Floor Statements

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Armed Services be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, October 23, 2003, at 10:30 a.m., in executive session to discuss pending military nominations.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on October 23, 2003, at 10 a.m. to conduct a hearing on Proposals for Improving the Regulation of the Housing GSEs.

The Committee will also vote on the nominations of the Hon. Roger W. Ferguson, Jr., of Massachusetts, to be Vice Chairman of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System; the Hon. Ben. S. Bernanke, of New Jersey, to be a member of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System; and the Hon. Paul S. Atkins, of Virginia, to be a member of the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation be authorized to meet on Thursday, October 23, 2003, on pending Committee business off the floor in the President's room, immediately after the first vote of the day.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Environment and Public Works be authorized to meet on Thursday, October 23 at 9:30 a.m. to consider S. 994, the Chemical Security Act of 2003, and S. 1757, the John F. Kennedy Center Act.

The business meeting will be held in SD 406.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Finance be authorized to meet during the session on Thursday, October 23, 2003, at 2 p.m., to hear testimony on Company Owned Life Insurance.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Foreign Relations be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, October 23, 2003, at 9:30 a.m., to hold a hearing on Post 9/11 Visa Policy.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions be authorized to meet for a hearing on Federal and State Role in Pharmacy Compounding and Reconstitution: Exploring the Right Mix to Protect Patients during the session of the Senate on Thursday, October 23, 2003, at 10 a.m. in SD- 430.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary be authorized to meet to conduct a markup on Thursday, October 23, 2003, at 9:30 a.m. in Dirksen Room 226.

Agenda:

I. Nominations: Henry W. Saad to be United States Circuit Judge for the Sixth Circuit; Dora L. Irazarry to be United States District Judge for the Eastern District of New York; Dale S. Fischer to be United States District Judge for the Central District of California; Gary L. Sharpe to be United States District Judge for the Northern District of New York; and William K. Sessions III to be a Member of the U.S. Sentencing Commission.

II. Bills: S. 1545, Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors Act of 2003 (the DREAM Act) [Hatch, Durbin, Craig, DeWine, Feingold, Feinstein, Grassley, Kennedy, Leahy, Schumer]; S. 1720, A bill to provide for Federal court proceedings in Plano, Texas [Cornyn]; S. 1743, Private Security Officer Employment Authorization Act of 2003 [Levin, Schumer]; S. 1194, Mentally Ill Offender Treatment and Crime Reduction Act of 2003 [DeWine, Durbin, Grassley, Hatch, Leahy]; S. Res. 239, Designating November 7, 2003, as ``National Native American Veterans Day'' to honor the service of Native Americans in the United States Armed Forces and the contribution of Native Americans to the defense of the United States [Campbell]; and S. Res. 240, A resolution designating November 2003 as ``National American Indian Heritage Month'' [Campbell, Hatch].

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Select Committee on Intelligence be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, October 23, 2003, at 2:30 p.m. to hold a closed hearing.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on Surface Transportation and Merchant Marine be authorized to meet on Thursday, October 23, 2003, at 2:30 p.m. Railroad Shipper Issues and S. 919, Railroad Competition Act of 2003.

Mr. President, I rise today to pay tribute to a dear friend, Jean Elizabeth Rodgers Sutton, of Linden, AL. Jean Sutton died on Tuesday, September 16, at the age of 62.

Jean was born in Jackson, MS, and attended Hinds Junior College in Raymond, MS. She received a Junior College Press Association Scholarship to continue her education at the University of Southern Mississippi.

It was at the University of Southern Mississippi that she met her husband, Goodloe Sutton, and they were married in 1964 after Jean had graduated and worked for a year as editor of the Tylertown Times in Tylertown, MS.

After moving to Linden, Jean worked as a reporter for the award- winning Democrat Reporter, the weekly newspaper owned by her husband. She also taught girls physical education and journalism at Linden High School.

After teaching at Linden High School for two years, she began working full time for the Democrat Reporter where she served as managing editor.

Together, Jean and Goodloe worked as a husband-and-wife reporting team. In the 1990s, they successfully exposed corruption and a drug ring involving the Marengo County Sheriff's office, amid death threats and intense pressure throughout their community. Their investigative reporting led to an FBI investigation and the conviction of the county's sheriff in 1997.

