Floor Statements

Mr. President, while I was deeply saddened when Senator Trent Lott told me he would retire at the end of the year, I understood completely why he made this decision.

Trent and Tricia have been trying to restore their lives in Mississippi following the devastation of their home as a result of the terrible devastation which struck our East Coast during the Katrina and Rita hurricanes. They lost their home--and most of their possessions, and, they need time to recover.

There is no Senator with whom I have served who has had a deeper commitment to our Nation. Trent was the whip of our party in the House of Representatives when I was whip here in the Senate. We initiated weekly conferences to try to share the progress and intentions of our leaders at that time. From those days until now I have considered Trent one of the best friends I have had in my lifetime.

Trent and I have served together on several committees of the Senate. Our primary work together has been on the Commerce Committee where Trent has been our leader on the aviation and maritime commerce subcommittees. His work on our Commerce Committee will be sorely missed.

Trent's own words on ``herding cats'' is well known here. He has had more success in achieving bipartisan results than most people outside the Senate know. Trent has not sought the credit for what he has accomplished--it has been enough for him that he knew the job was done.

His role as a member of the ``Singing Senators'' is well known. What people should know is that he had the good sense to ask this Senator not to join--they didn't need a monotone!

As I told the The Politic, it is doubtful the Oak Ridge Boys will come back to the Capitol. Trent brought them to the LBJ Room--where he asked them to sing ``The Late Night Benediction at the Y'all Come Back Saloon.''

It is hard for me to visualize the Senate without Trent Lott. I believe every Senator here now knows what he has done. He stepped down from the leadership--kept a smile on his face and went back to work. He regained the leadership as he was selected to be our whip--and the Republican leader's comments show that Trent Lott became the whip any leader would dream to have: loyal, supportive, full of energy to get the job done, and all with that smile that we all know so well.

So, as I said in the beginning, it is with sadness that I join in wishing Trent and Tricia the best that life has to offer as they leave this Senate family. Catherine and I wish them the best and will pray for their success in the future.

Mr. President, I yield the floor.

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

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak as in morning business for about 4 minutes.

Mr. President, at the end of the year my good friend Dr. Bill Hogarth will be leaving his position as the leader of the National Marine Fisheries Service. Bill is the Assistant Administrator for Fisheries for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and his departure will mark the end of a 6-year tenure in this post.

Throughout Bill's career with the National Marine Fisheries Service, I have had many opportunities to work with him on Fisheries issues critical to the State of Alaska, to the Nation, and to international fisheries management organizations. Bill's knowledge of our fisheries and commitment to science-based management have helped to conserve and rebuild many of our most important fish stocks, both domestically and internationally.

Last January, the President signed our reauthorization bill for the Magnuson-Stevens Fisheries Conservation and Management Act, which mandates an end to overfishing by requiring fisheries management councils to adhere to science-based catch limits. As we wrote that legislation, my colleagues and I worked with Bill to ensure this goal would be met. His expert advice and insight into our Nation's fisheries regulations proved to be indispensable.

In Alaska, which has half the coastline of the United States and produces half of our Nation's fisheries products, Bill has also demonstrated a firm commitment to both conserving and supporting our State's fisheries. Under his tenure, the fisheries service has invested in the scientific research and facilities that will enable sound conservation of Alaska's fish stocks. Bill has also ensured effective implementation of all fisheries legislation important to our State.

Alaska native communities have also benefited under Bill's leadership. He knows that the survival of our Alaskan villages relies on maintaining access to fisheries and marine mammals, and therefore Bill worked hard to ensure that this access is upheld. At this year's meeting of the International Whaling Commission in Anchorage, during which Bill served as Commission Chairman, he secured the subsistence bowhead whale quota for Alaska Native communities. This was a significant victory at a contentious meeting, and our communities owe Bill a debt of gratitude for his achievements.

I am pleased that Bill will be remaining on as Chairman of the International Whaling Commission. I look forward to continuing to work with him in this capacity. This will build on his other achievements in the international arena--such as the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas, where, as Chairman, he was at the forefront of the fight against illegal, unreported, and unregulated fishing--a serious threat to all global fish stocks.

