Floor Statements

Madam President, I wish to commemorate the awarding of the first endowed professorship in the field of nonproliferation studies to my friend, Dr. William Potter. Bill has served as director of the Center for Nonproliferation Studies at the Monterey Institute of International Studies. In that post he has made valuable contributions to U.S. policy through detailed analysis of the threat posed by the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, comprehensive program- matic reviews of efforts to address the threat, and training of arms control and nonproliferation experts.

Bill Potter has an unequaled research and academic record in the field of nonproliferation. He has served as a consultant to the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency and the RAND Corporation. In addition, he has served for a number of years on the United Nations Secretary General's Advisory Board on Disarmament Research. He has written or edited 14 books and contributed to more than 90 books or journals. He has also made Monterey's quarterly publication, ``The Nonproliferation Review,'' the leading journal in the field of nonproliferation.

I am honored that Monterey Institute has named Dr. Potter's new position the ``Nunn-Lugar chair of nonproliferation studies.'' In 1991, Sam Nunn and I believed that our Government had to act to address the threats posed by the dissolution of the Soviet Union. As political and military leaders inched away from Cold War standoffs, the weapons they had developed to threaten and deter each other remained capable of killing the entire American population and rendering our country a wasteland.

Sam and I worked closely with experts and friends like Bill Potter. Together we understood that a unilateral effort would not succeed and challenged the United States and our former enemies to work together. The United States needed a diplomatic strategy and a programmatic response to the threat. The Nunn-Lugar program was our answer. The program succeeded in convincing Ukraine, Belarus, and Kazakhstan to remove all nuclear weapons from their territories. In addition, it became the primary tool through which the United States continues to work with Russia to destroy its massive nuclear, chemical, and biological warfare capacity.

I could relate many stories and experiences I have enjoyed with Bill Potter. His patient diplomacy and leadership have made important contributions to U.S. national security and international peace. The education, policy information, and policy expertise he will provide through his new position to the students at the Monterey Institute will continue the grand tradition he has established there and ensure that his talents and dedication are continued in a fine academic tradition.

The proliferation of weapons of mass destruction was and remains the No. 1 national security threat facing the United States and the international community. We still have a lot of work to do to address the threats posed by the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. I congratulate the university and Dr. Potter on this important announcement and look forward to continuing my close relationship with Bill and his colleagues at Monterey as we work together to address the threat posed by the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.

Mr. President, I am grateful for this opportunity to join my many friends across the United States, Mexico, Canada, Guatemala, and El Salvador in celebrating the seventh annual Binational Health Week.

Since its inception in 2001, Binational Health Week has afforded us an opportunity to reflect upon and celebrate the many successful efforts made here in the United States in cooperation with Mexican, Canadian, Guatemalan, and Salvadorian consulates and health care providers to promote healthy lifestyles and well-being amongst migrant populations that might otherwise lack access to important health care services.

Binational Health Week originated as an effort by Mexico's Secretary of Health to direct health care services to the underserved migrant populations living and working in the United States. The network of Mexican consulates throughout the country has partnered with U.S. Federal, State, and local agencies, Mexico's Secretariats of Health and Foreign Affairs, as well as private companies and foundations. These growing partnerships and the information they provide have reached an estimated 238,000 people across the United States and Canada.

We must continue to work together at the Federal, State, and community levels with our friends throughout the world to encourage individuals and families to practice healthy lifestyles. I wish all those celebrating Binational Health Week every continuing success as they pursue new and exciting opportunities to promote health and well- being in our communities.

Madam President, on September 30, the people of Ukraine will return to the ballot box to vote in critical parliamentary elections. I rise today to express my hope that Ukraine preserves and extends the tremendous accomplishments they have achieved in establishing a stable and representative government.

I was privileged to represent our country as President Bush's personal representative for the November 21, 2004, presidential runoff election in Ukraine. I was not an advocate of either candidate in the election. My focus was to stress free and fair election procedures that would strengthen worldwide respect for the legitimacy of the winning candidate.

The 2004 campaign for president in Ukraine had been marked by widespread political intimidation and failure to give equal coverage to candidates in the media. Physical intimidation of voters and illegal use of governmental administrative and legal authorities had been evident and persistent.

Unfortunately the situation worsened on the day of the runoff election. The government of then-President Kuchma allowed, or aided and abetted, wholesale fraud and abuse that changed the results of the election. It was clear that Prime Minister Yanukovich, a position that he again holds today, did not win the 2004 election despite erroneous election announcements and calls of congratulations from Moscow.

I joined thousands of election observers who were sent by the United States and European states through organizations such as the National Endowment for Democracy, the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, and the European Network of Election Monitoring Organizations. Most importantly, more than 10,000 Ukrainian citizens were organized by the Committee of Voters of Ukraine to carefully observe individual polling stations. These observers outlined an extensive list of serious procedural violations.

Even in the face of these attempts to end any hope of a free and fair election, I was inspired by the courage of so many citizens of Ukraine demonstrating their passion for free expression and for a truly democratic Ukraine. As corrupt authorities tried to disrupt, frighten, and intimidate citizens, brave Ukrainians pushed back by continuing to do their best to keep the election on track and to prevent chaos.

