Gregg's leadership on the Homeland Security Appropriations Subcommittee and strong border security provisions in this bill, we can do just that.

I thank the Chair for the time granted me to express my views and to the Senators who have listened. Certainly, I hope what I have said will have an impact to some extent on this bill and that the amendments that have not yet been adopted, of which I have spoken, will, before we come to final closure, become part of this great effort to secure our borders, provide for an orderly transition for those who have come to our country illegally, and create orderly rules for future guest workers. This is important so the relationships between America and other countries can move forward, and so our country, which is going to need immigrants in the future, can look forward to that in an orderly manner based on a border that is secure and an agreement between the U.S. and Mexico that is going to be carried out and rendered operative.

I yield the floor.

Amendment No. 4087

What is the amendment?

Mr. President, I would like to announce for the information of the Senate and the public that a hearing has been scheduled before the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.

The hearing will be held on Thursday, May 25, 2006, at 10 a.m. in room SD-366 of the Dirksen Building.

The purpose of the hearing is to receive testimony regarding the outlook for growth of coal fired electric generation and whether sufficient supplies of coal will be available to supply electric generators on a timely basis both in the near term and in the future.

Because of the limited time available for the hearing, witnesses may testify by invitation only. However, those wishing to submit written testimony for the hearing record should send two copies of their testimony to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, United States Senate, Washington, DC 20510-6150.

For further information, please contact Kellie Donnelly, John Peschke, or Shannon Ewan.

Subcommittee on Public Lands and Forests

Mr. President, I commemorate the hard work and sacrifices made daily by law enforcement officers all across our great land. Many have lost their lives in the line of duty so that our families and communities may remain safe. We must never forget those who have given their lives to protect us all.

The annual celebration of Peace Officers Memorial Day and National Police Week during the calendar week has its roots in Public Law 87- 726, which was signed into law on October 1, 1962 by President John F. Kennedy. Public Law 87-726 designated this day and week as a time for ``recognition of the service given by the men and women who, night and day, stand guard in our midst to protect us through enforcement of our laws.'' This law was later amended during the 103rd Congress as part of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act in 1994 to order the United States flag on all Government buildings displayed at half-staff on May 15.

Since the turn of the last century, more than 60 law enforcement officers have been killed in the line of duty in New Mexico. This year, among other activities, law enforcement officers from around the country honored the lives of three New Mexico police officers whose names were recently added to the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial in Washington, D.C. One occurred a very long time ago, and the two others just last year.

Officer Michael R. King and Officer Richard W. Smith, Jr., both of the Albuquerque Police Department, are two of the three officers being honored this year. Their deaths occurred on a day that has become ingrained in the hearts of most New Mexicans as one of the bloodiest and most tragic in recent times. Officers King and Smith, longtime veterans of the Albuquerque Police Department, were responding to a call on August 20, 2005 ordering the pickup of a mental health patient from Kaseman Hospital. When they arrived at the scene, Officers King and Smith had no way of knowing that the subject of their call, John Hyde would be implicated in the shooting deaths of three people earlier that day. During the pickup Officers King and Smith were gunned down in the street before their murderer fled on a motorcycle. It took a force of approximately 300 of their fellow officers to chase down and finally apprehend the man responsible for the deaths of these brave and respected police officers.

The other officer honored this year was gunned down in Hope, New Mexico approximately 108 years ago. At the time, Eddy County Deputy Sheriff Bud Johnson had traveled to Hope in order to serve a warrant on one L.E. Pratt in regard to an infraction over water control. According to the Eddy County Sheriff's Department, Pratt shot and killed Bud Johnson with a shotgun when he was notified of the warrant. Deputy Sheriff Johnson died immediately.

