Floor Statements

Madam President, I am proud to support H.R. 1195, a bill to amend the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act, and the benefits that it will provide to West Virginia and the rest of the country. However, I must oppose the two amendments offered by Senators Boxer and Coburn. Both amendments have the good intention of ensuring open and honest government, but I must oppose them because of my concerns about their implications, particularly as they may impinge on the powers of the legislative branch.

I applaud the Senators for their attempts to eliminate any waste, fraud, and abuse that have plagued the Congress in previous years. As chairman of the Appropriations Committee, I have instituted on-line access to spending bills, so that the public may see where their tax money is being spent. But both of these amendments may inappropriately expose Congress to scrutiny by the executive branch by way of the Department of Justice.

Congress is fully capable of proceeding with its own internal investigations. Both Houses have bipartisan Ethics Committees that may undertake these investigations. If criminal activities are discovered in the course of a congressional inquiry, such crimes should then be investigated by the appropriate Federal authorities.

Mr. President, it has been written that King of England Edward I--known as the ``Hammer of the Scots''--once tried to prohibit London's burning of coal. He is said to have proclaimed, ``Be it known to all within the sound of my voice, whoever shall be found guilty of burning coal shall suffer the loss of his head.''

Coal has always had its critics. Despite them, coal has not only endured, it has prevailed. It fueled America's Industrial Revolution in the 19th century. It fueled America's naval battleships in the early 20th century. It possesses the bright potential to help America get out from under the thumb of foreign oil-wielding despots in the 21st century.

The coal industry has evolved in the last centuries, shaped by safety and environmental critiques. It has professed a willingness to evolve further. But the harsh attacks and efforts to demonize coal on the campaign trail are becoming increasingly irresponsible and inflammatory, and destructive. Coal miners hear these comments, and what are they to think? They are patriotic Americans. They risk their lives every day underground. They reside in the coalfields, where they live honest, modest lives, and where they attend church and teach their children solid values. And they vote. The last thing they deserve is to have their profession--or to have their father's profession--demonized.

These kinds of comments are counterproductive to the challenges that lie in front of us. If our Nation is to regain its independence from foreign oil, we must rely on coal. There is no getting around that reality.

Coal produces half of the electricity consumed by the American people. It is a cheap, abundant resource in a time when the American people demand stable, reliable energy prices. The U.S. military is already making long-term investments in liquid-coal technology. The chunk of rock that once burned in a stove will soon be widely used in fuel tanks of aircrafts, cars, trucks, and buses, and just about anything else we need it for. Coal will be around for a long, long time.

I support a broad energy portfolio. Renewable energies have their place in that portfolio, but they are not a panacea. Certainly one renewable energy alone, like wind, will not guarantee our Nation's energy independence. We need to expand our use of other renewable and alternative fuels. Solar is important, geothermal is showing promise, tidal has great possibilities, and biomass--particularly when combined with coal to help immediately reduce emissions that concern us all--is certainly a fuel worth investing in.

It is clear to me that the intent of the Ensign/Cantwell amendment is good, but the benefit of the Alexander amendment is greater. And so I will cast my vote with those who seek a broader investment in renewable energies that is also grounded in the realities of the continuing promise of coal.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the attached from the Office of Compliance be printed in the Record today pursuant to section 304(b)(3) of the Congressional Accountability Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1384(b)(3)).

Mr. President, I was saddened to learn that my good friend and former colleague, Senator Howard Metzenbaum, has passed away.

He was a man of courage, conviction, commitment, and toughness. He was a labor lawyer and union lobbyist, who grew up in poverty, and went on to become a champion of the rights of American workers. He was a self-made millionaire who became a dedicated adversary of big business.

I was honored to work with him in the Senate for 18 years. He was an unabashed liberal who brought such an intensity to any issue he was promoting, that it was a pleasure simply to watch him as he worked. It was the high level of energy and emotion that he brought to the issues about which he felt most deeply that prompted me to remark at one point, ``Some men have succeeded in politics through diplomacy and compromise, [but] Howard Metzenbaum's forte has been his passion.''

And he was passionate about liberal causes. During his career in the Senate, he wrote legislation on nutrition-labeling, funding for ``orphan drugs'' for rare diseases, airline safety, and penalties for violations of child-labor laws.

It was a delight to work with him in the incredibly productive 100th Congress--and he was one of the reasons that that particular Congress was so productive. Some of the legislation that Senator Metzenbaum sponsored during that Congress included plant-closing notification and a massive worker-retaining program.

Mr. President, Senator Metzenbaum's support for liberal causes earned him a variety of labels and descriptions. While the Wall Street Journal branded him ``Senator No'' for his determination and ability to block legislation that favored special interests, the Dayton Daily News called him ``Senator Can Do'' for his legislative accomplishments.

The Cleveland Plain Dealer described him as the ``watch dog for American consumers.'' The Gannet News service called him the ``millionaire friend of the little guy.'' The Congressional Quarterly depicted him as the ``Democratic Gatekeeper.'' In his weekly newspaper column, Senator Paul Simon called him ``the tiger of the Senate.'' The head of Handgun Control, Sara Brady, labeled him a ``hero'' for his leadership in fighting for the Brady bill and other gun-control measures. I was privileged to be able to call Senator Metzenbaum ``friend'' and ``colleague.''

American workers and American consumers, as well as members of the Senate, the State of Ohio, and the citizens of our beloved country are all so much better off because he served in this chamber for nearly two decades.

Mr. President, during one of his fights against special interests, the Washington Post editorialized, ``Thank God for Metzenbaum.'' I loved that remark because I, too, wish to ``thank God for [Senator] Metzenbaum.''