The day after the runoff election, I told the international and local press and the people of Ukraine through a

live television broadcast in Kyiv that President Kuchma had the responsibility and the opportunity to produce an outcome that was fair and responsible. I pointed out that he would enhance his legacy by prompt and decisive action that maximized worldwide confidence in the presidency of Ukraine and the extraordinary potential of that country.

That day, the people of Ukraine demanded change and the Orange Revolution was born. Tens of thousands of Ukrainians rallied and marched in Kyiv and other cities around the country. There commitment to democracy was heard loud and clear. The Central Election Commission that oversaw the flawed runoff election was fired. A new commission was appointed and a new election law was agreed to by all parties in an effort to eliminate fraud.

While the Orange Revolution had a few more twists and turns to navigate, on December 26, 2004, Ukraine's maturing democracy held free and fair elections. For the first time, Ukraine enjoyed the fruits of a true democratic process and elected a representative government. The people of Ukraine built upon their 2004 achievement by holding free and fair parliamentary elections in 2006. What made this accomplishment even more notable was that the 2006 results favored the party that had been voted out of office in 2004, a testament to the fairness of the process. Now it is time for the Government of Ukraine to preserve and extend the impressive gains and to provide a stable and representative government by holding another free and fair parliamentary election.

The people of Ukraine deserve a representative government that will work together to improve the quality of life in that country. In the years since the Orange Revolution, Ukraine has enjoyed a strong commitment to human rights and the rule of law, a growing free press, and a rapidly improving independent judiciary. Free and fair elections on September 30 will mark another important step in the right direction.

I encourage the Ukrainian people to continue their march to true freedom and democracy. A democratic Ukraine is in the national security interests of all parties.

The candidates and leaders of Ukraine must replicate their efforts of 2004 and 2006 and conduct these elections consistent with the standards established by the OSCE. A fraudulent and illegal election would be a major defeat for democracy and leave Ukraine crippled. The new parliament would lack legitimacy with the Ukrainian people and the international community.

Free and fair elections are the first step, but they are not the last. The elected leaders of Ukraine must overcome their past differences and govern together. In recent years, opportunities have been lost because of the failure of governmental leaders to unite and constructively work across party and ideological lines. A government that is committed to working together to improve the lives of the people, despite ideological differences will assist the people of Ukraine in reaching their full potential.

Mr. President, I rise to introduce a resolution expressing the sense of the Senate regarding the degradation of the Jordan River and the Dead Sea and welcoming cooperation between the peoples of Israel, Jordan and Palestine.

The Jordan River and the Dead Sea are bodies of water of exceptional historic, religious, cultural, economic, and environmental importance for the Middle East and the world. However, both the Jordan River and Dead Sea face serious problems. The governments of Israel and Jordan, as well as the Palestinian Authority, have worked together in an unusual and welcome spirit of cooperation to address many of the water challenges confronting the region. The Senate applauds this cooperation and urges Israel, Jordan and the Palestinian Authority to continue to work in a spirit of cooperation as they address the degradation of the Jordan River and Dead Sea.

Furthermore, the Senate hopes this cooperation might serve as a model for Israel and the Palestinian Authority as they prepare to meet in Washington this fall to seek a durable solution to the Arab-Israeli crisis.

Mr. President, I rise to introduce a resolution expressing the sense of the Senate regarding the degradation of the Jordan River and the Dead Sea and welcoming cooperation between the peoples of Israel, Jordan and Palestine.

The Jordan River and the Dead Sea are bodies of water of exceptional historic, religious, cultural, economic and environmental importance for the Middle East and the world. However, both the Jordan River and the Dead Sea face serious problems. The governments of Israel and Jordan, as well as the Palestinian Authority, have worked together in an unusual and welcome spirit of cooperation to address many of the water challenges confronting the region. The Senate applauds this cooperation and urges Israel, Jordan and the Palestinian Authority to continue to work in a spirit of cooperation as it addresses the degradation of the Jordan River and the Dead Sea, and hopes this cooperation might serve as a model for Israel and the Palestinian Authority as they prepare to meet in Washington this fall to seek a durable solution to the Arab-Israeli crisis.

Madam President, I thank the distinguished Senator from Virginia for raising the question. As a courtesy to my distinguished colleagues, I will be pleased to yield for the time requirements they have and then I will proceed after they have concluded.

Madam President, I unanimous consent to speak as in morning business.

Madam President, I rise today to discuss S. 1966, a bill that I introduced last month to reauthorize the U.S. Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Act of 2003--known as the Leadership Act. Under the Leadership Act, the American people have catalyzed the world's response to the HIV/AIDS epidemic. It is not often that we have an opportunity to save lives on such a massive scale. Yet every American can be proud that we have seized this opportunity. My message to Senators today is a simple one: let's agree that we should sustain this success, and let's move now to pass a reauthorization bill.

