Floor Statements

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce a bill that will amend Title V of the Higher Education Act. Specifically, this bill will eliminate the 2-year wait-out period now required between applications by eligible Hispanic Serving Institutions for grants under Title V of the Higher Education Act.

Title V of the Higher Education Act is the primary vehicle used to target urgently needed funds to Hispanic Serving Institutions. Grants under this section can be used by higher education institutions to strengthen academic quality, institutional management, and financial stability. These grants are essential to institutions that provide and increase the number of educational opportunities available to Hispanic students.

Under current guidelines, in order to qualify for a grant under Title V, an institution must have at least 25 percent full time, Hispanic undergraduate student enrollment, and not less than 50 percent of its Hispanic student population must be low income. Title V grants are awarded for 5 years, with a minimum 2-year wait-out period after the termination of a grant period before eligibility to apply for another grant. During Fiscal Year 2002, 191 institutions were awarded grants.

Title V's 2-year wait-out period impedes Hispanic Serving Institutions' efforts to implement continuing programs with long range solutions to Hispanic higher education challenges. Eliminating the 2- year wait-out period will be of great importance to equipping our Nation's Hispanic Serving Institutions with the continuous funding that they need to best answer complex challenges. In 2000, Congress eliminated the wait-out period for Tribally Controlled Colleges and Universities, Alaskan Native and Native Hawaiian-serving institutions. Historically Black Colleges and Universities also do not have a wait- out period. It is now time for us to eliminate the wait-out period for Hispanic Serving Institutions.

Hispanic Serving Institutions provide the quality education essential to full participation in today's society. Many students in my home State of New Mexico have benefited from the academic excellence that Hispanic Serving Institutions seek to provide. Title V grants are intended to provide assistance to these less advantaged, developing institutions, and preventing these institutions from reapplying for grants for 2 successive years is obstructing their development.

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

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce a bill that will amend Title V of the Higher Education Act. Specifically, this bill will eliminate the 2-year wait-out period now required between applications by eligible Hispanic Serving Institutions for grants under Title V of the Higher Education Act.

Title V of the Higher Education Act is the primary vehicle used to target urgently needed funds to Hispanic Serving Institutions. Grants under this section can be used by higher education institutions to strengthen academic quality, institutional management, and financial stability. These grants are essential to institutions that provide and increase the number of educational opportunities available to Hispanic students.

Under current guidelines, in order to qualify for a grant under Title V, an institution must have at least 25 percent full time, Hispanic undergraduate student enrollment, and not less than 50 percent of its Hispanic student population must be low income. Title V grants are awarded for 5 years, with a minimum 2-year wait-out period after the termination of a grant period before eligibility to apply for another grant. During Fiscal Year 2002, 191 institutions were awarded grants.

Title V's 2-year wait-out period impedes Hispanic Serving Institutions' efforts to implement continuing programs with long range solutions to Hispanic higher education challenges. Eliminating the 2- year wait-out period will be of great importance to equipping our Nation's Hispanic Serving Institutions with the continuous funding that they need to best answer complex challenges. In 2000, Congress eliminated the wait-out period for Tribally Controlled Colleges and Universities, Alaskan Native and Native Hawaiian-serving institutions. Historically Black Colleges and Universities also do not have a wait- out period. It is now time for us to eliminate the wait-out period for Hispanic Serving Institutions.

Hispanic Serving Institutions provide the quality education essential to full participation in today's society. Many students in my home State of New Mexico have benefited from the academic excellence that Hispanic Serving Institutions seek to provide. Title V grants are intended to provide assistance to these less advantaged, developing institutions, and preventing these institutions from reapplying for grants for 2 successive years is obstructing their development.

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

Mr. President, I have a question.

Have we already agreed on a list or are people still able to add to it?

Do you have a list?

I ask unanimous consent that no other amendments be in order this evening on this bill.

I ask unanimous consent that there be no further amendments in order.

I renew my request.

I renew my request.

You have had it in mind most of the day. But, no, they have not. I am just kidding the Senator.

I have no objection.

I withdraw the request.

Mr. President, I rise today to thank my colleague from Iowa, Senator Grassley, for his leadership in providing much needed assistance to our Nation's hospitals and doctors. Specifically, I would like to thank him for his support of the disproportionate share hospitals--DSH--program, and for his support of fair and equitable Medicare reimbursement for America's doctors.