I thank Bill for his many years of service to our fisheries and fishing communities. I also thank him for his cooperation and friendship as we worked to achieve our common goals of fisheries sustainability. I think he has done a grand job for the Nation. I wish Bill and his wife, Mary, all the best in the future.

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum. The clerk will call the roll.

Mr. President, I yield myself 5 minutes from the time on this side.

Mr. President, I do not support the Levin amendment. I rise in strong support of the amendment offered by our leader, Senator McConnell, and the Senator from Connecticut, Mr. Lieberman. That amendment will provide the Department of Defense and our deployed military personnel the resources they need to continue the mission they have been assigned. It will also eliminate the distinction proposed by the House to fund only those troops that are assigned to Afghanistan. In my view, it is unconscionable for Congress to send the message to our troops that they will only get what they need if they are lucky enough to be assigned to fight the war in Afghanistan. What if they were assigned to Iraq? Should they go without funds?

I believe it is our duty as Senators to support the troops in the field and provide them all the resources they need to complete the mission they have been assigned. Unlike us, they do not get to choose which battle they fight. They go where duty calls, without hesitation.

Senator Inouye and I were in Iraq during the Thanksgiving recess, and I can tell the Senate that the troops are watching what is going on right here. They will get the message over there, and if the House amendment is approved, it will be a real blow to the morale of our forces. This particularly concerns me, that some of my colleagues would consider cutting off funds in Iraq at a time when we are starting to see real progress and reconciliation.

I listened to the comments made by the Senator from Arizona, Mr. McCain. I am really pleased to see his strong approval of the funding of our troops that are deployed in harm's way.

In March, Ambassador Crocker and General Petraeus will be testifying before Congress to give us their assessment of the situation in Iraq. We know General Petraeus's plans are working. To withhold funding now would only invite defeat and step back from the progress that has been hard fought and won over the last few months.

I have urged Congress for quite some time to approve this funding and allow progress to continue until we hear from our leaders on the ground in Iraq. The funds that are sent--the President sent us the request for these funds 10 months ago. For the past 3 years, the Committee on Appropriations has included bridge funding as part of the annual appropriations bill to cover the cost of war, until a supplemental bill was passed in the following year. This amendment would continue what Congress has done in prior years by providing funds to cover the cost of continued operations, including special pay and subsistence to our troops, fuel, transportation, supplies, and equipment reset and procurement.

The amendment is intended to cover half-year costs for keeping troops in the field. It also provides resources to provide critical force protection equipment, including body armor, helmets, armor plate for vehicles, and aircraft survivability equipment.

There is also other equipment procurement funding to reset our forces returning from theater. This includes buying down shortfalls for the National Guard and Reserve units. Specifically, the McConnell-Lieberman amendment would provide $1.1 billion military pay and benefits to include support for our wounded warriors and death gratuities; $50.2 billion for operation and maintenance activities to include fuel, spare parts, transportation, and equipment maintenance, including $500 million for the commander's Emergency Response Program, $1.4 billion for body armor and personal protection equipment, and $9 billion for depot maintenance funding to reset equipment and maintain force readiness.

This amendment also provides funds to continue our efforts to train and equip the Iraqi and Afghan security forces. That funding is critical so that the elected governments in those countries can effectively provide for their own security and our troops can come home.

There is also $4.3 billion for the Joint Improvised Explosive Devise Defeat Fund which will help our troops detect and defeat the No. 1 killer of our troops in Iraq--the IEDs, the improvised explosive devices we have heard so much about.

Mr. President, $6.1 billion is included for the procurement of equipment, ammunition, vehicles, missiles and aircraft, including $946 million for Army aircraft, $3.46 billion for Army vehicles and equipment, $703 million for Marine Corps vehicles and equipment, and $266 million for special operations forces equipment.

The amendment also includes $1 billion for the Defense Working Capital Fund, which includes $587 million to reset prepositioned stocks stationed around the world, which greatly enhances our Nation's ability to respond to contingencies, and we have forces in 141 different--I ask for 1 more minute.

It also provides $141 million for increased fuel costs, $3.7 billion to continue to enhance our intelligence activities in the theater, $600 million for the Defense Health Program to provide for the care and recovery of our wounded servicemembers, and $193 million for counterdrug activities to curb production of opium in Afghanistan.

