Floor Statements

Mr. President, I am pleased to have this opportunity to recognize a few of the many accomplishments of Sarah Snider, an outstanding health administrator with 15 years of experience in broadening health care access throughout rural America.

As the administrator of the Richard G. Lugar Center for Rural Health at Union Hospital in Terre Haute, IN, Ms. Snider has worked in conjunction with the hospital's Family Medicine Residency Program to increase the number of primary care physicians who seek careers in rural medicine. She has also led the center's staff in the development of strategies that have greatly increased the exposure of needed rural health training programs. While serving in this role, Ms. Snider has accumulated an impressive list of accomplishments.

For example, in 1996, Ms. Snider worked in collaboration with her colleagues to obtain needed funds for the building of the Clay City, IN, Center for Family Medicine. This clinic serves as a model training site for family physicians and functions today as a vital primary care access point for the citizens of Clay and surrounding counties. More recently, Ms. Snider worked with community leaders in Clinton, IN, to establish the Vermillion-Parke Community Health Center. Similar to the Clay City facility, this community health center will serve as a teaching and learning site for primary care clinicians and address the considerable mental, physical, and dental health needs of surrounding communities.

Ms. Snider has also applied her talents towards the development of the Landsbaum Center for Health Education in Terre Haute, IN. Dedicated in 2003, the Landsbaum Center is a state-of-the art building that combines the prestigious teaching facilities of Union Hospital with the educational assets of Indiana State University and the Indiana University School of Medicine.

It has been a tremendous pleasure for me to witness Sarah's efforts over the years. Her leadership, dedication, and counsel have benefited many individuals. While she will be dearly missed in Terre Haute, I wish Sarah and her family all the best as they pursue new and exciting endeavors.

Madam President, I appreciate this opportunity to support the President's nomination of Judge William Thomas Lawrence to serve as a U.S. district judge for the Southern District of Indiana.

I would first like to thank the Senate Judiciary Committee chairman, Pat Leahy, ranking member, Arlen Specter, the respective leaders of the Senate, and especially my colleague, Senator Evan Bayh, for their important work to facilitate the timely consideration of this distinguished nominee.

On December 18, 2007, the Senate voted to confirm the nomination of John Tinder to serve on the Seventh Circuit Court. John was a distinguished leader on Indiana's Southern District Court, and I knew his successor would need to possess the same degree of integrity and intelligence. Given this need for strong leadership, I was pleased to commend William Lawrence to President Bush for consideration. This selection was the product of a bipartisan process and reflective of the importance of finding highly qualified judges to carry forward the tradition of fair, principled, and collegial leadership.

I have known Bill Lawrence for many years. I have always been impressed with his high energy, his resolute integrity, and his remarkable dedication to public service.

William Lawrence attended Indiana University, where he received both his undergraduate and his law degrees. He immediately entered private practice but also devoted time to serve as a public defender in Marion County, IN, courts.

Subsequently, he served part time as a master commissioner of the Marion County Circuit Court.

In 1996, Judge Lawrence was elected to the Marion County Circuit Court. In this position, he built a reputation for fairness and efficiency. The Marion County Circuit Court is one of the busiest in the State of Indiana. In less than 3 years, Judge Lawrence reduced the number of pending cases by 20 percent. This impressive performance on the bench led to his appointment in 2002 to serve as U.S. magistrate judge.

Throughout Bill's career, his reputation for personal courtesy, fairness, decency, and integrity was equally well earned and widespread among colleagues and opposing counsel alike and on both sides of the political aisle.

I am also pleased that Bill's experience and professionalism are recognized by the American Bar Association, which bestowed a rating, by a substantial majority of the committee, of ``well-qualified.''

I would like to thank again Chairman Leahy and Ranking Member Specter for their important work on this nomination. I believe Judge Lawrence will demonstrate remarkable leadership and will appropriately uphold and defend our laws under the Constitution.

Mr. President, I am pleased to join the friends and families of four remarkable young Hoosiers in congratulating their team's success in the eCybermission science, math, and technology competition for sixth through ninth graders sponsored by the U.S. Army.