The Medicaid DSH program is an essential program that provides relief to many of our Nation's safety net hospitals; hospitals that experience financial difficulty because they treat larger numbers of the uninsured, low-income, and Medicaid patients. By raising payment rates to these hospitals, the DSH program helps to alleviate the disadvantaged financial situation suffered by many of these hospitals, and helps to ensure that all who need access to hospital care are able to receive that care.

Under current rules, a state's DSH payments may not exceed an allotment amount that is set in law for that state. In my home state of New Mexico, DSH payment adjustments are set at less than 1 percent. This 1 percent is far less than the national average of 8 percent, thus classifying my state as an ``extremely low DSH state.'' This lack of funding has seriously threatened the viability of many New Mexico safety net hospitals, and it puts at risk the care of some of our neediest citizens.

Today however, as a result of the work done by this body, Medicaid DSH allotments for States like New Mexico that have extremely low payments will be raised from 1 percent to 3 percent. This additional funding will help to ensure that our hospitals can continue to treat Medicaid and other low income or uninsured patients, and it will help relieve some of the pressure on our State's budget.

In addition to the assistance provided to the DSH program, this Congress has also taken a proactive approach to resolving another issue of great importance to me, fair and equitable Medicare reimbursement for America's doctors.

In many Medicare payment localities, current Federal policy undermines a doctor's ability to see Medicare patients by establishing disparity in reimbursement levels. Rural physicians are among the lowest Medicare dollar reimbursement recipients in the country, and I submit that this is the reason these areas cannot effectively recruit and retain their physicians.

This practice is unfair and it is discriminatory. There is not reason doctors in Albuquerque, NM should be paid less for their time than doctors in New York City. Doctors should be valued equally, irrespective of geography.

Today, Congress has agreed to fix many of these inequities, and has provided for a more balanced reimbursement formula. By increasing Medicare physician reimbursement, we will improve patient access to care and increase the ability of states to recruit and retain physicians. When Medicare physician reimbursement rates are raised, patients are the ultimate beneficiaries.

I have enjoyed working with my colleagues, including Senator Bingaman, on these very important issues.

Mr. President, I think the Senate now knows that S. 14, a comprehensive energy policy, is before the Senate. Obviously, we are going to have to take some time in this calendar of ours to get it done.

We always speak of a comprehensive energy bill and we tell the country we need one. We have one before us. There are many of us who think it is very good. We won't know how good the Senate thinks it is until we have had a chance to go through it and vote on it. I am very hopeful that those who have amendments will start thinking about coming down here to offer them.

The pending amendment is a major one--the so-called ethanol amendment. That is the bill which establishes a national goal of 5 billion barrels by the year 2012. It is a very important contribution to America's independence and a component of the bill, if adopted, when adopted, that will create diversification. It will be moving toward independence rather than dependence. Obviously, it has fantastic side effects for rural America, agricultural America, which those who have been working on it for years have already spoken to, and many more will.

Nonetheless, there are Senators who have concerns about the pending amendment. There are Senators who want to amend it. I urge and ask those Senators who have amendments to get them down here and let the Senate pass judgment on whether it wants the ethanol package that has been worked on for years, which is bipartisan and was introduced essentially by the majority and minority leaders, with cosponsors in ample numbers from both sides of the aisle as an indication of its support. I hope Senators who we understand have amendments will begin to bring them down so we can debate and vote on them.

I understand that at this point the distinguished Senator from Ohio, Mr. Voinovich, desires to speak in favor of the amendment. As manager of the bill, even though we are operating under no time agreements, I yield the floor at this point, assuming he will give his 15-minute address.

Mr. President, I ask the Senator from Ohio if he can remain in the Chamber for a few moments. An amendment is going to be offered to the bill, and I have to be elsewhere. Will the Senator do that for the Senator from New Mexico?

No, I believe we will leave the amendment pending. The order is not that there will be no votes today but, rather, no votes until all Senators have returned. It could be this evening, but there is no order to do that or not to do it at this point, so it will remain the pending amendment.

I am going to yield momentarily to the distinguished Senator from Ohio, Mr. Voinovich, who has worked for many years on this amendment. Suffice it to say, every argument the distinguished Senator from California made, and she made many of them, has been brought before the Committee on Environment and Public Works. They have been raised time and time again at many of the informal and formal hearings regarding this legislation. In the end, in the interest of getting something done that was uniform and that would work, they have all been denied. Efforts as she has put before us have been denied heretofore. I submit it is time for the Senate, at the earliest possible time, when we can, to vote. We should turn it down and leave in effect the national policy that is before us on ethanol, that has been so eloquently discussed on a number of occasions already in the Senate, and even today discussed by the distinguished Senator from the State of Ohio.