Without these funds, the Department of Defense would be forced to pay for the cost of war out of the regular DOD moneys we have already appropriated. This cost of this war is approaching $15 billion a month, with the Army spending $4.2 billion of that every month. Without relief, the Army will totally deplete their 2008 operations and maintenance funding by mid-February.

I urge the Senate not to take the risk that our troops in the field will not have those resources they need in time to complete the mission they have been assigned. I urge the Senate to support the McConnell- Lieberman amendment.

I ask to have a chart showing the $70 billion bridge fund, as I tried to outline, printed in the Record.

I also thank my colleagues for their continued support of the troops in the field.

I yield the floor.

Will the Senator yield for a question?

This Senator wonders if we will have a chance to read that omnibus. I understand it may or may not contain all of the bills that are unresolved as far as the appropriations process is concerned.

It is still subject to amendment in the House, isn't it?

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak as in morning business for 5 minutes.

I am happy to withdraw my request. I thought it would be a quorum call.

Mr. President, I come to the floor today to thank Congress for finally raising the mandatory retirement age for commercial airline pilots from age 60 to age 65. This language was included as part of the ``Fair Treatment for Experienced Pilots Act,'' and allows our most experienced commercial pilots to continue providing safe air transportation for the Nation. The House approved the bill unanimously.

Since 1960, the FAA ``Age 60 Rule'' has restricted pilots age 60 and older from serving on any commercial flight operations. Under the rule, it is estimated that our aviation system lost 50 pilots every week.

Many in the aviation community, the FAA, and now Congress, have reacted to the realization that the Age 60 Rule has become outdated and discriminatory against one of Alaska's greatest resources, its experienced and seasoned pilots.

As my colleagues in the Senate know, the State of Alaska depends on aviation more than any other State. In our State we find that 50 percent of the commercial pilots are over 55.

The lack of highway infrastructure creates a situation where aviation serves as the traditional road system. More than 70 percent of our communities can only be reached year around by air, making aircraft essential for personal, commercial, cargo, and mail transportation to most parts of our State. Having experienced pilots to deliver goods and services to our communities is essential for Alaskans.

Many of our pilots contacted me and told me how the Age 60 Rule was impacting them.

In fact, on Wednesday, I met with Gary Miller, a Vietnam veteran and current FedEx pilot based in Anchorage. If Congress would not have acted on this outdated regulation, Gary would have been forced to retire in February.

In addition, there are pilots like Captain Bill Green, one of Alaska's best Hercules pilots. The Hercules aircraft are used for transporting large cargo shipments. Captain Green turns 60 next April and would have been forced into retirement, despite the need for qualified, experienced pilots in Alaska.

Mike Redmond, who has experience flying every type of aircraft used in Alaska--in 2 years he will be 60 years old and under the Age 60 Rule Alaskans would have lost his wealth of knowledge and experience.

I have supported changing this rule for more than a decade, and I applaud the Senate's actions in finally taking hold and raising the age to 65.

These pilots are our most experienced aviators and are a valuable resource to the commercial aviation industry. This action today will allow them to continue serving our Nation.

It is rare that Congress passes legislation that has such an immediate personal impact on our citizens. This is a proud moment for me and for the Congress. I am proud to say the President signed this bill immediately when he received it last night.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I believe I have 3 minutes yielded to me.

Mr. President, at the beginning of this Congress I introduced a bill to achieve a 40-mile-a-gallon goal by 2020. As I have indicated before, I became engaged in the CAFE debate because I believe the only way our Nation will achieve energy independence is through a combination of initiatives. Conservation, domestic production, and the development of alternative sources of energy are all parts of the broader solution. Setting fuel economy standards is one avenue toward limiting our Nation's dependence on foreign oil and significantly reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

The Senate passed unanimously a CAFE amendment based upon the attribute concept I authored. The fuel economy provision that has been placed in the bill is a good first step toward addressing our energy crisis. I thank Senator Inouye and Senator Feinstein for their insistence that the fuel economy provision be a product of bipartisan discussions. Their commitment to instituting strong and achievable policy goals was instrumental during the negotiation process of fuel economy standards.