I believe that Congress should reauthorize the Leadership Act this year, rather than wait until it expires in September 2008. Partner governments and implementing organizations in the field have indicated that, without early reauthorization of the Leadership Act, they may not expand their programs in 2008 to meet the goals that we set for the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief also known as PEPFAR. These goals include providing treatment for 2 million people, preventing 7 million new infections, and caring for 10 million AIDS victims, including orphans and vulnerable children.

Many partners in the fight against HIV/AIDS want to expand their programs. But to do so, they need assurances of a continued U.S. commitment beyond 2008. We may promise that a reauthorization of an undetermined funding level will happen eventually--but partners need to make plans now if they are to maximize their efforts. Today, they have only a Presidential proposal, not an enacted reauthorization bill. This is an important matter of perception, similar to consumer confidence. It may be intangible, but it will profoundly affect the behavior of individuals, groups, and governments engaged in the fight against HIV/

Mr. President, I am pleased to share the news of the birth of Charles McDonald ``Mac'' Lugar on September 5, 2007, at Sibley Memorial Hospital in Washington, DC. Mac was a healthy 8 pounds 6 ounces at birth. His parents are David Riley Lugar, son of Richard and Charlene Lugar, and his wife Katherine Graham Lugar, daughter of Lawrence and Jane Graham. Mac was born at 4:50 p.m. and in the next few hours was joined in the hospital delivery room by Jane Graham, Richard and Charlene Lugar. We shared together a wonderful experience. On the next day, Mac met his sisters, Elizabeth Merrell Lugar, who was born at Sibley Memorial Hospital on May 25, 2004, and Katherine Riley Lugar, born on December 28, 2005, at Sibley Memorial Hospital. Mac and his sisters are now safe and healthy with their parents in their McLean, VA, residence.

Katherine and David were married on June 3, 2000, in St. David's Episcopal Church in Austin, TX. Katherine, a graduate of the University of Colorado, is senior vice president of government affairs for the Retail Industry Leaders Association. David Lugar, who came with us to Washington, along with his three brothers, 30 years ago, graduated from Langley High School in McLean, VA, and Indiana University. He is a partner of Quinn Gillespie & Associates. Both Katherine and David are well known to many of our colleagues and their staff members. We know that you will understand our excitement and our joy that they and we have been given this divine blessing and responsibility for a glorious new chapter in our lives.

Mr. President, I rise to introduce legislation to reauthorize the U.S. Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria Act of 2003, known as the Leadership Act, the largest international health initiative in history dedicated to a single disease.

Five years ago, there was little hope in Africa and the developing world of an effective response to HIV/AIDS. Tragically, many of the nations hardest hit by this disease are among those with the fewest resources to draw on for a response. There appeared to be little basis for hope.

Today, the pandemic continues. Yet there has been a change, and the American people have led that change.

The original Leadership Act authorized $15 billion in appropriations over 5 years. And in a significant departure from earlier approaches to development, it linked that funding to accountability for goals: support for treatment of 2 million people, prevention of 7 million new infections, care for 10 million people, including orphans and vulnerable children.

As many Senators will recall, when this legislation was first enacted in 2003, it was done with a certain amount of haste and after a request from the President for quick action. The G-8 summit was fast approaching, but even more importantly, rapid Senate action meant that the program could be established quickly, so that money could start to flow quickly to the fight. Given this, the Senate acted swiftly, passing the bill almost without amendment.

Now we are approaching the expiration of that 5-year authorization at the end of fiscal year 2008. Whatever our misgivings about the Leadership Act as we enacted it in 2003, at this point we need to judge it by the results it has enabled us to deliver. Those results are simply remarkable.

At the time the Leadership Act was announced, only 50,000 people in all of sub-Saharan Africa were receiving antiretroviral treatment. Yet through March of this year, the act has supported treatment for over 1.1 million men, women and children, over a million of them are in Africa, in those 15 countries where AIDS was on the verge of wiping out whole generations. In addition to these focus countries, we are working with one hundred other countries as well touching millions of other lives. Five years ago, HIV was a death sentence. Now there is hope.

During the first 3\1/2\ years of the act, U.S. bilateral programs have supported services for pregnant women to avoid transmission of HIV to their babies during more than 6 million pregnancies. In over 533,000 of those pregnancies, the women were found to be HIV-positive and received antiretroviral prophylaxis, preventing an estimated 101,000 infant infections through March 2007.

Before the advent of the Leadership Act, there was little concerted effort to meet the needs of those orphaned by AIDS, or of other children made vulnerable by it. We have now supported care for more than 2 million orphans and vulnerable children, as well as 2.5 million people living with HIV/AIDS, through September 2006.

Effective prevention, treatment and care all depend to a large extent on people knowing their HIV status, so they can take the necessary steps to stay healthy. The U.S. has supported 18.7 million HIV counseling and testing sessions for men, women and children.

Across the act's programs, the majority of services have been provided to women and girls, and a growing number of services are reaching children.

Our financial investment in this fight has been critical to our success, and thanks in large part to the flexibility of the Leadership Act, we have been able to obligate over 94 percent of its available $12.3 billion appropriated through this fiscal year.