Jean also found time to raise a family. She and Goodloe raised two exceptional sons. Their son, Howard Goodloe, is a graduate of Auburn University and I am pleased to have him as a member of my staff. He has served as my State Director since 2000. And, William Robert Sutton attends Southern Union Community College.

Jean Sutton was a good friend, a leader in the Linden community, and a role model for investigative journalists. Her tremendous courage, her hard work and sacrifices on behalf of her readers, and her dedication to her family serve as an example of excellence for every reporter, parent and citizen. She will be greatly missed by many.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Congressional Budget Office cost estimate for S. 300, the Jackie Robinson Congressional Gold Medal bill, be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, I rise today in honor of Mrs. Nancy Gardner Sewell, a library media specialist/coordinator and head librarian at Selma High School in Selma, AL. After 36 years of exemplary commitment and dedicated service to the Selma City school system, Mrs. Sewell plans to retire on October 18, 2003.

Mrs. Sewell is an educator, media specialist, civic leader, and strong advocate for children. Since 1993, she has tenaciously served the City of Selma, AL, as the first black female elected to its city council. Mrs. Sewell is multi-talented and has excelled in every avenue of her life, as indicated by the numerous honors and awards bestowed upon her by her peers and community. She has never been content with the status quo. Each endeavor throughout her rich life has been met with new and innovative ideas, insurmountable energy, and the ability to motivate people.

Born and raised in Alabama, Mrs. Sewell married her college sweetheart, retired Coach Andrew A. Sewell, and became the mother of three children, Terri, Andrew, and Anthony. Her distinguished educational background includes a bachelor of science degree from Alabama State University, a masters degree from Purdue University, and advanced course work in other graduate studies at Atlanta University and the University of Alabama.

Among many of Mrs. Sewell's outstanding achievements and honors, she pioneered the development of elementary libraries in the Selma City Schools, was instrumental in maintaining accreditation status for their libraries, implemented the ``Accelerated Reader's Program,'' revitalized the Selma-Dallas Youth and Government Council, and lobbied for grants to improve literacy through school libraries, just to name a few.

Alabama is honored to be home to Mrs. Sewell. It is no secret that she is a woman who, day in and day out, goes above and beyond the call of duty. She is to be commended for all of her extraordinary efforts on behalf of Selma, AL, and everyone whose life she has touched.

Mr. President, I rise today in support of passage of the Defense Production Reauthorization Act of 2003. This bill will reauthorize the Defense Production Act of 1950 for an additional 5 years.

Mr. President, the Defense Production Act of 1950 was originally passed in response to the outbreak of war on the Korean Peninsula. The U.S. defense industrial base that had provided the fighter planes, tanks and ships that were so crucial to the outcome of World War II had been largely scrapped following the end of that horrific conflict. The prevailing view, of course, was that such an industrial base was no longer needed in light of the defeat of Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan and the introduction into the American arsenal of atomic weapons.

As we learned literally within hours of the crossing of the 38th Parallel by the first North Korean Army units, that view was catastrophically wrong. The Defense Production Act was the recognition by the executive and legislative branches of Government that a large industrial base oriented toward national defense was still vital to our national security and that the usual process by which weapons and other equipment are procured would not suffice in a genuine crisis.

As in June 1950, the United States remains dependent upon the ability to respond to crises in a manner appropriate to the circumstances. That is where the Defense Production Act of 1950 continues to play a vital role in providing for the national defense. Its authorities allow the President to prioritize and reallocate contracts when the United States is confronted by an imminent threat to its well-being, and to respond to those threats after they've materialized. It provides the authority for the Department of Defense to go into factories that can not afford to maintain a critical capability due to insufficient demand and provide the means for that factory to continue to produce the required item. It indemnifies contractors against legal actions taken as result of U.S. Government directives issued under Defense Production Act authorities, as was needed during the first Persian Gulf War when Civil Air Reserve commercial aircraft were drafted into the war effort at the expense of their commercial obligations.

Over time, the Defense Production Act has been expanded to include natural disasters as well as man-made events like terrorist attacks, and disasters resulting from accidents and equipment failures that can result in large sections of the United States being blacked-out by a major utility failure. In short, it is an emergency capability that we keep in our back pocket and hope it is never needed.