The compromise we negotiated mandates the fuel economy of cars and trucks to be evaluated separately based upon this attribute system. The mandate ensures reasonable fuel efficiency goals for trucks and cars. In addition, the requirement will guarantee the continued availability of various sized trucks and cars in the market, which is important-- very important--to our home State of Alaska.

Our bill requires annual increases to the nationwide average fleet fuel economy standards for cars and light trucks to achieve a fleetwide average standard of 35 miles per gallon by 2020. As Senator Inouye said, this will be the first statutory fuel economy increase for passenger cars since 1975.

The bipartisan fuel economy provision will help save, as Senator Cantwell has indicated, a significant amount of fuel over the next decade. I thank the Senate for supporting this bipartisan measure.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that a list of Senate Commerce Committee staff on the Republican side who worked on the fuel economy compromise be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that this letter from CAPT Seth Chapel be read into the Congressional Record. Captain Chappell wrote this address for East Anchorage High School's Veterans Day Remembrance Ceremony. He is a 2000 East High graduate and a 2004 Graduate of the U.S. Military Academy. Captain Chappell served with the 37th Engineer Battalion, Combat, Airborne, in Afghanistan during Operation Enduring Freedom VII as a route clearance platoon leader a light equipment platoon leader.

Mr. President, I come to the floor to honor the President pro tempore, our great friend, the senior Senator from West Virginia. Senator Byrd will celebrate his 90th birthday next Tuesday. In Alaska, we call this a significant milepost. Milestones in Alaska get covered with snow too often.

I remember watching from the gallery in 1959 when Senator Byrd took office. I was a member of the Eisenhower administration at the time. He had been here for nearly a decade by the time I came to the Senate in 1968. Senator Byrd and I have worked together on the Appropriations Committee now for 36 years. We have each chaired that committee and we have each had the honor of becoming the President pro tempore. He has been President pro tempore twice.

Senator Byrd has been called a symbol of our history, and those of us who served with him, and continue to serve with him, rely on his knowledge of the Senate and its history and traditions. I wish I had the time to go into some of the times I have listened to Senator Byrd recite poems or history, or tell of his times of researching the history of the Roman Senate. I served as the whip here for 8 years when Senator Byrd was giving his history lessons, and it was my honor to sit here and listen to those history lessons, and I learned a great deal from him.

His devotion to the Senate and to those of us who serve with him are reasons for us to call him the patriarch of the Senate family. I know of no one who has done so much to keep the spirit of the family alive in the Senate. Over the years, Senator Byrd has come to the floor many times to honor me personally and to honor my family. He comforted me here on the floor when my wife Ann passed away. He comforted me in times of sorrow; he comforted me in times of joy.

He came to me on the day I first became a grandfather. And I will never forget that, because he gave a speech about the meaning of becoming a grandfather, and he told me I had my first taste of immortality because I was a grandfather. Those words have stayed with me for a long time. I now have 11 grandchildren, but I will never forget that speech about the first one.

I also remember the kind remarks he has made to me on many other occasions. He came to the floor and offered congratulations of the Senate when I remarried, and he came again when Catherine and I had our first daughter, our only child, Lilly. Earlier this year, he came to the floor to congratulate Lilly on her graduation from law school. And with Lilly, I remember when she was young and a baby, and I was the whip, we had a birthday party for Lilly every year here, and Senator Byrd never missed one of those. He became Uncle Robert to Lilly. He has had a marvelous relationship with the children of Senators who have served with him.

The nurturing and caring quality that Senator Byrd has brought to this Chamber for so many years reminds us we are a family. We had the sad occasion to gather with him and support him when he lost his beloved wife. But I have come here today to congratulate the Senator from West Virginia not only for his service to our Nation and to the Senate, but for his longevity. He is the only Senator who is older than I am, and I thank him for his friendship and for all he has done for me and my family personally.

Catherine and I wish him a very happy birthday, and we hope the Senate will join in extending to the President pro tempore our sincere congratulations on his birthday.

Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I offer today a resolution recognizing Hostelling International USA for 75 years of service to intercultural understanding and to youth travel.

Hostelling USA was established in 1934 to promote hostelling in the United States. Since it is founding, it has hosted over 22 million visitors in its 70 hostels across the country, including Alaska.

Hostelling is a unique and affordable way travelers can see our country, while making lifelong friends and contacts.