With that, I yield to the Senator from Ohio for further comments. I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

I ask unanimous consent that I be permitted to speak as in morning business for 10 minutes.

I thank the Chair.

(The remarks of Mr. Domenici and Mr. Reid pertaining to the introduction of S. 1051 are located in today's Record under ``Statements on Introduced Bills and Joint Resolutions.'')

Mr. President, parliamentary inquiry: What is pending before the Senate?

The Feinstein second-degree amendment to the ethanol amendment to S. 14, the comprehensive energy bill; is that correct?

I might say, if anyone cares to speak on either the amendment or the underlying bill or, for that matter, the comprehensive energy bill, the floor is open for that purpose. I have asked the majority leader if it would be appropriate to have a vote on the Feinstein amendment, a vote on it or in respect to it, this evening. He has indicated that sometime after 7 o'clock that might be in order. I am not asking for that at this point, but I am just saying to Senators that probably will happen.

If there are no other Senators desiring to do so, I will myself move to table it sometime after 7 o'clock, when it is deemed appropriate by the majority and minority leaders.

I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce a piece of legislation that is of paramount importance to the State of New Mexico and many other Western States. This bill will address the mounting pressures brought on by the growing demands throughout the West of a diminishing water supply.

A water crisis has ravaged the West for 4 years. Drought conditions are expected to expand into the upper Midwest this year. Last year snow packs were abnormally low, causing severe drought conditions. Snow pack conditions this year are still low, but marginally better in the Southwest. The rest of the West does not look any more promising.

I know that the seriousness of the water situation in New Mexico becomes more acute every single day. This drought has affected every New Mexican and nearly everyone in the West in some way. Wells are running dry, farmers are being forced to sell livestock, many of our cities are in various stages of conservation and many, many acres have been charred by catastrophic wildfires.

The drought conditions also have other consequences. For example, the lack of stream flow makes it very difficult for New Mexico to meet its compact delivery obligations to the State of Texas.

The bill that I am introducing today deals more specifically with the issue of in-stream water flows. To compound the drought situation, New Mexico is home to a vast amount of salt cedar. Salt cedar is a water- thirsty non-native tree that continually strips massive amounts of water out of New Mexico's two predominant water supplies--the Pecos and the Rio Grande rivers.

Estimates show that one mature salt cedar tree can consume as much as 200 gallons of water per day; over the growing season that's 7 acre feet of water for each acre of salt cedar. In addition to the excessive water consumption, salt cedars increase fire, increase river channelization and flood frequency, decrease water flow and increase water and soil salinity along the river. Studies indicate that eradication of the salt cedars could increase river flows. Increasing river flows could help alleviate mounting pressure to meet compact delivery obligations--both on the Pecos and the Rio Grande.

The drought and the mounting legal requirements on both the Pecos and Rio Grande rivers are forcing us toward a severe water crisis. Every river in the intermountain West seems to be facing these same problems. Solving such water problems has become one of my top priorities.

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

I am happy to yield.

This map which we just showed indicates that your problem is not just yours, my problem is not just mine. All the States that are green on the chart have tamarisk or one of these foreign plants such as salt cedar, that have infested the area, sucking up their water for no good use.

Estimates show that a mature salt cedar tree can consume as much as 200 gallons of water a day over the growing season or 7 acre feet of water for each acre of salt cedar.

In addition to the excessive water consumption, the salt cedar increases fire, increases river channelization, flood frequency, decreases water flow, increases water and soil salinity over the various river basins.

They are good for nothing.

I thank the Senator for joining me.

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

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce a piece of legislation that is of paramount importance to the State of New Mexico and many other Western States. This bill will address the mounting pressures brought on by the growing demands throughout the West of a diminishing water supply.

A water crisis has ravaged the West for 4 years. Drought conditions are expected to expand into the upper Midwest this year. Last year snow packs were abnormally low, causing severe drought conditions. Snow pack conditions this year are still low, but marginally better in the Southwest. The rest of the West does not look any more promising.

I know that the seriousness of the water situation in New Mexico becomes more acute every single day. This drought has affected every New Mexican and nearly everyone in the West in some way. Wells are running dry, farmers are being forced to sell livestock, many of our cities are in various stages of conservation and many, many acres have been charred by catastrophic wildfires.