Having won the ninth grade Northwest Regional Competition, the Fort Wayne-based ``Snacks 4 Education'' team of Allie Dembar, Andrew Reichle, Amelia Roebuck, and Darcy Whitney will now face three other teams in the National Competition to be held in Washington, DC, on June 24. These four students have shown considerable insight and leadership in the execution of their project promoting proper school-time nutrition. The team is led by adviser, Larry Lesh.

Each member should be proud of their accomplishments. I am especially grateful for their advocacy and the effort these young leaders have put forth to demonstrate the benefits of proper nutrition and healthy snacks on classroom education.

I hope you will join me in offering congratulations to all the participants in this year's eCybermission competition and best wishes to the many finalists.

I ask to have the following statement further detailing the ``Snacks 4 Education'' project printed in the Record.

The material follows.

(By the members of Snacks 4 Education)

In American schools today, many students arrive ill-

prepared to learn at their full potential. There are a

multitude of reasons for this, including not getting enough

rest, not eating a nourishing breakfast, and not coming from

a home that values education. As a result, these students in

particular, and probably all students, have a time during the

school day when they experience a low energy point. Our team

of four students, after noticing the same problem in our own

schools, hypothesized that having a healthy snack at or near

this low energy time would help students to be more alert,

more energetic, and better able to concentrate.

For our project, the team experimented in eleven classrooms

in four schools, covering each grade from one through six.

The experiments were run during three separate time periods.

The team first had to determine the low energy time of the

class. This was accomplished by asking the students through a

questionnaire, or by allowing the teacher to make the

decision, or by a combination of these two methods. In two of

the experiments, snacks approved by the Fort Wayne

Community Schools' Nutrition Services were given each day at

the low energy time. Then for two weeks, snacks were not

given. In one case, the experiment ran for eight weeks,

having two weeks with snacks, then two weeks without, then

two with, and finishing with two weeks without.

In each experimental snack week, dry snacks were given on

Monday, Wednesday, and Friday. Fruit snacks were given on

Tuesday and Thursday. The dry snacks were packages of teddy

grahams, pretzels, and animal crackers. Fruit snacks varied

and included small packages of sliced apples, grapes, or

oranges. The dry snack servings all contained around 125

calories and were determined to be of healthy content by a

registered dietitian.

Questionnaires were given to the students on each Friday of

the experimental weeks. On the final week evaluation, two

extra questions were asked. The first question asked whether

the students did better in their schoolwork during the weeks

they had a snack each day. The second question asked how they

felt after having a daily snack. In grade 1, 84 percent

thought they did better on their schoolwork, and 70 percent

said they felt better after having a snack. In grade 2, the

results were 60 percent and 70 percent. In grade 3, 84

percent and 70 percent. In grade 4, 88 percent and 78

percent. In grade 5, 84 percent and 86 percent. In grade 6,

86 percent and 91 percent.

For overall results from all eleven classrooms in all six

grades, the actual number of answers were used instead of

averaging percents, as not the same number of students

participated in each grade. Overall, 81 percent of the

students said that while they were having snacks they thought

they did better on their schoolwork and 82% said they felt

better after having a snack.

Following our research, we were involved in discussions

with the Indiana Parent Teacher Association, which passed a

resolution urging its members to support the concept of

healthy snacks in schools. That resolution will be considered

at the national PTA convention next year.

Mr. President, today I wish to extend my heartfelt congratulations to Alan Harre on the occasion of his retirement from the presidency of Valparaiso University in Valparaiso, IN.

I have known Alan for many years and have greatly valued his insightful guidance. He is a man of singular character and faith whose leadership has been an important cornerstone for Valparaiso University and the community in which it resides since his arrival there in 1988.

As the University's 17th president, Dr. Harre has overseen an exciting two

decades of growth and expansion on campus. With his support a center for the arts was built, as was the Kade-Duesenberg German House and Cultural Center, the Christopher Center for Library and Information Resources, and the Kallay-Christopher Hall. In addition, several renovation and structural expansion projects owe their success to Dr. Harre's commitment and vision toward making Valparaiso a world-class collegiate environment.

But perhaps President Harre's most impressive achievements have very little to do with mere brick and mortar building projects. They include a considerable expansion of the university's nationally ranked graduate programs, greater enrollment of minorities and international students, the establishment of 11 endowed chairs and professorships to attract and retain high caliber instructors, and technological upgrades that offer students 21st century tools and skill-sets.