Mr. HARKIN, Mr. President, I was saddened to learn of the death, last night, of former Senator Howard Metzenbaum of Ohio. But my grief is leavened by wonderful memories of this extraordinary person and all that he accomplished during his nearly two decades in this body.

There are several essential, bedrock things you quickly learned about Howard Metzenbaum. He was proud, unreconstructed, irrepressible liberal. He was a fighter who never gave in or gave up. And he was utterly intolerant of injustice or discrimination toward any human being.

In many ways, he was a classic child of the Great Depression, raised amidst poverty and anti-Semitic prejudice, and reared on the speeches of his hero, Franklin D. Roosevelt.

Howard was a self-made man who said that he was ``born knowing how to make money.'' And he did, indeed, make a fortune in the business world. But, for Howard, money was not an end in itself. It gave him the freedom to devote himself to public service and to the causes that he believed in so passionately.

Howard and I shared a common interest in combating child labor and child slavery around the world. I especially admired his work as a founding member of the RUGMARK Foundation, a non-profit organization dedicated to fighting child labor in the hand-made carpet industry, especially in countries like India and Pakistan.

He poured all his energy and prestige as a U.S. Senator into getting RUGMARK started, and building it into the successful humanitarian organization that it is today. And on many occasions, he joined with other anti-child-labor activists in picketing outside of rug stores that persisted in selling products made with abusive child labor.

Of course, Howard's fight for social and economic justice extended into many other arenas.

For many years, he worked as a lawyer for labor unions, and he always believed passionately in unions as instruments for lifting people up and fighting for justice. It was Senator Metzenbaum who passed the law requiring 60-day notice before a plant could be closed.

And I dare say that the Senate has never had a more outspoken advocate for the American consumer. In fact, after he retired from the Senate, Howard served as chairman of the Consumer Federation of America. He fought for access to affordable prescription drugs. And, with good reason, he was especially proud of the law he passed requiring nutrition labels on all processed food products.

Food labels--listing calories, fat, salt, and cholesterol content-- have changed the way Americans shop, and they have given us an important tool for taking charge of our own health. Howard's work on food product labels was the inspiration for my own bill, which would require chain restaurants to provide similar information on the nutritional content of regular menu items.

Mr. President, those of us who were privileged to serve in the Senate with Howard Metzenbaum will never forget his sharp wit and equally sharp tongue. He didn't come to the Senate to be Mr. Popularity; he came here to get things done and to change the world for the better.

And that's exactly what Senator Metzenbaum did during his 19 years in this body. He was a tireless, outspoken voice for working families and union members, for the poor, and for anyone who is oppressed, exploited, or discriminated against.

Mr. President, there was one other great passion in Howard Metzenbaum's life, and that was his love for Shirley, his wife and partner for more than five decades. My thoughts and prayers, today, are with Shirley.

She is saying goodbye to her beloved husband. We are saying goodbye to one of the true giants of the Senate in the late 20th century.

Mr. President, in his essay on ``Politics and the English Language,'' George Orwell laments the abuse of speech by political leaders. He notes how certain words are so vague in meaning that they can be twisted and distorted into something they are not. What is entirely altruistic, he argues, can be made to seem repugnant and avaricious.

One such Orwellian word that has found its way into our political lexicon is ``earmark.'' This poor, wretched, maligned word has had scorn heaped upon it. It has been equated with corruption and invoked to describe dastardly, behind-the-scenes machinations--sometimes real, but mostly imagined.

President Bush has enthusiastically embraced this Orwellian line. In his State of the Union Address, the President asked the Congress to reduce Congressional earmarks by half and threatened to veto any bill that does not comply. He instructed executive agencies to ignore Congressional guidance on earmarks for fiscal year 2009. Let the executive agencies make the spending decisions, his argument goes.

Certainly the White House budget office would like us to do that. I don't expect officials from that office to understand the critical needs of the communities we represent. They do not meet with our constituencies. They do not know our States and their people. They do not see what we see. An earmark may be pork to some political chatter box on television, but it could be an economic lifeline for a community. It may be a road that has fallen into dangerous disrepair or a bridge that is on the verge of collapse. An earmark is an economic need that many times falls between the cracks of the Washington bureaucracy. When that happens, the people we represent cannot call some unelected bureaucrat in the White House budget office. They cannot get a Cabinet Secretary on the line. When they need help, they come to us, their elected representatives. These are the working people in our society. Their priorities may be considered unimportant by some, but it's our job to make sure critical needs in our States are addressed.

Some earmarked spending has proven to be a tremendous asset to this country. Children's Hospital, here in the District of Colombia, which has served over 5 million critically-ill children, was built with earmarked funds. Human genome research was initiated by an earmark sponsored by our colleague Senator Domenici. The WIC program, which has provided essential nutrition to 150 million women, infants, and children, was started as an earmark. The Predator unmanned aircraft, which has been so effective in the Global War on Terror, was built with an earmark.

The DeMint amendment before the Senate today fails to acknowledge the existence of these achievements. The amendment does not recognize that Members of Congress know the needs of the people they represent better than unelected bureaucrats at the White

House budget office. The idea that an all-knowing, all-powerful executive bureaucracy is more trustworthy than the elected representatives of the people when it comes to spending taxpayer dollars challenges the most basic tenet of our political system.