But the Defense Production Act is routinely needed. I have alluded to the Transportation Security Administration's use of it in the wake of the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. It has also been used by the Department of Defense in support of Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan to procure vital military equipment like Predator UAVs and military satellite communications technology vital for the conduct of joint operations. And with the scale of contraction in the U.S. defense industrial base over the past decade, the act's authorities will remain as vital as ever for the foreseeable future.

In drafting reauthorizing legislation, it was the committee's intent to modernize the Defense Production Act to take into account the dramatic changes that occurred since the act's last update in 1994. The emergence of terrorism, evident in the U.S. Embassy bombings in East Africa, the attack on the USS Cole in the Gulf of Aden, and the tragic events of 9-11, as the central focus of U.S. national security planning has created an imperative that the Defense Production Act be adapted to that reality. That is why the Banking Committee-passed bill includes new findings and a declaration of policy: because the war on terrorism and the growth in scale of threat to the nation's critical infrastructure of telecommunications, transportation, energy, banking, and other sectors of society the security of which are vital to our national security and our economic and social well-being.

The committee-passed bill, in line with the recommendations of the President's Report to Congress on the Modernization of the Defense Production Act and the Report of the President's Commission on Critical Infrastructure Protection, included in its findings and declaration of policy this emphasis on the war on terrorism and critical infrastructure protection. In addition, language was added intended to further strengthen the linkage between critical infrastructure and the authorities provided by the Defense Production Act during committee consideration of this bill.

Unfortunately, this modernization of the act was more than the other chamber could swallow right now. That is why the ranking member of the Banking Committee, Senator Sarbanes, and I will offer an amendment in the nature of a substitute. Because the Defense Production Act expires today, there would be no time for a protracted conference. Consequently, the Banking Committee and its House counterpart have agreed to a more modest update of the Act. The amendment by the ranking member and me does the following:

Reauthorizes the Defense Production Act for five years, as requested by the Defense Department;

Provides funding the department requested for hardening electronics against the effects of radiation;

Clarifies the President's authority to obtain information needed for the performance of assessments of the U.S. defense industrial base--a provision requested by the Department of Commerce; and

Formally incorporates the concept of critical infrastructure protection under Defense Production Act authorities by including it under the definition of ``national defense.''

Mr. President, I cannot emphasize enough the importance of the Senate passing the amendment in the nature of a substitute and then voting on final passage as soon as possible. The minute the Defense Production Act lapses, vital authorities for the conduct of military operations in Afghanistan and Iraq disappear. I urge my colleagues' support for the amendment and for final passage of the bill.

Mr. President, I appreciate the words of the distinguished Senator from Connecticut and look forward to continuing work with my colleagues on these important issues concerning the needs of our military industrial base. The Defense Production Act is an important piece of legislation that provides vital authorities to the Departments of Defense, Homeland Security, Commerce, and Energy to prepare for and respond to crises. These provisions are particularly important during this time as the nation prosecutes its war on terror. The act's authorities allow government agencies to allocate contracts and re-prioritize contracts to meet emergency requirements. And it also provides authority to these agencies, especially the Defense Department, to work with private industry to ensure they have the industrial capabilities required to meet national security requirements that economics alone would otherwise allow to atrophy.

I am pleased the Senate will act on this legislation before it expires at midnight tonight. My hope is that it will be passed by the other body and signed into law by the President shortly.

Mr. President, I rise today in support of H.R. 3087, the Surface Transportation Extension Act of 2003. This bill, which was crafted in a bi-partisan, bicameral fashion will extend the Federal transportation programs for an additional 5 months to February 29, 2004.

The Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century expires on September 30 of this year. Legislation is necessary to carry on the essential functions of the highway, highway safety, motor carrier safety, transit and other programs that are recipients of highway trust fund money. This bill accomplishes just that. It funds the programs at five-twelfths of the fiscal year 2004 budget conference report level.

H.R. 3087 is a clean reauthorization of these programs. This bill contains no new projects and no new programmatic changes. It simply extends TEA-21 and current provisions of transportation law. As the chairman of the Banking Committee whose jurisdiction includes the reauthorization of the transit title of TEA-21, I was hopeful that, working with the chairman of the relevant committee, we would have achieved passage of a multiyear bill. As funding levels and an appropriate source for those funds have yet to be identified, that proved to be impossible.