Deputy Johnson's death shows us that the dangers of police work have been present throughout the long history of our Nation. All too recently, citizens of New Mexico mourned the loss of Deputy James McGrane, Jr., who was killed on March 22, 2006 during a traffic stop in Tijeras, NM. While we remember those who have lost their lives, we also take solace in the fact that many others have been able to survive the dangers of duty. Officer John Garcia, Officer Josh Otzenberger, Sergeant Carol Oleksak, Deputy Shaun Sanchez, and Sheriff's pilot Chris Holland were all shot during the past two years while protecting our communities. We are thankful that most of them survived these close brushes with death and were able to return to duty.

We should remember their dedication to protect and serve, and the tragic price they paid for that devotion. We must also remember the families of all fallen officers and the sacrifices they have incurred because of a deep-seated commitment to duty and public service. All of us from New Mexico owe a debt of gratitude to each and every officer who has lost their lives in the line of duty. To all who have paid the ultimate price and to those who continue to serve, may we forever be grateful and never take for granted what you do. You have my utmost admiration.

Mr. President, I would like to announce for the information of the Senate and the public that a hearing has been scheduled before the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.

The hearing will be held on May 22, 2006 at 2:30 p.m. in room SD-366 of the Dirksen Building.

The purpose of the hearing is to receive testimony regarding nuclear power provisions contained in the Energy Policy Act of 2005.

Because of the limited time available for the hearing, witnesses may testify by invitation only. However, those wishing to submit written testimony for the hearing record should send two copies of their testimony to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, United States Senate, Washington, DC 20510-6150.

For further information, please contact Clint Williamson or Steve Waskiewicz.

committee on energy and natural resources

Mr. President, I would like to announce for the information of the Senate and the public that an oversight hearing has been scheduled before the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.

The hearing will be held on Tuesday, May 23, 2006 at 10 a.m. in room SD-366 of the Dirksen Building.

The purpose of the hearing is to receive testimony on the National Research Council report, Managing Construction and Infrastructure in the 21st Century Bureau of Reclamation and the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation Report, Managing for Excellence: An Action Plan for the 21st Century.

Because of the limited time available for the hearing, witnesses may testify by invitation only. However, those wishing to submit written testimony for the hearing record should send two copies of their testimony to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, United States Senate, Washington, DC 20510-6150.

For further Information, please contact Nate Gentry or Steve Waskiewicz.

Mr. President, I rise today to support affordable, adequate and accessible health insurance. We have a bill before the Senate, S. 1955, the Health Insurance Marketplace Modernization Affordability Act of 2006. Chairman Enzi has worked very hard on this bill for many months now and I believe that it will help small business people who are struggling to afford health insurance for themselves, their employees, and their families. I hope that the Senate will pass this bill because the time for Congress to take action on this issue is long overdue.

Most people in the U.S. who have health insurance obtain it through their employer or through a family member's employer as a workplace benefit. Small employers however are far less likely than larger employers to provide health insurance to their workers. In my home state of New Mexico, I am embarrassed to say that almost 25 percent of the citizens do not have health care. This is the second highest rate of uninsured in the country. Furthermore, there are approximately 143,909 small businesses in New Mexico, and of these small businesses, only about 37 percent of firms with fewer than 50 employees offer health insurance. For much smaller firms with five or less employees, the numbers are

even more staggering; fewer than 50 percent of firms offer health insurance. This is unacceptable. Working people deserve better.

The current realities of the insurance market make it much more difficult for a small business people to secure quality, affordable insurance. I believe that by allowing small businesses to band together, as this bill does, that economy of scale will be created and small businesses will be able to leverage their larger purchasing power to lower their health care costs. This would hopefully enable more employers to afford such coverage and ideally reduce the number of small firm workers without health insurance. It is a real first step to providing more access in a market where small business is currently struggling.