Frankly, the effort to demonize earmarks is a ruse; it is a feint; it is an effort to distract Americans from horrendous budget deficits which have mushroomed under President Bush. When President Bush took office, this Nation had just completed 4 straight years of budget surpluses. The Congressional Budget Office estimated that the surplus between 2002 and 2011 would be $5.6 trillion. Now, according to the White House's own budget documents, we are facing $2.7 trillion of debt over those same 10 years. During the Bush Presidency, our government will have experienced the five largest annual deficits in the history of the Republic. The author of this amendment would like Americans to think that these deficits were caused by earmarks. What poppycock. If anyone thinks they can eliminate the $400 billion deficit by eliminating earmarks, they need to take a refresher course in arithmetic.

In fiscal year 2008, the total cost of the Bush tax cuts will be $252 billion--21 times the amount of earmark spending in question. In fiscal year 2008, the cost of the tax cuts for the wealthiest one percent of taxpayers will be almost $70 billion--6 times the amount of spending in question. In fiscal year 2008, special interest tax favors will cost $1 trillion--83 times the amount of spending in question. Corporate tax hand-outs will cost $91 billion--over 76 times the amount of spending in question. The level of Congressional earmarks is one-fiftieth of what this country has exhausted on the war in Iraq.

I implore my colleagues to look at the facts. Last year, the President proposed almost 2,000 earmarks, totaling more than $22 billion. Earmarks exploded under the Bush administration, including presidential earmarks for cattle fever ticks, fruit flies, and light brown apple moths. When President Bush signed the highway bill in 2005, it contained over 6,000 earmarks, 50 percent more earmarks than all the previous highway bills combined.

In the past year, it was the Congress that took the initiative to limit earmarks. In 2007, we had a moratorium on earmarks until rules could be enacted that would add transparency to the process of earmarking funds. Last year, Congress enacted new rules that added unprecedented transparency and accountability to the process of earmarking funds. These were needed.

Adding transparency and accountability to the earmarking process is responsible. Reducing the level of earmarks below the levels approved by President Bush for fiscal year 2005, is responsible. We have already taken these steps. But pretending that we can save money by eliminating earmarks is pure folly. It is poppycock. It is also bad policy. The Constitution gives the power over the purse to Congress. That is the most effective way to check an irresponsible President of either party. Congress must not cede decisions about how the taxpayers' money should be spent.

It's simply ridiculous to criticize Federal investments in local and State communities without having visited the neighborhoods that will benefit, without talking with the people who live there, and without understanding the local planning that is involved. The earmark is the safety net under blind formulas. It brings local concerns of average people into the funding process. A Republic cannot address its needs based on formulas and the educated guesses of bureaucrats. The earmark ushers judgment, compassion, need, humanity, decency, and common sense into the budget process. Certainly our bloated, bureaucratic Federal Government could use a whole lot more of all of those virtues.

I urge a ``no'' vote on the amendment.

Mr. President, I support this alternative to the President's deeply flawed budget policies.

The President submitted a budget request with a shocking price tag, $3.1 trillion. In the entire history of the Republic, the Congress has never had to grapple with such an enormous budget request. In the entire history of the Republic, the Congress has never had to reconcile such enormous deficits, the highest ever proposed by any administration. In the entire history of the Republic from George Washington, to Abraham Lincoln, through Franklin Roosevelt--in 220 years, after a Civil War, two World Wars, and the Cold War, after severe economic depressions, and stock market manipulations and crashes that eclipse anything we have seen in our lifetimes--the Congress has never, ever had to wrestle with such an alarming explosion in the national debt. No administration has ever proposed to borrow so much money. Once you look past the Orwellian rhetoric about earmarks, and see through the phony arguments about domestic programs somehow paying for everything else, you come to inexorable conclusion that this administration's policies have been an unmitigated, indisputable fiscal disaster.

What's most worrisome, is that the President's budget continues a dangerous practice of squeezing domestic agencies, and gambling that they can get by for another year, and another year, and yet another year on a starvation diet. Hurricane Katrina exposed the consequences of this kind of budgeting, when disasters inevitably occur and agencies like FEMA do not have the resources they need to respond. The same thing happened at the Mine Safety and Health Administration, where the administration chipped away at the mine safety budget for 6 years until it had lost inspectors, and teetered on the edge of disaster daily. Coal miners died because of budget decisions of this administration. Federal prisons are dangerously understaffed. Food safety inspections are alarmingly less than they should be. Our Nation is forgoing investments year after year to replace aging and deficient infrastructure, and that is going to come back to

haunt us one day. There are consequences, sometimes deadly consequences, when the necessary operations of government are denied adequate funding.

Now the administration is telling local communities they must do without Federal investments in State economies, threatening community and neighborhood projects that have been long planned and supported by the Federal Government. Some may deceptively dismiss these investments as earmarks, but they are vital stimuli for communities, especially in the midst of an economic slowdown. The President has even taken the brazen step of instructing Federal agencies and offices to ignore congressional committee report language related to future appropriations bills. To direct executive agencies to ignore the guidance of congressional committees on a spending bill, opens the door to its doing so on other bills--maybe an appropriations bill, maybe an authorization bill, maybe a revenue bill, maybe on matters that are entirely unrelated to so-called earmarks. It is a dangerous, dangerous precedent, and something that is to be resisted.

After 8 years of budgets that have burdened future generations with enormous debt and interest payments, and left behind physical infrastructure that is dangerously underfunded, let us do what we should have done many years ago, and reject this President's ill- conceived proposal. I am glad that the Budget Committee produced an alternative budget, and I look forward to supporting it.

Mr. President, this week, as the Senate debates proposed changes to the budget resolution, our minds are focused keenly on the pros and cons of various amendments and on the consequences of the budget resolution for the authorization and appropriations process that lies ahead. We have much to do this year, and less time than usual in which to do it.