While I am not overly confident that 5 months of negotiating will resolve this problem, I support this piece of legislation. I believe it is essential that we continue to authorize our Nation's highway and transit infrastructure. I think this necessary stop-gap measure is the way to achieve that. I recommend the bill to my colleagues and ask for their support.

Mr. President, I rise today in recognition of Mr. Harland Meredith, a resident of Tuscaloosa, a Navy hero, and a leader in our community. Over the Independence Day holiday, a friend of mine, Charlie Land, read the following tribute about Mr. Meredith. I ask that Charlie's comments be printed in the Record in celebration of Harlan Meredith.

The material follows:

Once upon a time a young man of this church, freshly

graduated from the University of Alabama, faced the world and

pondered the future. I know that doesn't sound like a big

deal. New college graduates are always doing that. No doubt

some are right now.

But this was a special time. It was May of 1941. He was 20

years old and war loomed uncertainly on the horizon.

He already had tried to get into military service through

the University's advanced Army or Army Air Corps ROTC

programs. Both had turned him down. Something always seemed

to be wrong when he took the required physical examinations,

although nothing ever showed up in his regular physicals. ``I

guess the Lord was just looking after me,'' he would muse

many years later. ``I figure He just didn't want me to be in

those.''

Within a few months, the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor.

War wasn't just on the horizon anymore.

He really had always wanted to serve in the U.S. Navy,

anyhow. He applied for a direct commission as a naval officer

and was accepted. He was ready to go fight for his country,

for freedom.

But the Navy sent its new ensign to Chicago to oversee the

hydrographic office that served the Great Lakes. It was not

an unimportant job and he did it well. His commanding officer

in Detroit was pleased. He pronounced his ensign a lucky

young man; he could hydrograph his way through the whole war

right there in Chicago. He liked Chicago okay, but that

wasn't at all where he wanted to be or what he wanted to do.

He wanted to go to sea and fight. It took a while, and he had

to find his own replacement, but finally he was off to San

Francisco to train for sea duty.

Now he was 21, but he was still single, his wife-to-be yet

unmet. And he was all steamed up to go to the South Pacific.

``You know how you are at that age,'' he says.

He got there, although in a sort of roundabout way. His

first sea duty was on the seaplane tender Hulbert, a

converted destroyer, in the Aleutian Islands off Alaska. It

was no pleasure cruise. The Aleutians were hostile waters;

Japanese forces occupied some of the islands. There was

combat, although not the heavy action to be found in the

South Pacific. One night the Hulbert dragged anchor off a

point in the Aleutians, ran aground and sank.

He transferred to a small new escort aircraft carrier based

in Portland, OR. Typical of her class, the ship was named for

a bay. Her namesake, Kalinin Bay, was in Southeast Alaska.

But she would take her new gunnery officer from Tuscaloosa to

the South Pacific at last.

And there would be some action.

The Kalinin Bay, with her 27 aircraft and 860 crew members,

sailed about the South Pacific, doing her chores. A lot of

them involved combat. There were enemy air attacks to fend

off. There was the occasional torpedo to dodge. There were

air strikes to be made. There were invasions to support-

Sapan, Guam, the Southern Palaus, islands in the Leyte Gulf

and finally the invasion of Leyte itself as Gen. Douglas

MacArthur made good on his promise to return to the

Philippines.

So the Kalinin Bay was no stranger to combat as she steamed

some 60 miles east of the Philippine Island of Samar early on

the morning of October 25, 1944. She already had operated off

Leyte for more than a week. Her planes already had flown 244

sorties, destroying enemy installations and airfields on five

different islands.

She was part of a small naval battle group nicknamed

``Taffy 3.'' It included 5 other escort carriers, plus a

screen of 3 destroyers and 4 destroyer escorts. The carriers

of ``Taffy 3'' were preparing to launch their first air

strikes of the day when its commanding admiral learned that a

sizable Japanese naval force was approaching. It was 0647

hours.

By 0658 hours, ``Taffy 3'' was under fire from part of the

largest Japanese surface fleet to fight since the Battle of

Midway, coming to keep the Americans out of the Philippines.

The ``Battle Off Samar'', as it would be called, was under

way. It would be described by historians as one of the most

memorable engagements in U.S. naval history.