Over the past few weeks, I have heard from many advocacy groups who are concerned with the way in which this bill addresses State benefit mandates. I understand these concerns and agree that widely accepted critical protections for patients must be preserved in any legislation the Senate ultimately adopts. That is why I have joined together with Senators Snowe, Byrd, and Talent to offer an amendment that would require small business health plans to comply with the benefits adopted by a majority of States. This amendment says if 26 States mandate it, than a small business health plan must comply with it. This amendment is a good and workable compromise that alleviates one of my primary concerns with the small business health plan bill. This compromise will help ensure that millions of Americans will continue to receive health care coverage for most areas, including mammograms, diabetes care and mental illnesses. It is vitally important that we pass a bill that will bring health insurance to employees of small businesses who currently are not covered without consequently diminishing coverage already offered in other areas. This amendment should make it easier for us to do so.

It is time for the Senate to take action on this issue. The House of Representatives has passed this type of legislation multiple times. The American people are tired of excuses and they are tired of the status quo. They want to see change for the better. I again thank my colleague, Senator Enzi, the chairman of the HELP Committee for his hard work on this important issue. I have long said that something needs to be done to address the problem of the uninsured, and I have also said that I support the idea of legislation aimed at helping small business. I sincerely hope that the Senate will pass a bill that will allow small businesses to afford insurance for their employees.

Mr. President, I would like to announce for the information of the Senate and the public that a hearing has been scheduled before the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.

The hearing will be held on May 15, 2006 at 2:30 p.m. in room SD-366 of the Dirksen Building.

The purpose of the hearing is to receive testimony relating to implementation of the Energy Policy Act of 2005's electricity reliability provisions.

Because of the limited time available for the hearing, witnesses may testify by invitation only. However, those wishing to submit written testimony for the hearing record should send two copies of their testimony to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, United States Senate, Washington, DC 20510-6150.

For further information, please contact Kellie Donnelly at (202) 224- 9360 or Shannon Ewan at (202) 224-7555.

Committee on Energy and Natural Resources

Mr. President, I would like to announce for the information of the Senate and the public that a hearing has been rescheduled before the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.

The hearing originally scheduled for Thursday, May 11, 2006 at 10 a.m. in Room SD-366 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building will now be held on Tuesday, May 16, 2006 at 10 a.m. in the same room.

The purpose of the hearing is to receive testimony regarding the status of the Yucca Mountain Repository Project within the Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management at the Department of Energy.

Because of the limited time available for the hearing, witnesses may testify by invitation only. However, those wishing to submit written testimony for the hearing record should send two copies of their testimony to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, United States Senate, Washington, DC 20510-6150.

For further information, please contact Clint Williamson at (202) 224-7556 or Steve Waskiewicz at (202) 228-6195.

Mr. President, I rise today to join Senator Nelson of Nebraska to introduce the National Integrated Drought Information System Act of 2006. I would like to thank Senator Ben Nelson; his strong leadership and hard work on this bill has been key in bringing us forward on this important issue.

Drought is a unique emergency situation; it creeps in unlike other abrupt weather disasters. Without a national drought policy we constantly live not knowing what the next year will bring. Unfortunately, when we find ourselves facing a drought, towns often scramble to drill new water wells, fires often sweep across bone dry forests and farmers and ranchers are forced to watch their way of life blow away with the dust. This year, my home State of New Mexico is facing a very real threat of devastating drought, as our snow pack was far below average.

We must be vigilant and prepare ourselves for quick action as this next drought cycle begins. Better planning on our part could limit some of the damage felt by drought. I submit that this bill is the exact tool needed for facilitating better planning.

This Act establishes the National Integrated Drought Information System within the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to improve national drought preparedness, information collection and analysis. This information system collects and integrates information on key indicators of drought in order to make usable, reliable and timely drought forecasts and assessments. This information will be disseminated to federal, state, tribal and local decision makers in order to better prepare them for the effects of drought.

The impacts of drought are also very costly. According to NOAA, there have been 12 different drought events since 1980 that resulted in damages and costs exceeding $1 billion each. In 2000, severe drought in the South-Central and Southeastern states caused losses to agriculture and related industries of over $4 billion. Western wildfires that year totaled over $2 billion in damages. The Eastern drought in 1999 led to $1 billion in losses. These are just a few of the statistics.