Personally, I am glad to be back amid the controlled chaos of the annual budget debate. As many people know, I fell last week. Fortunately, I only gave my back a good wrench, but my family and my doctors insisted on a lot of care and physical therapy, which was both therapeutic and frustrating. I do not like to be poked and prodded and cajoled any more than the next person, especially after I begin to feel better and am ready to get back to work. Nevertheless, the rest did let me spend a little time staring out the windows, watching the beauty of springtime steal across Washington. I hope that each of my colleagues will have a chance to enjoy the springtime show as the Senate breaks for the Easter recess.

This year, the vernal equinox falls in the middle of the Easter Holy Week, on Maundy Thursday. Therefore, the first day of spring is also the day that marks the Last Supper between Jesus and his disciples, the evening before the crucifixion Good Friday and the miracle of resurrection on Easter Sunday. It is fitting that the dawning of the spring and the resurrection of Christ occur in close conjunction. Both events celebrate renewal and rebirth, the awakening of new life. I, too, feel a sense of renewal this year, of restored health and energy that only enhances my usual affection for the springtime of year.

I welcome spring with the words of the English poet, William Blake (1757-1827) in his poem, ``To Spring:''

O thou with dewy locks, who lookest down

Through the clear windows of the morning, turn

Thine angel eyes upon our western isle,

Which in full chorus hails thy approach, O Spring!

The hills tell one another, and the listening

Valleys hear; all our longing eyes are turn'd

Up to thy bright pavilions: issue forth

And let thy holy feet visit our clime!

Next week, as Christians step through the liturgical calendar of Easter, observing and commemorating great events of two millennia past, the occupants of the northern hemisphere also count down the days to Spring. In these first warm and fragrant days, we can most fully appreciate the beauty of the season, so easily compared to the cold and wet weather of the previous weeks. With each trumpeting daffodil, each nodding crocus, each arching branch of yellow forsythia, and each dainty petal of blooming pear and cherry tree, we find the undeniable evidence of the approaching season. In the ever-lengthening evening light, we spy the house wren flitting about as she seeks a sheltered spot to build her nest. We hear, clear and strong, the first evening chorus of frogs, a song that will be lost in the background noise later in the season. But this week, we hear it ``a capella,'' unaccompanied by the evening singing of crickets and the hum of air conditioners on hot summer evenings.

Each sign of spring, each glory of the Easter-tide, is a gift from the Creator, a promise made to each of us that there is life after death, and beauty after the dark days of winter. I urge my colleagues in the Senate and those listening at home to step outside and revel in the glory and the beauty of spring.

Mr. President, I close with a poem by the great American poet, Robert Frost (1874-1963), called ``A Prayer in Spring.'' I thank my colleagues for their many kind wishes for my renewed health.

Oh, give us pleasure in the flowers to-day;

And give us not to think so far away

As the uncertain harvest; keep us here

All simply in the springing of the year.

Oh, give us pleasures in the orchard white,

Like nothing else by day, like ghosts by night;

And make us happy in the happy bees,

The swarm dilating round the perfect trees.

And make us happy in the darting bird

That suddenly above the bees is heard,

The meteor that thrusts in with needle bill,

And off a blossom in mid air stands still.

For this is love and nothing else is love,

The which it is reserved for God above

To sanctify to what far ends He will,

But which it only needs that we fulfill.

Mr. President, while the Senate was in recess last week, the senior Senator from Massachusetts became a little bit more senior. On February 22, Senator Edward Kennedy celebrated his 76th birthday.

Senator Kennedy has been a special friend over the years and I thank him for his fellowship.

Everyone who knows us knows that Senator Kennedy and I could not have come from more different economic and geographic backgrounds--he is the son of a wealthy New England family, while I am the son of the Appalachian coalfields. And people who know us know that over the years, Senator Kennedy and I have had our political differences--at one point, our political differences compelled us to challenge each other for a Senate leadership position.

But those who know us both well, also know that we have many things in common. We share a love of history, of poetry, and of politics. Foremost, we share a love and understanding of the Senate and the important role it is intended to play in the life of this Republic.

Maybe it was our mutual interests that formed the basis of our friendship. Perhaps it was admiration. I certainly admire Senator Kennedy's career and accomplishments for his State, as well as his keen intellect and fierce defense of his views and values. Senator Kennedy is a member of the Massachusetts Senate class that has included giants of the Senate such as John Quincy Adams, Daniel Webster, Charles Sumner, Henry Cabot Lodge, and John F. Kennedy. Senator Edward Kennedy has joined this august company for he, too, is a giant of the Senate.

Senator Kennedy is one of three Senators in the history of this institution to have cast more than 15,000 votes.

He is the third longest serving Senator in U.S. history.

But, more important than the quantity of his Senate service is the quality of his service. Senator Kennedy has been one of the most effective national legislators in the history of our Republic. His imprint is on a large stack of progressive legislation written during the past four decades. The Occupational Safety and Health Act, OSHA; the Voting Rights Act; the Age Discrimination Act; the Freedom of Information Act; the Americans with Disabilities Act; health care reform; increases in the Federal minimum wage--these are but a few of Senator Kennedy's legislative monuments.

As his Senate record demonstrates, Senator Kennedy is a man of remarkable compassion, who has labored mightily on behalf of his fellow citizens. A child of privilege, educated at Harvard and the University of Virginia, he could have taken an easier path in life. But, instead, Senator Kennedy has worked tirelessly in the Senate becoming a powerful voice for the protection of our environment, the rights of American workers, and women's equality. Senator Kennedy is the Senate's Mr. Health Care. He is the Senate's Mr. Civil Rights. He is the Senate's Mr. Human Rights.