The ships of ``Taffy 3'', slower, outnumbered and

outgunned, soon were fighting for their lives against a force

of four Japanese battleships, eight cruisers and 12

destroyers. The Kalinin Bay took the first of 15 direct hits

at 0750 hours, a 14- or 16-inch shell from one of the

battleships. It struck one side of the hangar deck near the

forward elevator. A later hit penetrated the deck and

destroyed all of the ship's radio and radar equipment.

Fortunately, some of the shells went right through the ship

without causing significant damage. And even more

fortunately, there were a great many near misses. The Kalinin

Bay fought back hard. She launched her aircraft while under

fire from three cruisers. She dodged behind a timely rain

squall, then maneuvered behind chemical smoke. She traded

fire with the cruisers for a while, then shot it out with

Japan's Destroyer Squadron 10.

Her 5-inch gun stayed busy. It scored two hits on one heavy

cruiser and hit a Japanese destroyer amidships. And her

planes inflicted heavy damage, striking the enemy ships

with bombs, rockets and gunfire.

The Japanese naval vessels turned away for ``Taffy 3''

after 2\1/2\ hours, but not before their destroyers launched

a torpedo attack. The torpedoes were launched from far enough

away to begin to slow before reaching their targets. So a

U.S. Avenger torpedo-

bomber from a sister ship was able to explode two torpedoes

in the Kalinin Bay's wake about 100 yards astern, and the

ship's 5-inch gun deflected another from a collision course

with her stern.

Battered and bloody, the U.S. force sailed south, but there

still would be little respite for the Kalinin Bay and her

surviving sister ships. Little more than an hour later, at

1050, they cam under concentrated attack from kamikzae

aircraft, the suicide bombers of World War II. Four kamikazes

dived at the Kalinin Bay. Two of the airplanes were shot down

at close range. The third crashed into one side of the flight

deck, damaging it badly. The fourth destroyed the aft port

stack.

It was finally over by 1130 hours. The ships and planes of

``Taffy 3,'' with some help from the planes of another unit,

``Taffy 2'', had cleared the air of enemy planes and had

denied the powerful Japanese force entry into the Gulf of

Leyte.

MacArthur's beachhead was safe.

The price had been high. Five of ``Taffy 3's'' 13 ships had

been sunk--two carriers, a destroyer and two destroyer

escorts. Hundreds of American sailors had died. The Kalinin

Bay counted five dead among her 60 casualties, plus

considerable structural damage.

During the hours of intense, furious fighting, the gunnery

officer of the Kalinin Bay never wished he was back in that

office in Chicago.

The Kalinin Bay managed to make it to New Guinea for

temporary repairs. The ship was back in the States by late

November and he transferred off as it awaited further work.

Shipmates had died in several battles. He had been frightened

at times and his faith in God had been tested. But he had

come through without a scratch and with his faith stronger

than ever.

``You realized your Christian faith was the most important

thing you could have,'' he would say. ``In combat I felt like

I was sent there for a purpose. I felt like God's hand was

holding me the whole time; I really did.''

He was ready for his next assignment.

It was to the Midway, a much larger aircraft carrier that

soon was to be commissioned at Newport News, VA. The idea was

for the Midway to sail around the Horn and into the Pacific,

where it would be a powerful additional force. By the time

the Midway was commissioned September 10, 1945, that

assignment was unnecessary. Gen. MacArthur had accepted

Japan's unconditional surrender on September 2 aboard the

Battleship Missouri in Tokyo Bay. The war was over.

The Midway would have a lasting impact on his life, though.

A fellow naval officer needed tickets to the commissioning

ceremony for house guests, and he was glad to oblige. Among

the guests he met the lovely young woman from Tuscaloosa who

would become his wife.

They married shortly after he got out of the Navy. Duty

done and a bit older, the young man who had loved his country

so much that he was determined to fight for it turned his

attention to a successful business career; helped raise two

beautiful daughters, and became a highly respected community

leader.

He became a stalwart of this church, a wise, practical

leader who has given of himself, grown and thrived on his

ability to seek and receive more insights. His faith has been

unwavering, even during the painful ordeal of one daughter's

untimely death.

People who know him will tell you he is a man of high

intelligence, great character, impeccable integrity, calm

consistency and complete credibility. They will also tell you

he hard-working, caring, considerate, loyal and a Southern

gentleman in the best sense of that definition.

He's a man who still greatly loves his family and his

hometown and the United States of America and what it stands

for, what he fought for.

A patriot.