In addition to support for the U.S. bilateral programs, the Leadership Act has also authorized support for the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria. The Global Fund provides an important avenue for the rest of the world to substantially increase its commitment, as we have done. The U.S. is the largest supporter of the Global Fund, having provided some $2 billion so far. It is important for the American people to understand and for the rest of the world to remember, that the American people are responsible for approximately \1/3\ of all the funding received by the fund.

As we survey the results achieved by this legislation, it is apparent that our efforts have been exceptionally successful. But to build on that success, we must reauthorize the legislation for another 5 years. As we consider how to accomplish that reauthorization task, it is important to note that the vast majority of the authorities needed for the next phase of our effort are already contained in the current Leadership Act.

The necessity for new authorities is in the eye of the beholder. Many Senators may wish to enhance issues such as TB/HIV, gender, nutrition, human capacity, infrastructure and health systems, and education. But the current law already articulates and authorizes activities in these very same areas, as evidenced by the many activities in these areas that the act has undertaken under existing authorities.

In this case, I believe we should follow the old adage, ``If it ain't broke, don't fix it.'' We have a good, if not perfect, law that is succeeding. In lieu of drafting an entirely new bill, today I introduce a reauthorization which preserves the bulk of the authorities that have enabled the program succeed and makes only minor modifications.

The U.S. Global AIDS Coordinator has interpreted the existing authorities well and has listened to the Congress and many stakeholders. As the Institute of Medicine recently said, the Global Leadership Act is a ``learning organization.'' The Coordinator is the first to admit, as he has before Congressional committees, that we can do better in every area of implementation. But new authorities are not needed; these are issues of implementation. In short, rather than absorbing the time of Congress, the coordinator, as well as stakeholders in drafting an entirely new bill, we should empower them to continue the work they are doing to improve upon program implementation utilizing the experience of these past 3\1/2\ years.

Let me highlight the basic changes I am suggesting to the existing legislation. First, it would increase to $30 billion the authorization for the next five fiscal years 2009-2013, a doubling of the initial commitment. I recognize that Senators may wish to revisit that funding level, and I trust that there will be opportunities for them to do so, in committee and on the floor.

Second, as the Institute of Medicine and others have argued, I believe we need to keep the bill as free of funding directives as possible in order to ensure maximum flexibility for implementation. I am proposing that only two funding directives be included, one modified from its current form, the other maintained as is.

The first modification would seek to address the abstinence directive in current law. The current Leadership Act requires that 33 percent of all prevention funding be spent on abstinence-until-marriage programs. The problem with this directive is that some countries need to focus their efforts not on abstinence per se but on, for example, mother-to- child transmission, an activity which is considered to be nonsexual transmission of HIV/AIDS. The original directive thus forced theses countries to either spend money in areas where they did not necessarily need to spend it or to divert funds from areas where they truly needed to.

The administration had interpreted and implemented this provision so as to include both abstinence and faithfulness programs, the `AB' of `ABC,' which stands for Abstinence, Be faithful, and the correct and consistent use of condoms. The directive has been helpful in ensuring an evidence-based, comprehensive approach to prevention. The ABC paradigm for prevention was developed in Africa by Africans, in order to address the wide range of risks faced by people within their nations, particularly in the context of generalized epidemics where HIV is widespread throughout the population. Recent evidence from a growing number of African countries shows a correlation between the adoption of all three of the ABC behaviors, and a clear association with declining HIV prevalence.

Before the creation of the U.S. Global Aids Coordinator, the U.S. Government had relatively little experience implementing behavior change programs for global HIV/AIDS that included the whole array of ABC behavior change. This was the rationale for the directive, and I believe it has served a useful purpose. However, I agree with many others that we can improve upon it as we look to the future.

The language I propose would provide that 50 percent of funding for prevention of sexual transmission of HIV, a sub-set all prevention funding, be dedicated to abstinence and faithfulness. This will enable greater flexibility to countries whose situation mirrors the one just described.

At the same time, the language would ensure the continuation of funding for abstinence and faithfulness programs as part of comprehensive, evidence-based ABC activities. I think this compromise approach is the right one that can win support from across the political spectrum and provide increased flexibility while ensuring continued support for comprehensive, evidence-based prevention.

There are a number of other directives in the current law that need no longer be maintained and the new bill does not contain them. The one other directive that I believe must be maintained is that 10 percent of funding be devoted to programs for orphans and vulnerable children, or ``OVCs''. As I have noted, there were few programs focused on the needs of these children before the Leadership Act of 2005 and we remain in the early stages of the essential effort to serve them. This is one of the aspects of our effort that is most strongly supported by the American people, the maintenance of this directive will help to ensure that this effort remains focused on those who need our support the most. The directive will also help ensure the success of the Assistance for Orphans and Other Vulnerable Children in Developing Countries Act of 2005, a bill I drafted, one cosponsored by eleven of my Senate colleagues, and which the Congress passed in October 2005.