What has really impressed me is that neither years of age nor years of political combat have diminished the idealism and energy of this talented, imaginative, and intelligent man. Throughout his career, Senator Kennedy has believed in a simple premise: that our society's greatness lies in its ability and willingness to provide for its less fortunate members. Whether striving to increase the minimum wage, ensuring that all children have medical insurance, or securing better access to higher education, Senator Kennedy has shown that he cares deeply for those whose needs exceed their political clout. Unbowed by personal setbacks, or by the terrible sorrows that have fallen upon his family, his spirit continues to soar, and he continues to work as hard as ever to make his dreams a reality.

I, personally, will always appreciate the support that Senator Kennedy gave me during the years I served as the Senate Democratic leader. When times got tough, as they occasionally do for a Senate leader, I always knew that I could count on his assistance.

As the majority leader of the Senate during the incredibly productive 100th Congress, I worked closely with Senator Kennedy, and he worked closely with me. His tenure as Chairman of the Senate Committee on Labor and Human Resources during that Congress

was extraordinary, both in the sheer volume of legislation that he sponsored and in the dedication that he displayed to improving the education and health of all Americans. Happy birthday to my friend and colleague, Senator Ted Kennedy. Because of you, so many millions of Americans are much better off.

Mr. President, on Monday, February 18, the United States will celebrate President's Day. President's Day takes on a particular significance this year, as the Nation is actively involved in the selection process for a new President. It is heartening to see the level of interest and participation in all of the Presidential campaign events and in the primaries and caucuses. It is a sign that Americans' faith in the basic processes of their Government is still strong, even as a recent poll indicates that the public holds a very low opinion of the current President and of Congress. In a 1789 letter to Richard Price, Thomas Jefferson wrote that, ``Whenever the people are well- informed, they can be trusted with their own Government. Whenever things get so far wrong as to attract their notice, they may be relied upon to set them to rights.'' I believe we are witnessing the truth of Thomas Jefferson's observation.

As early as 1796, Americans were observing the birthday of our first, and still one of our greatest, Presidents, George Washington. According to various old style calendars, George Washington was born on either February 11 or February 22, 1732. On whichever date people preferred, President Washington's birthday was feted with ``Birthnight Balls,'' speeches, and receptions. Here in the Senate, one of our most enduring traditions is the annual reading of Washington's 1796 Farewell Address by a current Member of the Senate. This practice began in 1862, and became an annual event in 1893. Beginning in 1900, the Senator who read the address then signed his or her name and perhaps wrote a brief remark in a book maintained by the Secretary of the Senate. For the historically curious, both Washington's Farewell Address and a selection of the remarks from the book can be found on the Senate's Web site (www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/common/generic/ FarewellAddressBook.htm).

After the 1865 assassination of President Lincoln, another revered President who was also born in February, similar memorial observations sprang up around the Nation. In 1865, both Houses of Congress gathered for a memorial address. President Lincoln's birthday became a legal holiday in several States, although it did not become a Federal holiday like President Washington's. However, in 1968, legislation was enacted to simplify the Federal holiday schedule. As a result, Washington's birthday observance was moved to the third Monday in February, regardless of whether or not that day was February 22. Officially, this holiday is still known as Washington's Birthday, but it has become popularly known as President's Day to honor both Washington and Lincoln, as well as all who have served as President.

Why were President Washington and President Lincoln so widely and spontaneously revered by the public, even in the immediate aftermath of their deaths, before time had a chance to burnish their memories and fade their less enobling characteristics? Certainly, the great events that were shaped for the better by their decisions were a major factor. Both George Washington and Abraham Lincoln made a name for themselves as inspiring leaders of men and the Nation during pivotal wars in our Nation's history. Both demonstrated true patriotism, a deep love of the Nation that was the prism through which they viewed all problems and made all decisions. Both men selflessly sacrificed their own personal lives to serve the Nation throughout their lives.

In honor of President's Day, I urge everyone to listen to or read Washington's Farewell Address and apply its wisdom to the Nation's current situation and to the decision each of us will make in November. A collaborative effort between George Washington and the authors of The Federalist Papers, James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, and John Jay, Henry Cabot Lodge wrote of the Farewell Address that ``. . . no man ever left a nobler political testament.'' In it, Washington supported the Federal Government as ``a main pillar in the edifice of your real independence . . .'' warned against a party system that ``. . . serves to . . . agitate the Community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms . . .'' and ``. . . kindles the animosity of one . . . against another.'' He stressed the importance of religion and morality, famously warned against the entanglements of permanent foreign alliances, cautioned against an over-powerful military establishment as `` . . . inauspicious to liberty . . .'' and urged the Nation to ``. . . cherish public credit . . .'' by using it as little as possible. Only then could the Nation avoid the accumulation of debt, because ``. . . towards the payments of debts there must be Revenue, that to have Revenue there must be taxes; that no taxes can be devised, which are not . . . inconvenient and unpleasant.'' We cannot have our cake and eat it, too--tax cuts and deficit spending cannot occur simultaneously if the economy is to remain sound over the long run.

Washington's experience and wisdom may serve us well as the true litmus test to apply to our prospective 44th President. Mr. President, I close with a poem by the author of The Life of Abraham Lincoln, Josiah Gilbert Holland (1819-1881) called ``God, Give Us Men!'' Penned before women had won the right to vote, it nonetheless resonates today and applies to anyone, man or woman, who would lead our Nation.