On April 18, 2006, the Texas Agriculture Experiment Station predicted a dramatic decrease in water flows and reservoir storage throughout New Mexico. Early predictions indicate that river water supply will be at 54 percent due primarily to receiving half our annual snow pack and above average temperatures in my state. Additionally, several of our reservoirs are at severely diminished capacity. Specifically, the Elephant Butte, El Vado and Caballo reservoirs will all be below 10 percent of capacity by Labor Day. Several New Mexico communities have already begun to institute water restrictions in preparation for what is predicted to be one of the worst years on record. As this drought persists, I want to ensure each New Mexican that I am committed to doing everything possible to make sure they have the tools and information they need to make the best decisions.

While drought affects the economic and environmental well-being of the entire nation, the United States has lacked a cohesive strategy for dealing with serious drought emergencies. As many of you know, the impact of drought emerges gradually rather than suddenly, as is the case with other natural disasters.

I am pleased to be following through on what I started in 1997. The bill that we are introducing today is the next step in implementing a national, cohesive drought policy. The bill recognizes that drought is a recurring phenomenon that causes serious economic and environmental loss and that a national drought policy is needed to ensure an integrated, coordinated strategy.

Mr. President, I rise today to join Senator Nelson of Nebraska to introduce the National Integrated Drought Information System Act of 2006. I would like to thank Senator Ben Nelson; his strong leadership and hard work on this bill has been key in bringing us forward on this important issue.

Drought is a unique emergency situation; it creeps in unlike other abrupt weather disasters. Without a national drought policy we constantly live not knowing what the next year will bring. Unfortunately, when we find ourselves facing a drought, towns often scramble to drill new water wells, fires often sweep across bone dry forests and farmers and ranchers are forced to watch their way of life blow away with the dust. This year, my home State of New Mexico is facing a very real threat of devastating drought, as our snow pack was far below average.

We must be vigilant and prepare ourselves for quick action as this next drought cycle begins. Better planning on our part could limit some of the damage felt by drought. I submit that this bill is the exact tool needed for facilitating better planning.

This Act establishes the National Integrated Drought Information System within the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to improve national drought preparedness, information collection and analysis. This information system collects and integrates information on key indicators of drought in order to make usable, reliable and timely drought forecasts and assessments. This information will be disseminated to federal, state, tribal and local decision makers in order to better prepare them for the effects of drought.

The impacts of drought are also very costly. According to NOAA, there have been 12 different drought events since 1980 that resulted in damages and costs exceeding $1 billion each. In 2000, severe drought in the South-Central and Southeastern states caused losses to agriculture and related industries of over $4 billion. Western wildfires that year totaled over $2 billion in damages. The Eastern drought in 1999 led to $1 billion in losses. These are just a few of the statistics.

On April 18, 2006, the Texas Agriculture Experiment Station predicted a dramatic decrease in water flows and reservoir storage throughout New Mexico. Early predictions indicate that river water supply will be at 54 percent due primarily to receiving half our annual snow pack and above average temperatures in my state. Additionally, several of our reservoirs are at severely diminished capacity. Specifically, the Elephant Butte, El Vado and Caballo reservoirs will all be below 10 percent of capacity by Labor Day. Several New Mexico communities have already begun to institute water restrictions in preparation for what is predicted to be one of the worst years on record. As this drought persists, I want to ensure each New Mexican that I am committed to doing everything possible to make sure they have the tools and information they need to make the best decisions.

While drought affects the economic and environmental well-being of the entire nation, the United States has lacked a cohesive strategy for dealing with serious drought emergencies. As many of you know, the impact of drought emerges gradually rather than suddenly, as is the case with other natural disasters.

I am pleased to be following through on what I started in 1997. The bill that we are introducing today is the next step in implementing a national, cohesive drought policy. The bill recognizes that drought is a recurring phenomenon that causes serious economic and environmental loss and that a national drought policy is needed to ensure an integrated, coordinated strategy.