While President Harre will be dearly missed back in Valparaiso, I am confident that the legacy he leaves behind will continue to be a great boon for this lauded institution of learning. I wish Alan every success as he pursues new challenges and adventures.

Mr. President, I thank my distinguished colleague.

It is a special privilege to see the Senate open with a prayer today by Rev. Steven Ailes from Peru, IN. Reverend Ailes has served in seven churches in Indiana. He is a civic leader in Peru as president of the Rotary Club and has been the chairman and a member of many foundations. He has brought students to this Capitol from Peru, IN, with regularity.

I have known Reverend Ailes well because of his son Justin who is a distinguished graduate of the University of Indianapolis and who came onto my staff and served for many years as a very able public servant. It has been a privilege to be reunited this morning with Justin and with his dad.

Let me say that Reverend Ailes is a genuine Hoosier, born in Valparaiso, IN. He completed his undergraduate degrees at Lawrence University in Appleton, WI, but came back to Ball State and has served there likewise in addition to these distinguished churches in our State.

I thank the Chair for allowing me to make this special word of greeting and commendation to a very distinguished pastor and a very dear friend. I thank the Chair.

Mr. President, I wish today to congratulate Holy Name of Jesus Catholic Church and School in Beech Grove, IN, currently celebrating the centennial year of the founding of the parish. On the weekend of June 27-29, 2008, the clergy, students, and parishioners who are part of the Holy Name community will honor this signal event. I am confident it will be a time of joy, worship, and fellowship that members will cherish well into the future.

Holy Name was founded in 1908 by the Rt. Rev. Silas Chatard, the first Bishop of Indianapolis. In its inaugural decade the parish grew steadily, and the years that followed brought about exciting changes and expansions to the facilities and ministries provided by the church. In the early 1920s, the Holy Name School was built; its first class graduated in 1923; and to date, the school has graduated over 4,200 students from prekindergarten to eighth grade.

I applaud Holy Name and its many members for the laudable service they provide local communities in the greater Indianapolis area and beyond, and I am hopeful that these festivities will be an opportunity for celebrants to not only honor the past achievements of their parish, but the blessings of another 100 years as well.

Mr. President, I rise today to express my opposition to the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008, referred to as the 2008 farm bill. The 2008 farm bill contains many worthwhile polices, including valuable investments in conservation and nutrition programs. However, it fails to provide meaningful crop subsidy program reforms that most Americans would support.

This farm bill continues a set of antiquated programs that send a majority of payments only to farmers earning over $200,000 a year. It exceeds the budget allocation by $10-$20 billion through the use of tax policies and budgetary sleights of hand. The perception of being within the budget limit is not reality.

While it is true that subsidies are only part of the overall bill, Congress should not accept these outmoded policies in order to move along other priorities. The fiscal, food and trade policy costs are too great and too damaging.

This farm bill continues the ``three-legged stool'' of a ``farm safety net'' that targets mostly corn, soybean, wheat, rice, and cotton farmers. The first leg is the practice of sending $20 billion in direct payments to only 43 percent of U.S. farms. Of those, only 8 percent receive 58 percent of the payments. These payments have nothing to do with markets, disasters, or need, and they have been ruled to violate trade agreements. This farm bill reduces these payments by a miniscule 2 percent. Farmers, who had received an average $94 per acre for a history of growing rice, would still receive $92.40 under this farm bill.

Second, the farm bill continues counter-cyclical payments that are made when prices go down. Third, these targeted farmers may also receive unlimited marketing loan payments--farmers do not need to repay government loans if prices fall below a targeted rate. Additionally, this farm bill retains a government administered supply and demand program that keeps sugar prices for consumers well above world market prices.

Farm bill conferees added yet a fourth leg to the farm subsidy stool by creating a new $4 billion standing disaster program to cover losses due to droughts and floods. The idea of a permanent disaster program may have merit, especially when you consider that Congress has passed legislation to fund ad hoc disaster payment assistance nearly every year for the last 20 years. But we should ask ourselves, if the current expensive farm bill is failing to provide a safety net to farmers when these devastating events do happen, then what is the purpose of the farm bill? Why do we need a new program administered by a separate Federal agency to fulfill what most Americans believe is the core purpose of the legislation before us? We should fix the root problem, namely that the current subsidy system does not work and wastes taxpayer dollars.