A man who reminds us in his modest, unassuming way that

patriotism isn't some mysterious, exotic condition. It is

simple and fundamental and powerful. It springs from fervent

love for your country, love for freedom. It is in your heart

and spirit and actions, just like it always has been in his.

This sanctuary hasn't lacked for patriots and heroes to sit

in its pews to worship God over the decades. Many who fit

that description are here today, as you are most Sundays.

I salute you. And I salute Harlan Meredith, who story I'm

sure some of you recognized. I also thank him for his

graciousness in sharing it with me, at my request, so I could

share it with you today.

Incidentally, Harlan and Mary Anne have been married for 57

years now. That's worth a salute, too. Our church, community

and country has been blessed to have people like Harlan, and

you.

This, too, is a special time in our country's history.

Again we are at war. Almost every day more of our soldiers

pay the ultimate price for our country, leaving saddened

survivors to live with the aftermath. It makes this

Independence Day weekend all the more meaningful. I pray it

also makes us all the more thankful for our blessings.

And the United States of America truly has been blessed

these 227 years, perhaps most of all with the courageous,

hard-working, God-loving people who have built and maintained

this great country of liberty and justice. People who have

been willing to sacrifice and fight for it, as so many

continue to do today. Patriots.

We aren't perfect as a country. But to the extent mere

humankind can be, the good part of the United States of

America is both the light and the hope of the world. May God

bless you; may God continue to bless America; and may we

never forget from Whom our blessings flow.

I don't think Harlan Meredith ever has.

Mr. President, I want to associate myself with the statement of Senator Voinovich regarding the importance of the M1A2 System Enhancement Program. I strongly support providing the necessary funding to modernize the 3rd Armored Cavalry Regiment (ACR) tank fleet. I would ask Chairman Stevens and Senator Inouye to work with us to find a way to address this important issue in conference.

Mr. President, I am reminded that both the distinguished

chairman and the ranking member have been strong proponents of the

JASSM program in the past.

The JASSM program is less than 30 days from completing operational

test and is scheduled for a full rate production decision in November

of this year. Both DOD and the Air Force have sufficient confidence in

JASSM that they have proposed to use fiscal year 2003 Iraqi freedom

funds to procure additional missiles. In addition, I would note that

the Navy is scheduled to join the Air Force in future JASSM

procurements and this production ramp is critical to meeting both the

Navy and Air Force inventory requirements.

I hope that we can work in conference to find a path that will

protect the existing contract while at the same time provide the Air

Force these vitally needed ``go-to-war'' assets.

Mr. President, I rise today to recognize the outstanding accomplishments and distinguished career of Mr. Arthur G. Stephenson upon his retirement as the Director of the NASA Marshall Space Flight Center. It has been a privilege for me to get to know Art. While retirement announcements are things that we do not like to hear when it involves someone who has been as vital to the success of an organization as Art has been to Marshall's, I would like to say how much I have enjoyed working with Art and his staff during his tenure as the Director of the Marshall Space Flight Center.

As the Director of one of NASA's largest field installations, with more than 6,500 civil service and contract employees and an annual budget in excess of $2 billion, Art successfully managed a very broad range of activities for the U.S. space program. Some of these critical NASA initiatives included development of new reusable launch vehicles, space shuttle propulsion, advanced space transportation systems, second and third generation propulsion technology development programs, research in microgravity, and science payload operations aboard the International Space Station. He also oversaw the establishment of the National Space Science Technology Center, a partnership with universities and Federal agencies to conduct cutting-edge research. Art also oversaw the planning and establishment of the Propulsion Research Laboratory, a world-class laboratory for research into future space transportation and propulsion technology. Art has led the Marshall Center in numerous successful space shuttle launches in which Marshall was responsible for all propulsion elements. Under Art's direction, the Marshall Center has completed testing of the truss and pressurized modules for the International Space Station, and provided support for the construction and operation of the International Space Station, including Marshall's Payload Operations Center which controls all the science experiments aboard the space station.

Art brought more than 35 years of experience in the space industry to NASA and used it to the great benefit of the Marshall Center and the U.S. space program. I could list many additional achievements and professional accomplishments, and I believe that success is directly attributable to Art's record as an extraordinary leader throughout his career.