Finally, let me describe some new language proposed for the inclusion regarding the Global Fund, an organization that enjoys wide support here in Congress. The Global Fund is a critically important partner of the U.S. in our fight against HIV/AIDS. Our contributions are not only financial, we are also active on its board, and our U.S. personnel overseas provide the technical assistance needed for the Global Fund's grants to work.

However, the fund is subject to pressures from many donors and in many directions. It has become clear that it would benefit from greater transparency and accountability. In keeping with my concerns with transparency and accountability of international organizations that receive U.S. funding, including the World Bank and International Monetary Fund, my proposed language would establish similar benchmarks for U.S. funding for the Global Fund. I don't believe any of these proposed benchmarks will be controversial, but if Senators have concerns about any of them, I look forward to working with them to address them.

It is also worth noting that the bill would maintain the limitation in the existing Leadership Act that U.S. contributions to the fund may never exceed 33 percent of its funding from all sources. This limitation has proven to be a valuable tool for increasing contributions to the fund from other funding sources, such as other governments, and I believe there is wide agreement that this provision should be maintained as we move forward.

In closing, let me turn to the issue of legislative timing. It is critical to the contents of my approach to reauthorization. It is critically important to reauthorize this bill during 2007, as opposed to awaiting its expiration September 2008.

The US Global Aids Coordinator depends on his implementing partners, including host governments and nongovernmental organizations, including faith- and community-based organizations, to scale up programs rapidly to reach as many people as possible. They have been a critical part of programs success to date.

But HIV and AIDS are different from many diseases: once HIV-positive persons are provided treatment or orphans enrolled in care programs, their treatment and care become ongoing commitments for program partners. Thus, for partners to continue to scale up programs in 2008, they need assurances of a continued U.S. commitment beyond 2008. These partners recognize that at this point, they have only a Presidential proposal, not actual reauthorization.

In fact, some of my staff on the Foreign Relations Committee have recently returned from countries receiving our assistance and verified this concern. Various ministries of health are refusing to expand the number of patients currently receiving antiretroviral medication for fear that they will not receive enough money in the years to come to purchase next year's doses for these new patients.

Without reauthorization in 2007, partners have indicated that they will be unable to scale up programs in 2008, and as my staff have confirmed, there is already evidence that some have begun to slow enrollment in programs. Without continued rapid scale-up this year and next, we may not achieve the ambitious goals for the first phase of PEFPAR, treatment for 2 million, prevention of 7 million new infections, care for 10 million, including orphans and vulnerable children. However, time will be needed to develop sustainable programs with commitments from our partner countries as we move into the next 5- year commitment from the American people.

Thus it is essential that we act before we go out of session this year. I recognize that we face a crowded calendar. But we can do it if we will take the most direct path to passage, a clean bill.

This body can be proud of its contribution to the remarkable turnaround on the issue of global HIV/AIDS, from concern to action. We have represented well the compassion and generosity of the American people and the demand for accountability by the American taxpayer. I call on my colleagues to join me in sponsoring this bill to reauthorize the Leadership Act in 2007, and to extend the authorities that have enabled the American people to make such a difference in the lives of others.

I have no pride of authorship. But we need to start the reauthorization process now. I welcome the involvement

and inputs of my colleagues. We should let the mark-up and amendment process work. Secondly, I would welcome the assistance of other Committees and their memberships. Thirdly, I look for strong support and guidance from the NGO and faith-based communities. These organizations will be key to the reauthorization effort. We will require the constructive engagement of the administration in this reauthorization effort.

If we pull together and display the spirit of compromise necessary for good legislation, we can complete the job in 2007.

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

Mr. President, I rise to introduce legislation to reauthorize the U.S. Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria Act of 2003, known as the Leadership Act, the largest international health initiative in history dedicated to a single disease.

Five years ago, there was little hope in Africa and the developing world of an effective response to HIV/AIDS. Tragically, many of the nations hardest hit by this disease are among those with the fewest resources to draw on for a response. There appeared to be little basis for hope.

Today, the pandemic continues. Yet there has been a change, and the American people have led that change.

The original Leadership Act authorized $15 billion in appropriations over 5 years. And in a significant departure from earlier approaches to development, it linked that funding to accountability for goals: support for treatment of 2 million people, prevention of 7 million new infections, care for 10 million people, including orphans and vulnerable children.

As many Senators will recall, when this legislation was first enacted in 2003, it was done with a certain amount of haste and after a request from the President for quick action. The G-8 summit was fast approaching, but even more importantly, rapid Senate action meant that the program could be established quickly, so that money could start to flow quickly to the fight. Given this, the Senate acted swiftly, passing the bill almost without amendment.

Now we are approaching the expiration of that 5-year authorization at the end of fiscal year 2008. Whatever our misgivings about the Leadership Act as we enacted it in 2003, at this point we need to judge it by the results it has enabled us to deliver. Those results are simply remarkable.