Trade distortion is yet another major problem with the bill. In 2004, Brazil won a World Trade Organization, WTO, case against U.S. cotton programs based on the trade distorting nature of direct payments, countercyclical payments, and marketing loan payments. Similar cases against other commodities are now being deliberated. Surprisingly, instead of fixing the programs to shield U.S. farmers from these challenges, this farm bill continues these programs and provocatively increases the subsidy rates.

How, in good faith, can we ask other governments to join us in trading partnerships, or to abide by fair trade agreements, when this Congress blatantly ignores our own commitments? Some Senators may wonder why we

should be concerned about violating WTO commitments. They might think that this is simply limited to agriculture or specific crops with little impact on our overall economy. Others might even suggest that we are better off building up more barriers to trade; that this farm bill is about American farmers not farmers in Brazil or elsewhere. However, if Senators look further down the line they will see that our WTO violations could cost the United States billions in revenue, intellectual property, and lost trade opportunities. Failure to move toward compliance will invite retaliatory tariffs that legally can be directed at any U.S. industry.

It could be argued that flaunting these commitments would be justified in order to save the U.S. farming sector from sure ruin. However, that would ignore the realities of our current farm economy and the actual structure of these farm programs. Thanks to strong foreign and domestic demand, net farm income for 2007 was nearly $89 billion, up $30 billion from 2006 and $30 billion above the average for the previous 10 years, setting a new farm income record. Estimates for 2008 project net farm income to top $92 billion. As a result, average farm household income is projected to be almost $89,000 in 2008, up 9 percent from 2006, and well above average U.S. household income of $67,000.

We need a new farm bill that ensures a stable farm economy and a healthy food supply. I do not believe our Nation is best served by this farm bill that continues to make payments that defy common sense, snubs our trading partners, and balloons taxpayer spending. Last year I joined Senator Frank Lautenberg and others in offering a farm bill alternative that received 37 votes on the Senate floor. It would have provided all farmers with a more equitable ``safety net,'' as well as greater investment in conservation, rural energy projects, and nutrition.

Under the proposal, farmers, for the first time, would receive--at no cost to them--either expanded county-based crop insurance policies that would cover 85 percent of expected crop revenue, or 80 percent of a farm's five year average adjusted gross revenue. These subsidized insurance tools already exist, but our reforms would have made them more effective and universally used, while controlling administrative costs. Farmers would also be able to purchase insurance to cover the remainder of their revenue and yields. In addition, the amendment would have created optional risk management accounts that would be available to every farmer and rancher and provide incentives for them to put away money in good years to cover lean years. Our program would be available to all farmers in the country--regardless of products--and not just a select few corn, soybean, wheat, rice, and cotton farmers.

Using the savings from this approach could fund important expansion in conservation, nutrition, energy, and research programs. In fact, the approach made more significant investments within the Federal budget in these areas than the farm bill before us and even found savings to help pay down our Nation's budget deficit, which this year is approaching $400 billion.

I will vote against the farm bill conference report and support a presidential veto of the bill. I further suggest that the Lugar- Lautenberg FRESH Act remains a reform option, a constructive alternative that will save taxpayers billions, provide a generous safety net, and allow for funding of farm, nutrition, bioenergy, conservation, and rural development programs without budget-breaking gimmicks.

Mr. President, I wish to share my enthusiasm for a celebration that is soon to take place across America, National Salvation Army Week. The Salvation Army has been serving and enriching American communities for over 125 years. Since 1954, when President Eisenhower declared the first National Salvation Army Week, local units and State divisions have used this time to celebrate the charitable work they have accomplished and call attention to forthcoming projects. It is a time of heightened activism for the organization and its members. But this week is also an opportunity, a chance for us to thank the corps' members for the wonderful gifts of servanthood and volunteerism they have shown.

I recognize the many lives the Salvation Army has touched through its important work, and I am deeply thankful for the men and women who offer their time and energy in realization of its cause.

Furthermore, I am especially pleased to note that several Indiana communities will be host to their own festivities in honor of this occasion.