The drought conditions also have other consequences. For example, the lack of stream flow makes it very difficult for New Mexico to meet its compact delivery obligations to the State of Texas.

The bill that I am introducing today deals more specifically with the issue of in-stream water flows. To compound the drought situation, New Mexico is home to a vast amount of salt cedar. Salt cedar is a water- thirsty non-native tree that continually strips massive amounts of water out of New Mexico's two predominant water supplies--the Pecos and the Rio Grande rivers.

Estimates show that one mature salt cedar tree can consume as much as 200 gallons of water per day; over the growing season that's 7 acre feet of water for each acre of salt cedar. In addition to the excessive water consumption, salt cedars increase fire, increase river channelization and flood frequency, decrease water flow and increase water and soil salinity along the river. Studies indicate that eradication of the salt cedars could increase river flows. Increasing river flows could help alleviate mounting pressure to meet compact delivery obligations--both on the Pecos and the Rio Grande.

The drought and the mounting legal requirements on both the Pecos and Rio Grande rivers are forcing us toward a severe water crisis. Every river in the intermountain West seems to be facing these same problems. Solving such water problems has become one of my top priorities.

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

I am happy to yield.

This map which we just showed indicates that your problem is not just yours, my problem is not just mine. All the States that are green on the chart have tamarisk or one of these foreign plants such as salt cedar, that have infested the area, sucking up their water for no good use.

Estimates show that a mature salt cedar tree can consume as much as 200 gallons of water a day over the growing season or 7 acre feet of water for each acre of salt cedar.

In addition to the excessive water consumption, the salt cedar increases fire, increases river channelization, flood frequency, decreases water flow, increases water and soil salinity over the various river basins.

They are good for nothing.

I thank the Senator for joining me.

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

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, be authorized to meeting during the session of the Senate on May 13, 2003, at 10 a.m. to conduct a hearing the nominations of Mr. Nicholas Gregory Mankiw, of Massachusetts, to be a member of the Council of Economic Advisors, Executive Office of the President; Mr. Steven B. Nesmith, of Pennsylvania, to be Assistant Secretary for Congressional and Intergovernmental Relations, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development; and Mr. Jose Teran, of Florida, Mr. James Broaddus, of Texas, Mr. Lane Carson, of Louisiana, and Mr. Paul Pate, of Iowa, to be members of the Board of Directors, National Institute of Building Sciences.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation be authorized to meet on Tuesday, May 13, 2003, at 9:30 a.m., on Media Ownership in SR- 253.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Finance be authorized to meet during the session on Tuesday, May 13, 2003, at 2 p.m., to hear testimony on Status of the Free Miami Ministerial.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Finance be authorized to meet in open Executive Session during the session on Tuesday, May 13, 2003, at 7 p.m., to mark up an original bill, the

text of which was reported by the Committee on Finance on May 8, 2003, for the purpose of meeting Finance Committee reconciliation instructions.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary be authorized to meet to conduct a hearing on ``Project Safe Neighborhoods: America's Network Against Gun Violence'' on Tuesday, May 13, 2003, at 9:30 a.m., in the Dirksen Senate Office Building, Room 226.

Panel I: The Honorable Paul M. Warner, United States Attorney for the District of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT; The Honorable Paul J. McNulty, United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, Alexandria, VA; The Honorable Todd P. Graves, United States Attorney for the Western District of Missouri, Kansas City, MO; The Honorable Patrick L. Meehan, United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA.