I congratulate Hostelling International USA for 75 years of service and hope my colleagues will join me in passing this resolution.

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

Mr. President, I want to state my support for the Department of Defense conference agreement that is before the Senate today. As we have done for so many years, my good friend from Hawaii, Senator Inouye, and I have worked in a bipartisan manner with our counterparts in the House to draft an agreement that meets the needs of the military. This bill balances our priorities for funding, pay, and benefits to the military and civilian personnel, maintaining force readiness in the operating accounts, and providing significant investment for the modernization of weapons systems. I strongly support the defense side of this bill.

I remain deeply disturbed by what is not included in the bill. What is missing from the conference agreement is what is known as the bridge fund or supplemental appropriations to support our troops in the field. For each of the last 3 years, and in the current CR, the bridge funding for the costs of operations in Iraq, Afghanistan, and around the world have been included, until a full supplemental bill could be considered has passed the Congress in the Spring.

This has been a difficult matter for us to deal with. I was unsuccessful in the defense conference in adding $70 billion as a bridge fund. As I understand it, the House has indicated they will bring forth a stand-alone bridge fund bill to be considered by the Congress as early as next week. As a matter of fact, it may be tomorrow that they take it up. I have not seen any action yet to assure that we will get a clean bridge fund bill that can be signed by the President. This bothers me considerably.

The continuing resolution attached to this bill does not contain a bridge fund. As I said, every defense bill since fiscal year 2005 has included a bridge fund that funded contingency operations. Unfortunately, the absence of this bridge fund leaves the Department will be forced to divert money from their regular accounts to fund overseas operations. They will also be forced to reprogram money from the Defense bill itself in order to cover the problems of the men and women in the field.

I have said I would offer a motion to invoke rule XXVIII against this bill, but upon reflection and after talking to the people in the administration, the intention is to allow that this Defense bill to be passed because there are overwhelming problems in the Defense Department itself.

So contrary to my own deep thoughts about the lack of the bridge fund, I think, considering the matter of all of those people who serve us, it is essential we get the Defense bill itself passed. It will give us the basic funds to continue the ongoing operations for a limited period of time.

It bothers me that without the bridge fund--the Congress has failed to recognize the overall process of supporting our deployed forces and replacing worn equipment. These effort are at risk for being delayed, when this bridge fund is not provided. The current CR, which contains funding for our deployed forces, runs out on the 16th of this month.

I say to the Senate, it is a great risk we are taking, a great risk not to fund the people who are serving valiantly overseas. These people ought to be the first under consideration. Unfortunately, we are presented with a dichotomy of protecting the whole of the Department of Defense and getting the bill to the President to be signed, as opposed to having the additional moneys necessary to continue to support those overseas.

In the past 3 years, as I said, we have included a bridge fund. Without this funding, the Department of Defense will now have to divert money, reprogram money from this bill we are going

to pass, to fund overseas operations. Those operations cost about approximately $13 billion a month. That is money that is necessary to keep the people who are in the field now, sustain the rotation of those forces, and ensure that they have the equipment that they need. A significant portion of that money is dedicated to the troops and their families as they come home. It costs much more to bring a soldier or Marine back and put that person back into their unit and take care of all the medical problems associated with returning personnel as it does to send someone over.

The difficulty is without a bridge fund those people are going to be the first ones harmed. We still have time. This is the point just made to me--we still have time before November 16 to pass a clean bridge fund, one without bells and whistles, one without political concepts in it, one without telling the President to end a war he can't end.

I do hope the Senate understands we should not have a political dispute bar us from supporting those people who have volunteered. This is a total volunteer military. They have depended upon us to support them. We have until November 16 to do what we should do, and that is pass a bridge bill.

I do hope the House will keep its word to us and send us a bridge bill. No matter what happens between the White House and the Congress and the parties within the Congress, we should not lose sight of the fact that those people have volunteered to serve this country, they are there, some of them are coming back, and others are going over to take their place until this issue is settled. I, for one, hope it is settled as soon as possible, but I do not believe we can solve the problem by denying the Department the money it needs to support those in the field.

We have men and women in uniform in 146 countries today. It is not just Iraq and Afghanistan. These servicemembers are still chasing terrorists around the world. I think we send the wrong message to the deployed troops who have volunteered for duty if we neglect them. This will be the first time we have done that.