Art has been an important and respected member of the Huntsville community. I know that I speak for many people in Huntsville and everyone in the NASA family when I say that we all thank Art for his tireless commitment to NASA and to Marshall. We sincerely hope that he and his family will remain part of the Huntsville community for many years to come.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Congressional Budget Office cost estimate for S. 498, the Joseph A. De Laine Congressional Gold Medal bill, be printed in the Record.

Madam President, I rise today to encourage my colleagues to oppose the amendment of the senior Senator from California, Mrs. Feinstein.

First, I address the second-degree amendment the senior Senator from Nevada, Senator Reid, is offering. I encourage my colleagues to oppose this second-degree amendment, also. The Reid second-degree amendment would exempt derivative contracts on precious metals from the new regulatory scheme the Feinstein amendment creates. We are told the Feinstein amendment is necessary to avoid the manipulation of markets for commodities that are in limited supply like oil or metals.

Underpinning the Feinstein amendment is the belief the Enron debacle and the California energy crisis occurred because there was insufficient regulation and wrongdoers were able to accomplish massive frauds and manipulation. The Feinstein amendment is intended to close the alleged regulatory loophole for off-exchange transactions for exempt commodities.

Assume, only for argument's sake, that Senator Feinstein is correct. Assume the regulatory regime established only 2\1/2\ years ago is insufficient and that we must close a so-called regulatory loophole. If you believe this and support the Feinstein amendment, you must necessarily oppose the Reid second-degree amendment, which will carve a vast number of derivative contracts out of the regulatory scheme the Feinstein amendment creates.

I don't believe we can have it both ways. What is necessary for the energy markets is necessary for the metals markets. I encourage my colleagues to oppose both the Reid second-degree amendment and the Feinstein amendment as unnecessary, redundant, and potentially destabilizing to our financial markets. I encourage my colleagues who feel compelled to support the Feinstein amendment to not support the Reid amendment, which is at direct cross-purposes to the underlying amendment.

Less than 3 years ago, in December 2000, Congress enacted the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000, which was landmark legislation that provided legal certainty regarding the regulatory status of derivatives. Passage of the modernization act was the result of many months of analysis of the role that derivatives play in the marketplace and the consequences of increased regulation. In fact, because the modernization act addressed derivative products pertaining to commodities and financial products, both the Agriculture Committee and Banking Committee held numerous hearings to help Members and the public better understand the role the various derivative financial instruments and contracts played in our economy and what regulatory landscape, if any, is appropriate.

Now, only 3 years after enactment of the modernization act, Senator Feinstein's amendment proposes fundamental changes to the law. I believe

this amendment could create many regulatory problems, including creating jurisdictional confusion between the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, FERC, and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, CFTC, imposing problematic capital requirements on facilities trading derivatives, and impugning the legal certainty of OTC derivatives put in place in 2000.

I am concerned this body does not have full appreciation of these consequences and potential unintended consequences that will likely follow if we were to adopt the Feinstein amendment.

I also believe it is premature to adopt this amendment because we have simply not had enough time to review the results of the modernization act. We have not received any reports from the CFTC detailing shortfalls in the regulatory authority conferred by the modernization act or recommendations requesting broader authority over derivatives. In fact, the CFTC had brought several major cases involving market manipulation since the passage of the modernization act. Congress should have more than a 2-year record before it decides to make rash but fundamental changes to legislation that was the product of so much deliberation a short time ago.

Proponents of the Feinstein amendment argue that the collapse of Enron and the disruption of the California energy market are prime examples of the need for greater regulation of derivatives. This assertion is simply not true. Enron collapsed as a result of deceptive accounting practices involving special purpose entities and poor corporate governance practices that permitted abusive business practices. Congress addressed such abuses in last year's Sarbanes-Oxley Act. More importantly, Enron's derivative business was in operation prior to enactment of the Modernization Act and was one of the business lines that retained value for sale after the collapse when most others didn't.

Further, FERC, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, recently concluded a year-long review of potential manipulation of electric and natural gas prices in the Western markets. Although FERC did find market manipulation, it also concluded:

Significant supply shortfalls and a fatally flawed market

design were the root causes of the California market

meltdown.

In short, it was lack of energy supplies and poor State regulations that caused the disruption. I fear that the adoption of the Feinstein amendment could lead to uninformed and premature changes to the carefully considered provisions of the Modernization Act.