Panel II: Mr. Russell Edward Spann, Captain, West Valley Police Department, Utah, West Valley, UT; Mr. Dennis A. Mook, Chief of Police, Newport News Police Department, Newport News, VA; The Honorable Donald R. Totaro, District Attorney, Lancaster County, Lancaster, PA; Mr. Charles L. Curtis, President, Kansas City Metropolitan Crime Commission, Kansas City, MO; Professor Jens Ludwig, Georgetown Public Policy Institute, Georgetown University, Washington, DC; Professor Alfred Blumstein, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on National Parks of the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, May 13, at 10:00 a.m., to receive testimony regarding S. 452, to require that the Secretary of the Interior conduct a study to identify sites and resources, to recommend alternatives for commemorating and interpreting the Cold War, and for other purposes; S. 500, to direct the Secretary of the Interior to study certain sites in the Historic District of Beaufort, South Carolina, relating to the Reconstruction Era; S. 601, to authorize the Secretary to acquire the McLoughlin House National Historic Site in Oregon City, Oregon, for inclusion in the Fort Vancouver National Historic Site, and for other purposes; S. 612, and H.R. 788, to revise the boundary of the Glen Canyon National Recreation Area in the States of Utah and Arizona; and S. 630, and H.R. 519, to authorize the Secretary to conduct a study of the San Gabriel River Watershed and for other purposes.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on Water and Power of the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, May 13, at 2:30 p.m., to receive testimony regarding S. 520, a bill to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to convey certain facilities to the Fremont-Madison Irrigation District in the State of Idaho; S. 625, a bill to authorize the Bureau of Reclamation to conduct certain feasibility studies in the Tualatin River Basin in Oregon, and for other purposes; S. 960, a bill to amend the Reclamation Wasterwater and Groundwater Study and Facilities Act to authorize certain projects in the State of Hawaii and to amend the Hawaii Water Resources Act of 2000 to modify the Water Resources Study; S. 649, a bill to amend the Reclamation Wastewater and Groundwater Study and Facilities Act to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to participate in projects within the San Diego Creek Watershed, California, and for other purposes; and S. 993, a bill to amend the Small Reclamation Projects Act of 1956, and for other purposes.

I ask unanimous consent that Mr. Kris Schafer, a fellow from the Army Corps of Engineers who was detailed to my personal office and worked on the relevant legislation, be allowed the privilege of the Senate floor that he already was allowed as we did discuss this, and during further discussion of this bill at any time during this Congress.

Mr. President, I rise to pay tribute to former U.S. Senator Russell Long, who is being laid to rest today in his home State of Louisiana.

The U.S. Senate has a long history that is highlighted by public service careers of a few highly talented legislative geniuses. I consider Russell Long to be one of those Senators. I had the privilege of serving with Senator Long during my first terms in this Chamber. He was undoubtedly as formidable a Senator as any who have served here.

For those freshmen Senators who paid attention, Russell Long provided us with example after example of how to serve as an effective public servant. His place in history is secure because he was so dynamic and productive.

As a freshman Senator, I quickly learned to consider him one of the kindest and most considerate Senators. We were not of the same party or ideology on many issues. But on more than one occasion, he went out of his way to help me when I truly needed his help on the floor. He will never be forgotten, not only for his leadership skills as a Senator, but also for his kindness and generosity.

I extend my condolences to his wife Carolyn and the rest of the Russell Long family. He was a wonderful man.

Mr. President, at the time Senate Report No. 108-43 was filed, the Congressional Budget Office report was not available. The report is now available on the CBO website at www.cbo.gov.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate now resume consideration of the energy bill until 11:30 today. I further ask consent that at 11:30 the Senate proceed to the consideration of S. 113, the FISA bill; provided further, that the previously scheduled cloture votes occur at 1:45 today as under the previous order.

Finally, I ask consent that at 12:45 today, Senator DeWine be recognized to speak for up to 15 minutes in morning business.

Mr. President, I will proceed to discuss a proposed ethanol amendment that will be offered to this pending bill later in the proceedings when it is in order. When I am finished within a few moments, I will yield to the minority leader who will speak, and thereafter we will rotate back and forth for as long a time as we have this morning to discuss this measure.

Today the Senate will consider what will soon be offered as an amendment to S. 14, which I hope will become the renewable fuel standards portion of the comprehensive energy bill. The amendment offered today by the majority leader and the minority leader, and Senators Inhofe, Dorgan, Lugar, Johnson, Grassley, Harkin, Hagel,

Durbin, Voinovich, Nelson of Nebraska, Talent, Dayton, Coleman, Edwards, Crapo, and DeWine--and if there are any others who desire to join in the amendment, it is obviously open for submitting their names as additional cosponsors.

This represents the culmination of a long and difficult debate about the U.S. transportation fuels policy. The amendment is the product of more than 4 years of work by the stakeholders and Members of this body and represents a solid compromise between disparate groups.

The amendment establishes a renewable fuels standard providing that a portion of the U.S. fuel supply will be provided by renewable domestic fuels, primarily ethanol, growing to 5 billion gallons a year by the year 2012. In addition to full support from the affected parties, the amendment also enjoys the administration's full support.