Mr. President, I would like to announce for the information of the Senate and the public that an oversight hearing has been scheduled before the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.

The hearing will be held on Thursday, May 11, 2006 at 10 a.m. in room SD-366 of the Dirksen Building.

The purpose of the hearing is to receive testimony regarding the status of the Yucca Mountain Repository Project within the Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management at the Department of Energy.

Because of the limited time available for the hearing, witnesses may testify by invitation only. However, those wishing to submit written testimony for the hearing record should send two copies of their testimony to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, United States Senate, Washington, DC 20510-6150.

For further information, please contact Clint Williamson at (202) 224-7556 or Steve Waskiewicz at (202) 228-6195.

As the Senate is aware, the Southwestem United States has been devastated by a severe drought which has resulted in numerous deleterious effects to that part of the country.

New Mexico's neighbor to the east, Texas, has lost 5,000 head of cattle, 5,500 miles of fence, and 4.9 million acres have burned due to recent wildfires. Severe drought also exists in New Mexico, which is currently facing one of its worst droughts in the past 125 years. It is anticipated that great hardship will result in New Mexico as a result of this drought. These conditions require emergency measures be undertaken in both States.

Although the Appropriations Committee is silent on the intent of the appropriation to the Emergency Conservation Program, ECP, within the Department of Agriculture, it is my understanding that of the $17 million made available to the ECP in this legislation, $12 million is to be provided to the State of Texas and $5 million is to be provided to the State of New Mexico. The amendment did not originally include ECP funding, so I want to especially thank Senator Hutchison for her leadership in requesting that these funds be included for ECP.

I thank the distinguished Senator from Utah, Mr. Bennett, and the distinguished Senator from Texas, Mrs. Hutchison for their consideration and explanation of this important matter.

Mr. President, I have an amendment I am going to introduce on the pending bill. I will not speak longer than 5 minutes on the amendment.

Madam President.

The PRESIDING OFFICER (Ms. Murkowski.) The Senator from New Mexico is recognized.

I have a parliamentary inquiry.

Is my understanding correct that we are now on the supplemental appropriations bill?

Madam President, I note the presence now of the chairman of the Appropriations Committee.

I will take as little time as possible, and I know of no reason for this amendment to take a lot of time, but I want to make sure everybody knows it is pending, and that is why I put it here, and I plan to offer it now. It is a very important amendment with reference to the reconstruction of the levee system.

I will quickly show three photographs.

One, the photo that is up here right now shows the floodwall breach at the 17th Street Canal. As you can see, the storm surge pushed the floodwall out of alignment. The corresponding photograph shows repairs to the 17th Street Canal floodwall as of February 2006.

This one shows the repairs and, believe it or not, that is what has been done already, Mr. Chairman, in the short time since the disastrous break, and it looks like that now.

Third, this photo shows the failure of an I-wall section of the levee. The President has requested that we replace I-walls with stronger and more substantial T-walls. These I-walls fell down all over parts of the area, letting water come through as they fell down, and became more like waterways rather than water containers.

That is what we are replacing, and we are replacing them with what is shown in a fourth photograph I have here, which shows work taking place elsewhere in the area. The amendment I am submitting in behalf of the President is going to authorize this kind of construction occur in an area described in the amendment.

This is the construction of T-walls along the inner harbor navigation canal. The foreground shows the reinforcing steel that goes into these T-wall sections driven into the ground at an angle. The T-wall is then cast in place on top of the pilings. With this, we will have as strong a containment as can be expected and can be done, according to the experts.

We will take this photograph down because we don't need to have this up while speeches are given.

Amendment No. 3769

Madam President, I call up amendment No. 3769 and ask that it be considered immediately.

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

Madam President, the amendment has been made available to the other side.