At the time the Leadership Act was announced, only 50,000 people in all of sub-Saharan Africa were receiving antiretroviral treatment. Yet through March of this year, the act has supported treatment for over 1.1 million men, women and children, over a million of them are in Africa, in those 15 countries where AIDS was on the verge of wiping out whole generations. In addition to these focus countries, we are working with one hundred other countries as well touching millions of other lives. Five years ago, HIV was a death sentence. Now there is hope.

During the first 3\1/2\ years of the act, U.S. bilateral programs have supported services for pregnant women to avoid transmission of HIV to their babies during more than 6 million pregnancies. In over 533,000 of those pregnancies, the women were found to be HIV-positive and received antiretroviral prophylaxis, preventing an estimated 101,000 infant infections through March 2007.

Before the advent of the Leadership Act, there was little concerted effort to meet the needs of those orphaned by AIDS, or of other children made vulnerable by it. We have now supported care for more than 2 million orphans and vulnerable children, as well as 2.5 million people living with HIV/AIDS, through September 2006.

Effective prevention, treatment and care all depend to a large extent on people knowing their HIV status, so they can take the necessary steps to stay healthy. The U.S. has supported 18.7 million HIV counseling and testing sessions for men, women and children.

Across the act's programs, the majority of services have been provided to women and girls, and a growing number of services are reaching children.

Our financial investment in this fight has been critical to our success, and thanks in large part to the flexibility of the Leadership Act, we have been able to obligate over 94 percent of its available $12.3 billion appropriated through this fiscal year.

In addition to support for the U.S. bilateral programs, the Leadership Act has also authorized support for the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria. The Global Fund provides an important avenue for the rest of the world to substantially increase its commitment, as we have done. The U.S. is the largest supporter of the Global Fund, having provided some $2 billion so far. It is important for the American people to understand and for the rest of the world to remember, that the American people are responsible for approximately \1/3\ of all the funding received by the fund.

As we survey the results achieved by this legislation, it is apparent that our efforts have been exceptionally successful. But to build on that success, we must reauthorize the legislation for another 5 years. As we consider how to accomplish that reauthorization task, it is important to note that the vast majority of the authorities needed for the next phase of our effort are already contained in the current Leadership Act.

The necessity for new authorities is in the eye of the beholder. Many Senators may wish to enhance issues such as TB/HIV, gender, nutrition, human capacity, infrastructure and health systems, and education. But the current law already articulates and authorizes activities in these very same areas, as evidenced by the many activities in these areas that the act has undertaken under existing authorities.

In this case, I believe we should follow the old adage, ``If it ain't broke, don't fix it.'' We have a good, if not perfect, law that is succeeding. In lieu of drafting an entirely new bill, today I introduce a reauthorization which preserves the bulk of the authorities that have enabled the program succeed and makes only minor modifications.

The U.S. Global AIDS Coordinator has interpreted the existing authorities well and has listened to the Congress and many stakeholders. As the Institute of Medicine recently said, the Global Leadership Act is a ``learning organization.'' The Coordinator is the first to admit, as he has before Congressional committees, that we can do better in every area of implementation. But new authorities are not needed; these are issues of implementation. In short, rather than absorbing the time of Congress, the coordinator, as well as stakeholders in drafting an entirely new bill, we should empower them to continue the work they are doing to improve upon program implementation utilizing the experience of these past 3\1/2\ years.

Let me highlight the basic changes I am suggesting to the existing legislation. First, it would increase to $30 billion the authorization for the next five fiscal years 2009-2013, a doubling of the initial commitment. I recognize that Senators may wish to revisit that funding level, and I trust that there will be opportunities for them to do so, in committee and on the floor.

Second, as the Institute of Medicine and others have argued, I believe we need to keep the bill as free of funding directives as possible in order to ensure maximum flexibility for implementation. I am proposing that only two funding directives be included, one modified from its current form, the other maintained as is.

The first modification would seek to address the abstinence directive in current law. The current Leadership Act requires that 33 percent of all prevention funding be spent on abstinence-until-marriage programs. The problem with this directive is that some countries need to focus their efforts not on abstinence per se but on, for example, mother-to- child transmission, an activity which is considered to be nonsexual transmission of HIV/AIDS. The original directive thus forced theses countries to either spend money in areas where they did not necessarily need to spend it or to divert funds from areas where they truly needed to.

The administration had interpreted and implemented this provision so as to include both abstinence and faithfulness programs, the `AB' of `ABC,' which stands for Abstinence, Be faithful, and the correct and consistent use of condoms. The directive has been helpful in ensuring an evidence-based, comprehensive approach to prevention. The ABC paradigm for prevention was developed in Africa by Africans, in order to address the wide range of risks faced by people within their nations, particularly in the context of generalized epidemics where HIV is widespread throughout the population. Recent evidence from a growing number of African countries shows a correlation between the adoption of all three of the ABC behaviors, and a clear association with declining HIV prevalence.

Before the creation of the U.S. Global Aids Coordinator, the U.S. Government had relatively little experience implementing behavior change programs for global HIV/AIDS that included the whole array of ABC behavior change. This was the rationale for the directive, and I believe it has served a useful purpose. However, I agree with many others that we can improve upon it as we look to the future.