In Chesterton, IN, a public concert will be held on Saturday, May 17, with a performance by the Chicago Brass Band. In Bloomington, interested parties will be able to partake in ``Donut Day'' on May 13 and a family Block Party on May 15. Columbus, IN, will fly the Salvation Army flag over its city hall for the entire week. Indianapolis will witness a ``Ramp to Camp'' fundraiser organized to send at-risk youth to summer camps. Fort Wayne-based Salvation Army volunteers will hold a Thank-a-Thon. New Albany, IN, will be the site of several open house events. The list continues; these are just a few of the many noteworthy events that I am confident will be a time of joy and fellowship for participants.

I hope you will join me in extending best wishes and fine weather upon all those involved in this year's National Salvation Army Week, May 11 to 17.

Mr. President, I wish to pay tribute to a remarkable professor, scholar, and author, Dr. Emmett Buell of Denison University in Granville, OH. Today, April 28, 2008, Dr. Buell will teach his final class before stepping down as a full-time professor.

Professor Buell received his Ph.D. in political science from Vanderbilt University after earning his undergraduate and M.A. at Louisiana State University. He has taught at Denison since the 1969 to 1970 academic year and has directed the Richard G. Lugar Program in Politics and Public Service since its inception in 1995. This program provides students with opportunities to study various aspects of public policy, combining classroom instruction with the practical application of these studies through an internship experience. As of July 2007, about 110 students in the program will have served as interns in congressional offices. Given his exemplary leadership and record of success, Dr. Buell was subsequently installed as the inaugural holder of the Richard G. Lugar Chair in Public Policy on April 21, 2006.

Dr. Emmett Buell is a nationally recognized expert in the political science field and specifically on Presidential selection and negative campaigning in Presidential elections. He has authored, coauthored, or coedited four books, including ``Attack Politics: Negativity in Presidential Campaigns Since 1960''. Emmett also has authored or coauthored articles and research notes in the American Journal of Political Science, Journal of Politics, American Politics Quarterly, Urban Affairs Quarterly, Social Science Quarterly, and the Journal of Law & Politics. In addition, he has written chapters for books edited by others on such topics as the invisible primary, the New Hampshire primary, the changing role of national party conventions, and news coverage of Presidential aspirants.

Outside of his impressive list of experiences and skills, I know Emmett to be an individual of high integrity and character. He is idealistic, while remaining grounded in the practical. He is serious and thoughtful, while maintaining a sense of humor. He is generous with his time and attention, without losing his focus and personal discipline.

Perhaps most importantly, Dr. Buell has been an inspirational mentor to hundreds of students. His office door has always been open, and he makes every effort to assist, promote, and encourage those who seek guidance. I have heard from many individuals, including those who have worked in my own office, that they would not be in their employment positions today if it were not for his assistance. Likewise, I know that he is immensely proud of these students and their accomplishments.

Dr. Buell is also legendary on the Denison campus for his devotion to personal fitness and mastery of racquetball. He has encouraged numerous student challenges on the racquetball court throughout his career and has almost always been on the victorious side.

Mr. President, I was pleased to join with many of these former students, along with numerous faculty and friends, in celebration of Emmett's career at a retirement ceremony on Saturday, April 19, 2008. I am delighted that this event provided a forum to share our admiration for his years of service and contribution to Denison University.

Mr. President, I wish to honor the memory of an outstanding Hoosier, IN, State senator, David C. Ford.

Representing Senate District 19, David Ford served in the Indiana Senate from 1994 until his death from pancreatic cancer on March 5, 2008. His colleagues in the Indiana Senate have lost a dear friend and insightful leader. Public officials across the State will remember him as a tireless advocate for technological innovation. However, the breath of his knowledge extended to education, agriculture, and judiciary policy as well. In short, he was an able and devoted legislator who performed his duties with intelligence, vigor, and integrity.

Prior to being elected to the Indiana Senate, David Ford served as prosecutor in Blackford County, IN. He was also an accomplished pilot, an active member of the American Agriculture Law Association, a board member of Dollars for Scholars, and the recipient of many State and national awards.