By not raising the point of order I am relying upon what I believe is a commitment of the House to send us a bridge bill, a bridge bill that can be passed and signed by the President by the 16th, by the time the current CR expires. I do not believe we can ignore our commitments to our forces overseas, and I do hope the Senate will join us in agreeing to pass a bridge bill that is not political.

I know my friend, and I disagreed on the basic concept of entering this war. But after the troops were there, we have set aside any political differences and decided our job was to make sure the volunteers who commit themselves, commit their lives and put them at stake, are going to get what they need so long as the Commander in Chief orders them to do what he has the power to do under the Constitution, and that is to represent this country in events taking place in Iraq, Afghanistan, and throughout the world.

These are very complicated times. We are reading what is going on in Pakistan, which impacts our operations in Afghanistan. When we were there the last time I was there, the one thing they wanted was support for helicopters and equipment to assist in the war on terrorism.

I remind my colleagues there is more than $11 billion in this package for mine resistance, ambush protected, or MRAP vehicles. Senator Inouye and I totally support that concept. But force protection for the troops goes far beyond the vehicles in which they ride. It includes everything from body armor to helmets, to ballistic eye protection, aircraft survivability equipment, to improved sensors, communications for better situational awareness--all of that should be in the bridge fund that is not here.

I am disturbed with myself, as a matter of fact, to a certain extent, that I am not going to raise that point of order. But you have to weigh this, now, as to what is in the best interests of the people in uniform.

We are not saying today there is not going to be a bridge fund. We are saying we will pass this bill now, but we are committing ourselves--I am committing myself to do everything possible to get a bridge fund passed by November 16.

We do not want to send the wrong message to our people deployed. The interesting thing about it--I have spent the last few evenings, quite late into the morning, watching this marvelous public television series called ``The War.'' That was our war, Senator Inouye's war, and my war. As a matter of fact, Senator Inouye has a dramatic presentation in that series, and I applaud him for that. But the difference between that war and this war, these conflicts in which we are involved now, is overwhelming.

I remember leaving Miami and calling my aunt and uncle, with whom I lived, then when I came back from China, calling them from Hawaii, almost 2 years later. There was no communication--no phones, no e- mails, no messages. Once in a while, about twice a month maybe, a letter or a package.

This is a different concept. These people overseas can hear us now. They are going to get e-mails today saying the Senate did not pass that bridge bill. They are watching us--and they should. They have every right to watch us, and their families do too.

I think to do anything less than passing this bridge bill before we go home for Thanksgiving--to me, it would be irresponsible. We have to keep our commitment to these people. The $70 billion that is available to the Department of Defense under the current CR, it ought to remain available to them until we pass the main supplemental, which the Congress will take up sometime in March or April.

I do hope the Senate will understand what we are doing. We have a bill today, which includes the Continuing Resolution, that has a great many provisions in it that we didn't have much to do with here in the Senate. The Senate is on warning that it could well become surplusage in the processes of the Congress if we let this happen again. These items were entered into the conference report entirely separate from the defense bill that is before us tonight. Rule XXVIII is supposed to bar that. The exigencies of the situation now are such that we must let the Defense bill go to the President in order to achieve our goal of supporting the activities of the Department of Defense.

It is with reluctance I urge my colleagues to support this bill, send it to the President for his signature--which I am assured will happen. If we don't stand up as a Senate and support our troops, we will be neglecting our duty.

We have duties here too. We support the Constitution, and the Constitution gives the President of the United States power to send troops overseas whether we like it or not. As a matter of fact, we passed the resolution to make sure the President had that power and then asked him to do it.

So under these circumstances, we should not neglect those people who are overseas, who are wearing our uniform and putting their lives at risk on a daily basis. I do hope the Senate will take notice that we cannot let this become a common practice, we cannot neglect our job in terms of having the Congress consider the things we believe are absolutely necessary for our country.

The only reason I do not do it now is this gap between now and a week from now on November 16. We have the time to pass a bridge bill. We have the time to authorize the money that is needed to support these people during our absence on what we call the Thanksgiving recess. I hope and I pray to God we will do it. We must do it. It is on that basis that I do not raise a point of order.