The language I propose would provide that 50 percent of funding for prevention of sexual transmission of HIV, a sub-set all prevention funding, be dedicated to abstinence and faithfulness. This will enable greater flexibility to countries whose situation mirrors the one just described.

At the same time, the language would ensure the continuation of funding for abstinence and faithfulness programs as part of comprehensive, evidence-based ABC activities. I think this compromise approach is the right one that can win support from across the political spectrum and provide increased flexibility while ensuring continued support for comprehensive, evidence-based prevention.

There are a number of other directives in the current law that need no longer be maintained and the new bill does not contain them. The one other directive that I believe must be maintained is that 10 percent of funding be devoted to programs for orphans and vulnerable children, or ``OVCs''. As I have noted, there were few programs focused on the needs of these children before the Leadership Act of 2005 and we remain in the early stages of the essential effort to serve them. This is one of the aspects of our effort that is most strongly supported by the American people, the maintenance of this directive will help to ensure that this effort remains focused on those who need our support the most. The directive will also help ensure the success of the Assistance for Orphans and Other Vulnerable Children in Developing Countries Act of 2005, a bill I drafted, one cosponsored by eleven of my Senate colleagues, and which the Congress passed in October 2005.

Finally, let me describe some new language proposed for the inclusion regarding the Global Fund, an organization that enjoys wide support here in Congress. The Global Fund is a critically important partner of the U.S. in our fight against HIV/AIDS. Our contributions are not only financial, we are also active on its board, and our U.S. personnel overseas provide the technical assistance needed for the Global Fund's grants to work.

However, the fund is subject to pressures from many donors and in many directions. It has become clear that it would benefit from greater transparency and accountability. In keeping with my concerns with transparency and accountability of international organizations that receive U.S. funding, including the World Bank and International Monetary Fund, my proposed language would establish similar benchmarks for U.S. funding for the Global Fund. I don't believe any of these proposed benchmarks will be controversial, but if Senators have concerns about any of them, I look forward to working with them to address them.

It is also worth noting that the bill would maintain the limitation in the existing Leadership Act that U.S. contributions to the fund may never exceed 33 percent of its funding from all sources. This limitation has proven to be a valuable tool for increasing contributions to the fund from other funding sources, such as other governments, and I believe there is wide agreement that this provision should be maintained as we move forward.

In closing, let me turn to the issue of legislative timing. It is critical to the contents of my approach to reauthorization. It is critically important to reauthorize this bill during 2007, as opposed to awaiting its expiration September 2008.

The US Global Aids Coordinator depends on his implementing partners, including host governments and nongovernmental organizations, including faith- and community-based organizations, to scale up programs rapidly to reach as many people as possible. They have been a critical part of programs success to date.

But HIV and AIDS are different from many diseases: once HIV-positive persons are provided treatment or orphans enrolled in care programs, their treatment and care become ongoing commitments for program partners. Thus, for partners to continue to scale up programs in 2008, they need assurances of a continued U.S. commitment beyond 2008. These partners recognize that at this point, they have only a Presidential proposal, not actual reauthorization.

In fact, some of my staff on the Foreign Relations Committee have recently returned from countries receiving our assistance and verified this concern. Various ministries of health are refusing to expand the number of patients currently receiving antiretroviral medication for fear that they will not receive enough money in the years to come to purchase next year's doses for these new patients.

Without reauthorization in 2007, partners have indicated that they will be unable to scale up programs in 2008, and as my staff have confirmed, there is already evidence that some have begun to slow enrollment in programs. Without continued rapid scale-up this year and next, we may not achieve the ambitious goals for the first phase of PEFPAR, treatment for 2 million, prevention of 7 million new infections, care for 10 million, including orphans and vulnerable children. However, time will be needed to develop sustainable programs with commitments from our partner countries as we move into the next 5- year commitment from the American people.

Thus it is essential that we act before we go out of session this year. I recognize that we face a crowded calendar. But we can do it if we will take the most direct path to passage, a clean bill.

This body can be proud of its contribution to the remarkable turnaround on the issue of global HIV/AIDS, from concern to action. We have represented well the compassion and generosity of the American people and the demand for accountability by the American taxpayer. I call on my colleagues to join me in sponsoring this bill to reauthorize the Leadership Act in 2007, and to extend the authorities that have enabled the American people to make such a difference in the lives of others.

I have no pride of authorship. But we need to start the reauthorization process now. I welcome the involvement

and inputs of my colleagues. We should let the mark-up and amendment process work. Secondly, I would welcome the assistance of other Committees and their memberships. Thirdly, I look for strong support and guidance from the NGO and faith-based communities. These organizations will be key to the reauthorization effort. We will require the constructive engagement of the administration in this reauthorization effort.

If we pull together and display the spirit of compromise necessary for good legislation, we can complete the job in 2007.

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

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce a resolution commemorating the 125th anniversary of the 1882 Treaty of Peace, Amity, Commerce, and Navigation between the Kingdom of Chosun, Korea, and the United States Treaty provisions covered the appointment of diplomatic and consular representatives, care for U.S. ships in distress or needing fuel, and protection for American citizens. The treaty also allowed that Koreans could work in the United States.