The Frist-Daschle amendment will promote increased domestic energy development, reduce oil imports, protect the environment, bolster our economy, and stimulate rural economic development by increasing production and use of domestic renewable fuels. I know there are a number of Senators who strongly opposed a similar amendment when it was offered and adopted last year. I expect them to offer a number of second-degree amendments this year again. This is their right, but I do expect--as the Senate did last year--the Senate to adopt the language of the Frist-Daschle amendment.

In view of the significant amount of work that has been put into this amendment and the consensus it represents among the affected parties, I urge my colleagues to adopt the amendment as offered, without amendments.

I yield the floor at this point.

Mr. President, I failed to indicate at the outset what has been mentioned by the distinguished minority leader at the outset. This is a jobs-producing measure. The entire energy bill, as we consider it, is a measure that will produce literally thousands of jobs for the American people. Right at the outset, the very first amendment is a clear indication of how in this bill we intend to produce, in this instance, agricultural jobs but not pure agriculture--industrial, as it relates to agriculture with the construction of ethanol plants in and out and around and about agricultural America.

Having said that, I know there are a number of Senators who want to speak. It was not for me to say that we have no consent agreement as to how we will proceed, but I saw the distinguished Senator, Senator Talent, standing first. I might suggest, just for some orderliness, he proceed next, and the distinguished Senator from Nebraska follow that. Then, if other Senators are here, and they seek recognition--

I wonder, considering the condition of the distinguished Senator, if he might proceed first.

Might we amend that, then, and have Senator Bond go first, Senator Talent, and then the Senator from Nebraska? Is that all right? We will proceed in that manner.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, we are going to hear now from one of the early proponents of ethanol and of this bill and of this composite that ultimately got such broad bipartisan support. It is my privilege to have as a supporter of this amendment and of the energy bill the distinguished Senator from Nebraska, Mr. Hagel.

I thank the Senator for all the work he has done in this area and for all the help he has given me by way of advice on the energy bill, which is pending before the Senate, of which this will become an integral and vital part. Thank you so much.

Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Mr. President, I say to fellow Senators, we are on this bill

until 11:30 a.m. for purposes of discussing the pending amendment. So I say to anybody who wishes to discuss it, we have this additional time now. There may be time in the future, but this is assured time now for anybody who wishes to speak.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I rise today to offer legislation entitled the ``Jesse Spiri Military Medical Coverage Act of 2003.'' The purpose of this legislation is to close a gap in medical coverage that leaves a certain group of military officers without health care benefits. Named in honor of a young New Mexican who fell victim to this gap, this bill would extend coverage to commissioned officers who are awaiting active duty status.

Jesse Spiri grew up in the heart of southwestern New Mexico where his family instilled in him both a sense of patriotism and an appreciation for higher education. Following his graduation from high school, he enrolled at Western New Mexico University where he served in the United States Marine Corps Reserves. His dedication to each of these endeavors culminated on May 11, 2001 when he received both his bachelors degree and his commission as a 2nd Lieutenant. Clearly, Jesse had laid a solid foundation for success in his life and, naturally, his family was extremely proud. Unfortunately, the pride and all the hopes that accompany such a crowning moment were short-lived, because one day after his graduation Jesse was diagnosed with brain cancer.

Under any circumstances, such a prognosis is demoralizing, but Jesse's situation was even more grave because receiving his commission had the effect of triggering his military status to that of ``inactive reservist.'' Jesse was not scheduled to gain ``active duty'' status until he began basic officer training in November, and since TRICARE does not fully cover reservists, his family was left with the burden of enormous medical bills--a burden they simply could not meet.

Despite the heroic efforts of the Spiri family, inquiries by my staff and others in the New Mexico congressional delegation, as well as efforts by Marine Corps lawyers to find a legal solution to the problem, Jesse Spiri, an officer of the United States Marine Corps, went without health care coverage and, hence, without proper treatment. He lost his battle with cancer in July of 2001.

It is inconceivable to me, as I am sure it is for all Americans, that because of a legislative quirk, an officer of the United States armed forces could be left completely exposed to a dread disease without even the hope of receiving available treatments. But Jesse's battle is proof that if we do not, through legislative enactment, extend full medical coverage to commissioned reservists, another promising life may be lost in similar fashion.

I know that Jim Spiri, Jesse's dad, has vowed to dedicate his life to ensuring that no family has to face what his experienced. This goal, however, should not take a lifetime to achieve. By passing the ``Jesse Spiri Military Medical Coverage Act of 2003,'' we can help give Jim and the entire Spiri family peace in knowing that others will have hope where Jesse did not.

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