God, Give Us Men!

God, give us men! A time like this demands

Strong minds, great hearts, true faith and ready hands;

Men whom the lust of office does not kill;

Men whom the spoils of office can not buy;

Men who possess opinions and a will;

Men who have honor; men who will not lie;

Men who can stand before a demagogue

And damn his treacherous flatteries without winking!

Tall men, sun-crowned, who live above the fog

In public duty, and in private thinking;

For while the rabble, with their thumb-worn creeds,

Their large professions and their little deeds,

Mingle in selfish strife, lo! Freedom weeps,

Wrong rules the land and waiting Justice sleeps.

Mr. President, will the Senator yield?

Mr. President, I deeply thank the able and distinguished Senator from the State of Florida in which I once lived. I thank him. I cherish his friendship. May he ever be one for whom the motto ``E pluribus unum'' will dwell in his heart.

Mr. President, with great pleasure I extend my most heartfelt congratulations to our esteemed colleague, the senior Senator from Hawaii, Daniel K. Inouye, for casting his 15,000 vote in the Senate.

Many times on this floor I have referred to Senator Inouye as my ``No. 1 hero,'' and he is. Few have ever served our country more bravely and with more loyalty and determination than has Senator Inouye.

Daniel Inouye was a member of the famed 442nd Infantry Regimental Combat Team of World War II, the most decorated Army unit in U.S. history. During one bloody battle, Platoon Leader Inouye led an assault on a heavily defended Nazi position. Although gravely wounded, he still managed to destroy three Nazi machine gun nests. Anyone who is not familiar with the details of this amazing display of heroism should make it a point to become so.

For his incredible heroism, Dan Inouye was awarded the Distinguished Service Cross, the Bronze Star, the Purple Heart, and the Congressional Medal of Honor, making him one of only seven Senators to have achieved our Nation's highest military honor. Senator Inouye is the Senate's only Congressional Medal of Honor recipient from World War II.

In 1963, he became the first Japanese American to serve in the U.S. Senate, where he continues to represent his State and our country with great distinction and dedication. This man of incredible integrity has worked tirelessly in the Senate on behalf of his constituents and our country. Senator Inouye served on the Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities--Watergate Committee--the Select Committee on Secret Military Assistance to Iran, and the Nicaraguan Opposition, Iran-Contra. He is the next in line on the Democratic side to chair the Senate Appropriations Committee and is currently the chairman of the Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense. He also served as Secretary of the Democratic Conference from 1977 to 1989. I have always respected Danny's deep loyalty to the Senate. I will always appreciate his loyalty to me when I was the Senate Democratic leader and I relied on his sage advice.

Senator Inouye is now the fourth longest serving U.S. Senator in history.

With today's vote, he is now the fourth U.S. Senator in history to have cast 15,000 votes.

Mr. President, I again congratulate my good friend, my outstanding colleague, and my ``No. 1 hero'' for another important milestone in his outstanding life:

God, give us men!

A time like this demands strong minds,

Great hearts, true faith, and ready hands.

Men whom the lust of office does not kill;

Men whom the spoils of office cannot buy;

Men who possess opinions and a will;

Men who have honor; men who will not lie.

Men who can stand before the demagogue

And brave his treacherous flatteries without winking.

Tall men, sun-crowned;

Who live above the fog,

In public duty and in private thinking.

For while the rabble with its thumbworn creeds,

Its large professions and its little deeds,

Mingles in selfish strife,

Lo! Freedom weeps!

Wrong rules the land and waiting justice sleeps.

God give us men!

Men who serve not for selfish booty;

But real men, courageous, who flinch not at duty.

Men of dependable character;

Men of sterling worth;

Then wrongs will be redressed, and right will rule the earth.

God Give us Men!

Mr. President, I was sad to learn that Richard Darman passed away last week. Mr. Darman was a good man, an outstanding public servant, and a great American. I liked him very much. Dick Darman was a graduate of Harvard and Harvard Business School whose career in Washington spanned two and a half decades. He served in five Presidential administrations and worked in six Cabinet departments and the White House.

Mr. Darman was a player in many of the important events of the last quarter of the 20th Century. While serving in the Justice Department, he helped arrange the plea bargain that eased Vice President Spiro T. Agnew out of office. Along with his boss, Attorney General Elliot Richardson, he was a victim of the infamous Saturday Night Massacre of the Watergate era. He served in the Reagan administration, eventually rising to the position of Assistant Secretary of the Treasury, where he helped formulate the economic policies of the Reagan revolution and helped negotiate the 1986 Tax Reform Act. And he served as Director of the Office of Management and Budget in the administration of the first President Bush.

It was during the 1990 budget summit that I really came to know and respect Mr. Darman. I quickly learned that Budget Director Darman was a pragmatist and a realist, who was opposed to budget gimmicks and simple and easy solutions to our Nation's fiscal woes. Concerned about a decade of devastating budget deficits he called for serious, realistic steps to get our Nation's budget under control. And he was not opposed to working with Democrats in seeking those solutions. As a result, we were able to craft the landmark 1990 deficit-reduction plan--a deal between a Republican-controlled White House and a Democratic Congress that marked a high point of bipartisan cooperation. This budget agreement helped reverse a decade of budget deficits and gave the economy a boost that lasted for more than a decade. Along with President Clinton's 1993 budget agreement, it helped lay the groundwork for the fiscal balance and economic growth of the 1990s.

This incredibly successful budget agreement, unfortunately, destroyed Mr. Darman's career in government. This man of deep integrity and incredible intelligence was eventually forced out of Government because too many people in his own political party had ideological differences with the contents of the 1990 budget agreement.