As President Reagan noted on the 100th anniversary of the treaty signing, ``This Treaty marked a chapter in the history of northeast Asia and was the auspicious beginning of an enduring partnership between the United States and Korea.''

Initial efforts in 1880 by U.S. Commodore Robert W. Shufeldt to negotiate a treaty of friendship and commerce with Korea were unsuccessful. However, in an interesting similarity to current events, Chinese officials assisted in this endeavor. Viceroy Li Hongzhang, a leading Chinese figure, invited Commodore Shufeldt to visit China so that discussions could be held regarding the U.S. efforts for a treaty with Korea. In May of 1882, in part due to Chinese assistance, agreement was reached. Commodore Shufeldt and Minister Sin Hon among others, participated in the treaty ceremony in Inchon. After it arrived in the United States, the treaty was ratified the following January.

The Republic of Korea-United States partnership covers economic, educational, security, and other fronts. Nearly 40,000 American citizens gave their lives during the Korean War with the hope that the Republic of Korea would remain free and independent. The U.S. Department of Defense reports that over 8,000 American personnel remain missing from their service in that war, with nearly 200 of those from my home State of Indiana.

Today, approximately 2 million Korean-Americans contribute to the fabric of life in the United States, and serve as an important link, on a personal basis, with the Republic of Korea. I am pleased to introduce this resolution with deep appreciation for this important bilateral relationship.

Mr. President, I appreciate this opportunity to support the President's nomination of Joseph S. Van Bokkelen to serve as a U.S. district judge for the Northern District of Indiana.

I would first like to thank Senate Judiciary chairman, Pat Leahy; ranking member, Arlen Specter; and the respective leaders for their important work to facilitate timely consideration of this nomination.

In July of last year, Judge Rudy Lozano informed me of his decision to assume senior status after a distinguished career of public service. He was a remarkable leader on the Federal bench, and I applaud his leadership to Indiana and to the legal community.

Given this upcoming vacancy and the need for strong leadership, I was pleased to commend to President Bush Joe Van Bokkelen to serve on the Federal court in the Northern District of Indiana.

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

Joe Van Bokkelen attended Indiana University where he received both his undergraduate and law degrees. He then served in the Indiana Attorney General's Office followed by his first experience in the United States Attorney's Office in the Northern District.

After many years of private practice, Joe assumed his current position of United States Attorney for the Northern District of Indiana on September 21, 2001. His performance in this position has been nothing short of remarkable. He has undertaken the most aggressive public corruption initiative in the history of the office. Since 2002, over 30 public officials have been indicted and convicted. Joe has also used his office to target the use and possession of illegal firearms, combat gang activity, implement drug demand reduction programs, and cultivate community partnerships.

Likewise, Joe has demonstrated leadership in the Justice Department where he serves on several of the Attorney General's advisory committees, including Violent and Organized Crime, White Collar Crime, Sentencing Guidelines, and the Regional Information Sharing Working Group.

Newspapers across northern Indiana contain articles and editorials applauding his determination to bring about effective law enforcement. The Northwest Indiana Times recently commented that Joe Van Bokkelen ``has an excellent track record for the five years he has led the U.S. Attorney's office in Northern Indiana.''

Joe has received a number of high performance ratings, including the A.V. rating from Martindale-Hubbell and the highest judicial rating from the American Bar Association.

Outside of his public service, Joe is involved with a number of community activities and civic organizations.

I would again like to thank Chairman Leahy and Ranking Member Specter for their leadership in facilitating consideration of Joe Van Bokkelen's nomination to serve as a Federal judge. I believe that he will demonstrate remarkable leadership to northern Indiana and will appropriately uphold and defend our laws under the Constitution.

Mr. President, on rollcall vote No. 231, I voted ``nay.'' It was my intention to vote ``aye.''

I ask unanimous consent that I be recorded as an ``aye.'' This would not affect the outcome of the vote.

Mr. President, I appreciate this opportunity to honor the distinguished service of my fellow Hoosier, SFC Jeffrey E. Mittman.

Throughout his remarkable career in the U.S. Army, Sergeant Mittman has exemplified the professionalism and dedication that is a hallmark of our Nation's Armed Forces, including during deployments in support of Operations Desert Shield, Desert Storm, Enduring Freedom, and Iraqi Freedom. On July 7, 2005, while assisting an Iraqi Public Order Brigade in Central Baghdad as a member of the Special Police Transition Team, SFC Jeffrey E. Mittman was wounded by an improvised explosive device. Since that day Sergeant Mittman has worked to recover from the injuries he sustained.

I also appreciate this opportunity to share my best wishes with Sergeant Mittman's wife Christy and children Jamie and Payton. As Sergeant Mittman works to recover from the grievous injuries he suffered while serving his nation in Iraq, I know that his children will benefit from the example of service and dedication that he and Christy have set.

I ask unanimous consent that a poem by Albert Caswell honoring SFC Jeffrey Mittman be printed in the Record.