I remember many wonderful visits with David over the years. I was always grateful for his wisdom and counsel, and I hope you will join me in paying tribute to State Senator Ford. May his wife Joyce and his many friends and family members continue to find love and comfort in the memory he has left us.

Mr. President, I rise to commemorate the 25th anniversary of the tragic April 1983 bombing of the U.S. Embassy in Beirut. As we speak, thousands of State Department employees are living and working abroad, promoting U.S. interests and building stronger relations with foreign governments and their peoples. While their work is always important, it is also sometimes dangerous. The 25th anniversary of the April 18, 1983, bombing of the U.S. embassy in Beirut reminds us of this fact. On that sad day, the lives of 63 people, including 42 Americans and Lebanese members of the Embassy staff, were tragically taken. In addition to those who lost their lives, many others were injured, including 35 embassy personnel.

On April 18th, 2008, the State Department will host a commemoration ceremony. Senior U.S. Government officials will join Ambassador Robert Dillon, the U.S. Ambassador to Lebanon at the time of the bombing, and over 100 family members of the victims to remember their sacrifice. The U.S. Senate also joins in honoring the service of those who died, mourning their death, and condemning all terrorist acts that deliberately target the innocent. We also reiterate our unwavering support for the people of Lebanon and their government as they seek to build a better future free from the threat of terrorist violence.

Mr. President, on February 28, 2008 we ratified the Andean Trade Preference Act, ATPA. Historically, these preferences have been decisive in encouraging both development and liberalization in a key region. Renewing them is an important step in our relations with the region, but we should also be realistic, and sophisticated, in our expectations for what these preferences can accomplish. As we look at where each of the four Andean nations stands today, we see that they are at very different stages of development, politically and economically, so the preferences will impact each country differently.

Peru has made commendable strides in its economic liberalization process while remaining a trustworthy counterpart on many nontrade matters. Earlier this year we cemented our relationship through ratification of a Free Trade Agreement, FTA. As we go through the FTA implementation process, preferences are still necessary to minimize disruption to current commercial flows between the United States and Peru.

Colombia has made outstanding progress politically and economically. During the past 6 years, Colombia's economic growth, one of the fastest in Latin America, has helped usher in a new era of unprecedented stability for that country--kidnappings, once rampant, have dropped sharply, down nearly 90 percent since 1999; and the once sky-high murder rate has plummeted to its lowest in almost 20 years. The FTA signed between our two countries includes environmental standards as well as worker protections and safeguards similar to the trade pact with Peru, which enjoyed bipartisan support.

Colombia's own private sector unions have endorsed the agreement. An extension on the Andean Trade Preference Act is crucial given that the Colombia FTA has not been ratified by the Congress, and would help leverage our considerable aid commitment, ensuring Colombia remains on its path to becoming a secure and prosperous nation.

Our trade preferences for Bolivia and Ecuador are important because both countries have elected leaders whose record and rhetoric cast serious doubt on their commitment to market-based economic policies. For this reason, it is important for the United States to maintain a strong relationship with the constructive forces in these countries. We want to encourage those who are working for economic liberalization and reforms that promote foreign investment and the creation of jobs. We want to support those who are pursuing policies that will improve social and economic development in health and education and advance the welfare for the less fortunate. It is in these countries where the effect of greater, and not lesser, engagement will yield the highest long term benefits.

The ability to benefit from trade preferences is difficult in an environment in which the rule of law is coming under severe attack. Both countries are facing challenges on this front, with weakened justice systems that struggle to uphold the law. In this regard, an environment that supports free economic exchange and accountable governance is weakened by the inability of these governments to implement the law.

Both Bolivia and Ecuador have much to gain by focusing on strengthening and depoliticizing the rule of law. Without an improvement on the legal front in these countries, the potential for these trade preferences to serve as development tools is limited.

It is my hope that 10 months from now, when we again address the issue of preferences for the Andean countries, we will be well into the implementation of FTAs with Peru and Colombia and at the same time witnessing an improved commitment in Ecuador and Bolivia to the reforms that are essential to getting the most out of trade preference legislation.

Mr. President, today I share with my colleagues the winners of the 2007-2008 Dick Lugar/Indiana Farm Bureau/Farm Bureau Insurance Companies Youth Essay Contest.