The President of the United States, after consultation with the man he placed in charge of this program, the project of renewal, and with the Corps of Engineers' leadership, has asked us for $1.46 billion. An additional $2.2 billion is requested in this amendment, and that makes the total $3.7 billion. Previous supplemental funds provided last year enable restoration of current levee systems to the authorized strength as well as to complete the system as originally envisioned. The proposed supplemental funding takes us to the next logical step in this rebuilding process. The requested funding will provide for the improvement to the obvious weaknesses in the existing levee system. These include, $1.6 billion for replacement of I-wall design that failed during Hurricane Katrina with better designed, stronger flood walls; $530 million for temporary closure of the interior drainage canal, with permanent closure and integrated pumping stations; $250 million for storm-proofing of interior pump stations; $170 million for armoring critical elements of the levee system; and $350 million for navigable closures to improve protection of the inner harbor navigation canal.

The requested funding will also allow for increased protection from storm surges. These improvements include $215 million to incorporate the West Bank levee in Plaquemines Parish into the Federal levee. That will incorporate it into the levee system and upgrade the levee to the Federal standards; $100 million for restoration of coastal wetlands to reduce the risk of storm surge. And $493 million for increasing the levee heights of Lake Pontchartrain and Vicinity project and the West Bank and Vicinity project. These levee improvements will be a cost shared with the State of Louisiana, and everybody understands that. Based on the vulnerabilities demonstrated to our Nation's infrastructure by Katrina, $20 million is included for an inventory and assessment of Federal and non-Federal flood and storm damage projects nationwide. Currently, no reliable information is available to determine reliable flood risks across the country; $25 million is included for studies of the Louisiana coastal area to determine how best to provide long-term comprehensive restoration of coastal wetlands, to reduce storm surge in the New Orleans and south Louisiana areas.

In addition to the President's request, we have also provided additional funding for other emergency and disaster-related recovery efforts in California, Hawaii, Pennsylvania, and Texas. All of the funding proposed above the President's request is provided subject to a specific request from the President designating it as an emergency. Without an official Presidential request, these funds cannot be used.

In February 2006, the President submitted a request for supplemental appropriations for the Army Corps of Engineers totaling $1.46 billion. The funds will provide increased protection to obvious weaknesses in the New Orleans levee system and will improve storm proofing of interior pumping capabilities within the city to mitigate flooding.

Prior to Hurricane Katrina, FEMA had initiated a reevaluation of the 100-year flood plain in the New Orleans and other gulf coast areas. Post Katrina, the analysis was revised to include Katrina impacts. The revised 100-year flood plain maps show the existing levee system will not provide 100-year protection. These new flood plain maps will have a tremendous impact on where and how redevelopment of New Orleans can occur.

Additionally, the Corps has determined that roughly 36 miles of the 56 miles of I-walls that are part of the levee system protecting the greater New Orleans metro area should be replaced with more stable T- Walls or L-Walls as a result of the I-Wall failures during Hurricane Katrina.

Due to the need to bring some rationality and stability to the redevelopment of New Orleans, the administration submitted a revised request to provide 100-year level of protection to New Orleans proper. The request specifically excludes improvements to roughly 8 miles of I- Walls in lower Plaquemines Parish and increasing levee heights in lower Plaquemines Parish to provide 100-year level of protection.

Raising the height of the levees will improve the level of protection to New Orleans proper and allow for continued participation in the National Flood Insurance Program administered by FEMA.

On April 25, the administration requested an additional $2.2 billion for the following:

$1.6 billion for replacing I-walls with T-walls or L-Walls in New Orleans--roughly 30 miles. Replacing the I-walls with stronger T-Walls or L-Walls is necessary to improve the performance of the levee system due to the failure of the I-Walls during Katrina;

$495.3 million for the Federal share of raising the levee height in New Orleans to the newly determined 100-year flood plain level. The current cost share mandated by 33 U.S.C. 2213 requires a 35 percent local cost share;

$215 million for incorporating certain non-Federal levees by replacing or modifying these existing levees on the west bank of the Mississippi River in

Plaquemines Parish. Incorporating, replacing or modifying these non- Federal levees will provide a hurricane protection system commensurate with the level of protection authorized for the Federal New Orleans to Venice hurricane protection project in order to protect the evacuation route. This is an increase above the original February request of $155 million.