I believe the Feinstein amendment proposes unnecessary regulatory measures and significantly undermines the legal certainty achieved in the Modernization Act. Therefore, I strongly urge my colleagues to vote against the Feinstein amendment.

The President's Working Group on Financial Markets, which is comprised of the Secretary of the Treasury, the Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board, the Chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission, and the Chairman of the CFTC, will be sending a letter today expressing its concerns with this amendment and urging Congress to carefully consider the potential unintended consequences of the amendment before acting. I intend to submit this letter for the Record when I receive it. I anticipate this letter will raise the same concerns that were raised in the working group's letter last year.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, on Thursday, June 5, on rollcall vote No. 209, I voted yea. It was my intention then to vote nay. Therefore, I ask unanimous consent that I be permitted to change my vote since it will not affect the outcome.

Mr. President, I rise today in honor of Mr. Thomas ``Buddy'' Morgan, the general manager of the Montgomery Water Works and Sanitary Sewer Board in Montgomery, AL. Mr. Morgan serves as their representative to the Association of Metropolitan Sewerage Agencies, AMSA. On May 19, 2030, the members of AMSA elected Mr. Morgan to be the first president of the association from Alabama. Mr. Morgan was selected for his exemplary commitment and dedication to a clean-water community.

AMSA's mission is to effectively maintain a strong leadership role in the development and implementation of scientifically sound, cost- effective, and environmentally friendly policies for the protection of the health of the public and the environment. In May of 2003, AMSA will celebrate 33 years of service to the clean-water community and the Nation.

Mr. Morgan has worked on many projects on behalf of the city of Montgomery. His distinguished background includes his service on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Urban Wet Weather Flows Federal Advisory Committee and the Sanitary Sewer Overflow Federal Advisory Committee. He also served as chair of the Catoma Creek Watershed Committee and as a board member of the Alabama Clean Water Partnership. As a result of his involvement, Montgomery and surrounding areas of the Great State of Alabama are directly represented in national policy discussions.

Mr. Morgan was instrumental in creating the Montgomery County Water Festival, which is now in its third year. As a result of his efforts, the water festival brings together local students for a day of activities and entertainment that instills in them a sense of environmental stewardship and awareness.

Alabama is honored to be the home to Mr. Morgan. It is no secret that he is a man who, day in and day out, goes above and beyond the call of duty. He is to be commended for his extraordinary efforts on behalf of the Montgomery Water Works and Sanitary Sewer Board and his election to lead the Association of Metropolitan Sewerage Agencies.

Mr. President, I would like to take this opportunity to ask the Chairman of the Finance Committee about the Committee's intent with respect to Section 333, the section entitled ``Denial of Deduction for Certain Fines, Penalties, and Other Amounts.'' As currently drafted, Section 333 eliminates tax deductions for amounts paid or incurred at the direction of a governmental entity in relation to the violation of any law or the investigation or inquiry into the potential violation of any law.

Although I appreciate the Chairman's intent, I am concerned that this provision is drafted too broadly and applies to fees and compliance expenses that are mandated by regulators and that depository institutions must pay. For example, banks and thrifts are subject to routine, as well as special, examinations as part of supervisory reviews by State regulators, the FDIC, the Office of Comptroller of the Currency, the Federal Reserve Board and the Office of Thrift Supervision. The purpose of these supervisory examinations is to ensure that depository institutions are operating in a safe and sound manner and in full compliance with regulations. Institutions are then required to correct any deficiencies.

Currently, Section 333 could be interpreted to eliminate the deductibility of these fees because they relate to examinations, which are, to some extent, inquiries into potential violations. Also, this Section could be interpreted to preclude tax deductions for remedial measures undertaken pursuant to a regulator's order, or to address concerns raised in an examination. As a result, we could be in a situation where the regulators are requiring audits or imposing other compliance-related costs, but the companies are prohibited from taking deductions for the required payments.

I would ask that the Chairman clarify the text of Section 333 in order to specifically exclude such payments.

In addition we have received letters from Chairman Greenspan of the Federal Reserve Board, Director Gilleran of the Office of Thrift Supervision and Chairman Powell of the FDIC expressing their concern regarding the breadth of Section 333. At this time, I would like to incorporate these letters into the Record. Mr. Chairman, thank you for your attention to an issue that is of great importance to many companies in a variety

of industries. I look forward to working with the Chairman to amend the text of Section 333 in the conference report.

syndication