In 1985, I joined with the Indiana Farm Bureau to sponsor an essay contest for 8th grade students in my home State. The purpose of this contest is to encourage young Hoosiers to recognize and appreciate the importance of Indiana agriculture in their lives and subsequently craft an essay responding to the assigned theme. I, along with my friends at the Indiana Farm Bureau and Farm Bureau Insurance Companies, am pleased with the annual response to this contest and the quality of the essays received over the years.

I congratulate Jansen Hight, of Owen County, and Leah Lahue, of Crawford County, as winners of this year's contest, and I ask that the complete text of their respective essays be printed in the Record. Likewise, I would like to have printed in the Record the names of all of the district and county winners of the 2007-2008 Dick Lugar/Indiana Farm Bureau/Farm Bureau Insurance Companies Youth Essay Contest.

The material follows.

Energy Aware--Energy Independent

(By Jansen Hight)

Today our world runs mainly on fossil fuels. Therefore,

what are we going to do when all the fossil fuels are gone?

This limit of non-renewable fuel resources is why we should

start considering the use of alternative energy sources. Some

of the best-known alternative fuels include biodiesel,

butanol, ethanol, chemically-stored electricity, methane,

biomass, hydrogen, natural gas, vegetable oil, and peanut oil

(just to name a few).

A wide variety of alternative energy sources are being

developed to aid our rural economies and our nation's

security. With nearly 60 percent of our oil resources coming

from other countries, it is important that we develop our own

dependable sources of energy. Due to the lack of resources to

produce substantial amounts of energy from other sources such

as solar and wind power, biofuels are the best resource for

Indiana to pursue energy independence.

With Indiana being a strong agricultural state, Indiana has

the ability to be a leader in the production and use of

domestic renewable fuels including biodiesel, ethanol, and

fuels made from cellulosic biomass. Regardless of the type of

alternative fuels being produced by Indiana farmers, one

common advantage these fuels have is they improve our energy

resources since they all can be made from sources other than

imported petroleum. By using home-grown sources for fuel,

this would also increase the local demand for Indiana

soybeans and corn, leading to a better profit for the farmer.

This profit can then be circulated back into the local

community.

Indiana does have the agricultural resources to be a leader

in developing a strong biofuels industry. With the

cooperative efforts of biofuel users, petroleum companies,

and the government, our Indiana farmers can lead the way for

a sustainable energy future that supports rural economies and

aids our nation's security.

Mr. President, today I pay tribute to a remarkable Hoosier, Judge Allen Sharp, as he assumes Senior Status after 34 years as a judge on the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Indiana. As he enters this next phase of his career, I know that Judge Sharp will continue to serve the people of our State and Nation.

Upon graduating from the Indiana University School of Law in 1957, Judge Sharp entered private practice in Williamsport, IN, successfully arguing Hopkins v. Cohen before the U.S. Supreme Court in 1968. In 1969 Sharp became a Judge of the Appellate Court of Indiana, serving the people of Indiana in that capacity until he was confirmed as a U.S. District Judge in 1973.

Over the course of nearly three and a half decades on the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Indiana, including 15 years as chief judge, Judge Sharp has served with distinction. In the performance of his duties, he has presided over civil and criminal jury trials in four different U.S. District Courts and sat by special designation on four U.S. Appeals Courts.

In addition to his exemplary service to our Nation as a member of the Federal judiciary, Judge Sharp also served with the U.S. Air Force Reserve, rising to the rank of Lieutenant Colonel.

Outside of the courtroom, Judge Sharp has also distinguished himself as a scholar, teaching at Butler University, Indiana University South Bend, and Milligan College. He has also authored both books and scholarly articles, several of which focus on historical aspects of the law and government.

I am pleased to join with my colleagues in congratulating Judge Sharp and his family as we celebrate his remarkable service.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce a resolution expressing the strong support of the Senate for the North Atlantic Treaty Organization to extend invitations for membership to Albania, Croatia, and Macedonia at the April 2008 Bucharest Summit.

The goal of this legislation is to reaffirm United States support for continued enlargement of NATO to democracies that are able and willing to meet the responsibilities of membership. In addition, it represents a call to the administration to provide leadership at the upcoming summit to secure this important step in the development of the NATO Alliance. Albania, Croatia, and Macedonia have clearly stated their desire to join NATO and are working hard to meet the specified requirements for membership.