The President's original $1.46 billion request will provide critical storm protection to New Orleans and is still necessary despite the new request. The February request includes the following:

$530,000,000 is provided to modify the 17th Street, Orleans Avenue and London Avenue drainage canals, and install pumps and closure structures at or near the lakefront. The closure structures will help prevent storm surge from Lake Pontchartrain from entering the canals, and the new pumping stations will convey water from the canals to the lake;

$350,000,000 is provided to improve protection at the Inner Harbor Navigation Canal. The Corps will construct two closure structures, one at Seabrook where the IHNC enters Lake Pontchartrain and another on the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway;

$250,000,000 will be used for storm-proofing interior pump stations to ensure their operability during hurricanes, storms and high water events. Storm-proofing measures will provide more protection against hurricane force winds, storm surge and inundation so the drainage pumps and equipment can remain operable during hurricanes, storms, and high water events;

$170,000,000 shall be used for armoring critical elements of the New Orleans hurricane and storm damage reduction system. Armoring will be selectively used on levees and floodwalls at critical portions of the New Orleans hurricane and storm damage reduction system, including structural transition points such as pipeline crossings or junctures between levees and floodwalls; floodwalls susceptible to scour and erosion; and certain sections of levees exposed to extreme surge and wave wash;

$100 million to the Corps of Engineers to reduce the risk of storm damage to greater New Orleans by restoring the surrounding wetlands.

Since the President has revised his request following Appropriations Committee action, a floor amendment is necessary to accommodate the additional funding. The amendment will provide the following:

General Investigation--$48.75 million to support investigations of nationwide flood project inventory, Louisiana coastal area ecosystem restoration studies, Delta Islands and Levee studies in CA, developing a Delta risk management strategy in CA and for flood hazard and hydrologic investigations in flood prone areas of HI;

$595.3 million for levee raising and wetland restoration;

$3.1 billion for I-wall replacement; drainage canal improvements; storm proofing pumps; and armoring of levees.

The committee was aware the administration was considering a change in the request and tied to accommodate the President based on the original request. The committee provided $624 million in added funding, subject to request by the President. However, the new request significantly expands the scope of work and will require new language.

Amendments adopted in committee have been included as well--subject to the same terms and conditions.

As to Corps action to date, in the second supplemental $400 million for immediate disaster response to Katrina; $200 million for dredging operations and $200 million to repair existing projects.

In the third supplemental the President's request was $1.6 billion. Congress provided $2.89 billion--$1.3 billion above the request for recovery efforts from all fiscal year 2005 hurricanes. Of the amount provided in the third supplemental, about $1.9 billion went to LA.

In the fourth supplemental, $3.6 billion total:

In the first request, $1.46 billion for levee upgrades and flood mitigation activities in New Orleans;

In the second request, $2.2 billion to raise levee height, replace I- walls with T-walls.

To date, the administration and Congress have aggressively addressed hurricane damage to provide a higher level of protection for New Orleans and southeast Louisiana.

The Corps is working to restore hurricane protection for the start of hurricane season, on June 1, 2006.

The Corps is completing new sections of storm protection that were not in place when Katrina struck.

The latest request increases levee height in New Orleans to provide 100-year storm level protection, based on FEMA's new 100-year flood plain elevations, and improves flood mitigation capabilities within New Orleans to prevent severe flooding that occurred as a result of Katrina.

The Corps continues to evaluate existing structures to determine weak points and study and recommend necessary storm protection measures southeast Louisiana as provided in the third supplemental. The Corps should have initial recommendations by June 2006 with additional solutions provided over the next year. This information will be used to make informed decisions about future storm protection measures.

I believe we make our case. I do not think we have to talk more.

I yield the floor.