Mr. President, I extend my most heartfelt condolences to his wife Kathleen and his three sons and all of his family and friends. I am so pleased and proud to consider myself as one of the latter.

Fifteen minutes.

Mr. President, on February 11, 2008, the Congressional Budget Office responded to an inquiry from Senator Kent Conrad, the chairman of the Committee on the Budget, regarding the costs to date of U.S. operations and involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan. Allow me to quote in full the critical summary line of this letter:

If the administration's request for 2008 is funded in full,

appropriations for military operations and other war-related

activities in Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere in the war on

terrorism will rise to $188 billion this year and to a

cumulative total of $752 billion since 2001.

It can be difficult to truly grasp how large a number is $752 billion. Let me offer some comparisons. According to Forbes Magazine, the world's most expensive car, a 1930 Bugatti Type 41 Royale, is worth an estimated $10 million. For $752 billion, one could own a

fleet--a fleet--of 75,200 Bugatti Type 41 Royales; that is, if more than 6 had ever been made, or for $752 billion one could purchase 442 space shuttles at $1.7 billion each, according to NASA.

Here is one final comparison: According to the Bureau of the Census, the average price of a home in the United States in 2007 was $311,600. Let me repeat: According to the Bureau of the Census, the average price of a home in the United States in 2007 was $311,600, assuming one could still get a mortgage in today's real estate market. For $752 billion, one could buy 2,413,000 homes--enough homes to house every family in a city roughly the size of Jacksonville, FL or Indianapolis, IN.

That is $752 billion and counting, as the President's fiscal year 2009 budget request has come in, and Secretary Gates has suggested that after the ``surge'' troops come home, troop levels in Iraq will not-- not--drop below 130,000 for at least--at least--the remainder of this year. In Afghanistan, the 27,500 troops currently deployed will be augmented by an additional 3,200 marines this spring. So I do not believe that this budgetary comet will do anything but continue its meteoric rise.

We all might still count this $752 billion as well spent if we thought we were getting good value for our money, if both nations were being rebuilt and showing signs of stability and recovery. However, there is evidence that the vast sums of money being thrown at Iraq and Afghanistan are not all being well spent. Far too much money is being siphoned off to line the pockets of greedy contractors while the work which they are being paid to do goes undone or is poorly done. Alarmingly, money, weapons, and oil profits have apparently been delivered directly to insurgents and militias that are not under government control in Afghanistan and Iraq. That must be stopped.

In Afghanistan, one U.S. think tank recently estimated that only $1 of aid out of every $10 actually reaches an Afghan. In Iraq, a local Iraqi businessman told a reporter that:

I'd say that about 10 percent of business was corrupt under

Saddam. Now, it's about 95 percent. We used to have one

Saddam, now we have 25 of them.

Despite the growing reports of corrupt practices and the rising number of allegations of the fraud, waste, and abuse of Government contracts, not enough is being done to apply diplomatic pressure on the Governments in Iraq and Afghanistan to clean up their acts, and not enough resources are being applied to efforts to investigate and prosecute contract fraud. Congress has been watching, holding hearings, and complaining on behalf of the taxpayers, but much more--much more-- needs to be done. After 7 years, we cannot continue to hide behind feeble excuses. Too much money is being lost to continue to let the systemic abuses persist.

After 7 long years, 7 long years of occupation and reconstruction efforts, much, much remains undone that was supposed to be done long, long ago. As long as in-country government officials and all of the associated contractors continue to profit from corruption and an unchecked ability to commit fraud, waste, and abuse, there is little-- little, I say--incentive for anyone to make the progress that would assist the United States and the rest of the international community in departing.

American taxpayers and the Committee on Appropriations have invested $752 billion in Iraq and Afghanistan. We expect to see that treasure treated with the same respect that we give to our troops. They too have worked hard. They too have sacrificed much to provide the security for reconstruction efforts to take place. None of that sacrifice--none of that sacrifice--should be thrown away on cases of fraud, waste, abuse, and through rampant corruption. I--the personal pronoun I--intend to conduct a hearing on this matter as a first step, as a first step in what will be a long, long, hard look at just where--just where--the taxpayers' hard-earned money has been going.

I intend to invite Senator Dorgan, I intend to invite Senator Leahy, and I intend to invite Representative Waxman to testify on the findings of their earlier investigations. I will also invite other witnesses to offer their expertise on issues concerning the abuse, misuse, and loss of U.S. funds to corrupt practices. I appreciate the encouragement and support of our Democratic leader, Senator Reid, in tackling this issue.

This is not a partisan issue. Good governance and the wise use of taxpayer dollars are always nonpartisan goals. It is the responsibility of all of us--and I mean all of us--to determine the scope and the scale of the problems and then to devise the best--nothing but the best, and only the best--and fastest solutions to fix them.

I yield the floor.

Let Senators be aware that we Senators must and should address one another in the third person. There is a reason for this: It minimizes the chances of us having on display bad tempers. Are Senators aware that Senators should address one another--how? Not in the second person but, rather, in the third person? Is the Senator from Timbuktu aware of that

rule? Is the Senator from West Virginia aware of the rule? Yes.

The Senator from West Virginia will take his seat. I thank the Chair.

Mr. President, secretary for the majority, Mr. Martin Paone, is leaving the U.S. Senate. I am personally saddened by Marty's decision because I have known and worked with Marty for nearly 30 years. I take great pride in the fact that, as Senate majority leader, I hired young Marty to work in the Senate Democratic Cloakroom in 1979. Three years later, I promoted him to the floor staff of the Senate Democratic Policy Committee.