The Governments in Tirana, Zagreb, and Skopje have been preparing for NATO membership for more then 8 years. Each of them is undergoing a historic process of democratic and free market transformation after emerging from decades of occupation. They have made important progress in establishing civilian control of their militaries and demonstrating their ability to operate with the military forces of NATO nations at alliance standards. Albania, Croatia, and Macedonia continue to make important contributions to the United Nations-mandated International Security Assistance Force, ISAF, operating under NATO leadership to assist the Government of Afghanistan in extending and exercising its authority and influence across the country and creating the conditions for stabilization and reconstruction. In addition the three candidates have made

important improvements in their democratic processes; toleration of ethnic diversity; respect for human rights; building a free market economy; and promotion of good neighborly relations.

On February 18, 2008, the United States and many of our European allies diplomatically recognized the independence of Kosovo. This was an important step in putting the bloody history of the Balkans in the past, but our work there is not done. The United States and our allies must support the integration of Kosovo into international and Euro- Atlantic institutions. We must also be prepared to work closely with Serbia and assist with their goals of joining the European Union and engaging European institutions. In my view, lasting stability and security in southeastern Europe requires the military, economic, and political integration of emerging democracies into existing European structures.

Albania, Croatia, and Macedonia can play important roles in NATO efforts in Southeastern Europe. These three countries occupy critical geostrategic locations and are best situated to deter and disrupt any efforts by any party to destabilize the region through violence. NATO membership for these countries would be a success for Europe, NATO, and the United States by continuing to extend the zone of peace and security into a region that produced a world war and numerous regional conflicts that have cost the lives of hundreds of thousands, including Americans.

Bruce Jackson, president of the Project on Transitional Democracies, wrote in the Washington Post on February 4 that ``the transatlantic allies face two critical questions when they gather for their summit in Bucharest in April. The first is whether to invite Albania, Croatia and Macedonia to join NATO, a decision that is the culmination of a 15-year effort to end the wars that followed the breakup of Yugoslavia.'' Mr. Jackson points out that ``critics say that Albania, Croatia and Macedonia are not ready for NATO membership . . . But the fact is that Albania, Croatia and Macedonia have spent more than eight years in rigorous preparation for NATO membership.''

Albania, Croatia, and Macedonia are not perfect, and there is more each of them needs to do economically and politically. Nevertheless, all three countries bring important backgrounds to the table: ``Croatia has the most impressive economic performance, and real estate prices, of any country in southern Europe. In recent years, Albania has contributed more soldiers to missions in Iraq, Afghanistan and international peacekeeping than most NATO allies. And since the end of the Balkan wars in 1999, Macedonia has covered more ground in building an integrated, multi-ethnic society in a short time than any other European nation. We now have a chance to bring Catholic Croatia, secular-Islamic Albania and multi-ethnic, Orthodox Macedonia into the Euro-Atlantic community of democracies. Not bad.''

Mr. Jackson concludes by asking an important question. ``Imagine if [the Alliance] had waited until Greece and Turkey had completed their internal debates before inviting them to join NATO. Any further delay on the candidacies of Albania, Croatia and Macedonia will diminish regional stability just as Kosovo begins its extended period of supervised independence, and will confuse and undercut the European Union as it takes over chief security responsibilities from the United States and NATO throughout the region. An inability to close this chapter in the Balkans would also dangerously slow our engagement with Europe's East.''

Now is the time for NATO to invite these three important Balkan leaders to join the alliance. If NATO is to continue to be the preeminent security alliance and serve the defense interests of its membership, it must continue to evolve and that evolution must include enlargement. Potential NATO membership motivates emerging democracies to make important advances in areas such as the rule of law and civil society. A closer relationship with NATO will promote these values in Albania, Croatia, and Macedonia and contribute to our mutual security.

Five years ago, the U.S. Senate unanimously voted to invite seven countries to join NATO. Today, Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia are making significant contributions to NATO and are among our closest allies in the global war on terrorism. It is time again for the United States to take the lead in urging its allies to bring in new members and to offer timely admission of Albania, Croatia, and Macedonia to NATO.