In both positions, Marty performed his work for the Senate with incredible dedication and professionalism. In fact, in a floor statement I made on October 11, 1988, I acknowledged the ``disciplined, orderly thinking'' which Marty had brought to his work in the Senate, and complimented him on his ``calm demeanor under pressure.''

I was most pleased, but not surprised, when Senate Majority Leader Mitchell selected Marty Paone to be assistant secretary for the majority, and Senate Majority Leaders Daschle and Reid chose him to be secretary for the majority. This last position, of course, is one of the most important positions in the Senate. The secretary for the majority is regarded as the Senate's ``chief legislative officer'' because the office digests and processes all legislative proposals which come before the Senate. Marty thoroughly mastered his difficult and demanding responsibilities. He has carefully studied the Senate's rules and precedents. He understands how this great institution really works.

The dedication and diligence which Marty brought to every position in which he has served the Senate have only been enhanced by his friendly, helpful demeanor. Marty Paone was always on the job and at the top of his game.

Mr. President, it will be hard to say goodbye, but I wish Marty and his lovely wife Ruby, also a Senate staffer, all the happiness in the world.

Mr. President, I rise to recognize one of my former longtime staff members, Carol Mitchell, who for 15 years helped me improve health care delivery and services throughout West Virginia and the Nation. Carol has continued her contributions to public health by working in the private sector for the past 12 years.

Carol has decided to retire to enjoy more time with her husband David and son Rob. I salute Carol for her 30 years of service to the Congress and for her loyal and conscientious staff work in my office.

Over the years, Carol has worked directly with educators, health care providers and community and business leaders in West Virginia and throughout the country to develop and implement programs which benefit our citizens. She was instrumental in the creation of many of the Federal health and educational programs we know today and possesses a unique understanding of these programs and how institutions can successfully utilize them.

Carol's Capitol Hill service, includes 6 years on the Senate Appropriations Committee staff and 15 years as a senior staff aide to my West Virginia office. As a professional staff member of the Appropriations Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, Education and Related Agencies, she was a trusted adviser to subcommittee chairman Tom Harkin. She regularly briefed subcommittee members on Federal programs totaling in the billions of dollars.

Prior to joining the Appropriations Committee as a professional staffer, Carol worked for Senator Robert P. Griffin of Michigan and Congressman William T. Cahill of New Jersey.

Carol was an exemplary public servant who has made a significant, positive difference in the lives of many people she may never meet. I thank Carol for her fine service to her country, and wish her well in whatever endeavors she undertakes in her retirement years.

Mr. President, today I am pleased to join with my friend and colleague from West Virginia, Senator John D. Rockefeller, to introduce legislation entitled the Wild Monongahela: A National Legacy for West Virginia's Special Places. Our legislation would designate additional wilderness areas in the Monongahela National Forest, located in eastern West Virginia. A bipartisan companion measure was introduced yesterday in the U.S. House of Representatives.

I have long supported efforts to provide permanent protections for our most treasured lands. Along with Senator Kennedy and Senator Inouye, I voted for the original Wilderness Act in 1964. We can proudly say that the nine million acres of lands protected by the Wilderness Act has now grown to over 106 million acres in 44 States.

One of the most important sectors for economic development in West Virginia is environmental tourism. Our ``Wild and Wonderful'' slogan aptly describes the beautiful vistas, flower covered valleys, free flowing streams and rivers, and impressive sandstone formations, that can be found in the Monongahela National Forest. Inclusion of these sites in and nearby federally protected wilderness areas puts them ``on the map'' for those seeking an adventure in nature. Attracting these visitors is one of the keys to future economic growth in West Virginia.

Since the Forest Service released its new Forest Management plan for the Monongahela National Forest in September 2006, I have heard from many West Virginians wishing to express their strong opinions on proposals that call for new wilderness areas. I was particularly touched by a Christian youth group that visited my office. These young people spoke in personal terms of how a hike in these wild areas brought them closer to God.

Currently, the Monongahela National Forest has five protected wilderness areas, including Otter Creek, Dolly Sods, Laurel Fork North and South, and Cranberry. These areas comprise about 78,000 acres of land, approximately eight percent of the Monongahela's 919,000 acres.

Our legislation would designate seven additional areas for wilderness protection out of the 18 roadless areas evaluated by the Forest Service. Three of these are expansions of existing wilderness areas. These are the Cranberry expansion, Dolly Sods expansion, and the Otter Creek expansion. We propose four new areas for wilderness protection-- Big Draft, Cheat Mountain, Roaring Plains West, and Spice Run. In all, our legislation would protect an additional 47,000 acres of wilderness. This would bring the total acreage of wilderness in the Monongahela National Forest to approximately 125,000 acres, or just under 14 percent of the total forest.

Our legislation would add a significant amount of land to those areas protected as wilderness. However, the vast majority of the Monongahela National Forest will continue to be available for the multiple uses envisioned when the National Forest System was first created. These include timber harvesting operations, wildlife and fish management, and recreation.

It is my hope that after much thought and reflection all West Virginians will see this proposal as a straightforward effort to reach a bipartisan compromise that has a true chance to become reality. The result will be that future generations of West Virginians and all Americans will be able to enjoy the benefits of God's creation.

I wish to thank my fellow members of the West Virginia delegation, especially Chairman Rahall, for their hard work on this measure. Senator Rockefeller and I look forward to working with Chairman Bingaman and Ranking Member Domenici of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee to ensure that this measure is passed and signed into law this year.