Mr. President, I am pleased to introduce the Foreign Aid Lessons for Domestic Economic Assistance Act of 2007 to bring a fresh approach to the vexing problem of stimulating Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian and Lower-48 Indian Tribe economies to bring jobs, hope and investment to these impoverished peoples.

Despite modest improvements in the economic and social well-being of Alaska's native people, they continue to have extremely high rates of unemployment and poverty, poor health, substandard housing, and the related ills of alcohol and drug abuse.

Only 11 percent of American Indians and Alaska Natives hold a bachelor's degree compared to 24 percent of the total population. The poverty rate in

1999 was 25.7 percent for the American Indian and Alaska Native population, compared to 12.4 percent of the total population.

Weak economies also contribute to poor health in native communities: American Indian and Alaska Natives suffer from significantly higher mortality rates compared to the general population. The death rate for American Indians and Alaska Natives for tuberculosis is 600 percent higher, 510 percent higher for alcoholism, 229 percent higher for motor vehicle crashes, 189 percent higher for diabetes, 61 percent higher for homicide and 62 percent higher for suicide. American Indian and Alaska Native infants die at a rate of 8.5 per every 1,000 live births, compared to 6.8 per 1,000 for all U.S. races.

Housing statistics are no better--12 percent of American Indian and Alaska Native homes lack safe and adequate water supply and waste disposal facilities compared to one percent of the U.S. general population.

This is the profile of native communities in Alaska, and in the lower-48 states as well, despite a vibrant cultural legacy and abundant natural resources on and under their lands and in their waters. Many native communities have marketable timber, huge reserves of coal, natural gas, oil, fish and shellfish and other natural amenities.

At the same time, native economies are hobbled by geographic remoteness, distance from markets and population centers, poor physical infrastructure, and a lack of governmental transparency, contributing to stagnating Native American economies.

Because native economies are often plagued by the same challenges as the economies of the developing world, native economies are likely to benefit from the application of proven models employed in international development efforts, most notably the Millenium Challenge Act of 2003. This initiative aims to foster those policies that are known to be effective and in the process, reduce poverty and promote sustainable economic growth in the host country. Typically, the activities that are assisted are related to agriculture, irrigation, and related land practices; physical infrastructure development to facilitate marketing of goods and services; and a variety of health care programs.

Similarly, the objectives of the legislation I am introducing today are just as straightforward: enhancing the long-term job creation and revenue generation potential of Native economies by creating investment-favorable climates and increasing Native productivity.

The Foreign Aid Lessons for Domestic Economic Assistance Act would also authorize administering federal economic development assistance in a novel manner to promote economic growth, eliminate poverty, and strengthen good governance, entrepreneurship, and investment in native communities.

A corollary, but equally important, objective is to improve the effectiveness of existing Federal economic development assistance by encouraging the integration and coordination of such assistance to benefit Native economies. Accordingly, this legislation requires that any assistance provided must be coordinated with other Federal economic development assistance programs for Native Americans.

A critical component of the Foreign Aid Lessons for Domestic Economic Assistance Demonstration is in its demand for accountability in the performance of the Compact terms and use of financial resources. This legislation requires that eligible entities submit to the Secretary of Commerce written reports on an annual basis detailing activities undertaken and progress made through assistance from this program.

Mr. President, I hope my colleagues will join me in supporting this legislation.

Mr. President, I am pleased to introduce the Foreign Aid Lessons for Domestic Economic Assistance Act of 2007 to bring a fresh approach to the vexing problem of stimulating Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian and Lower-48 Indian Tribe economies to bring jobs, hope and investment to these impoverished peoples.

Despite modest improvements in the economic and social well-being of Alaska's native people, they continue to have extremely high rates of unemployment and poverty, poor health, substandard housing, and the related ills of alcohol and drug abuse.

Only 11 percent of American Indians and Alaska Natives hold a bachelor's degree compared to 24 percent of the total population. The poverty rate in

1999 was 25.7 percent for the American Indian and Alaska Native population, compared to 12.4 percent of the total population.

Weak economies also contribute to poor health in native communities: American Indian and Alaska Natives suffer from significantly higher mortality rates compared to the general population. The death rate for American Indians and Alaska Natives for tuberculosis is 600 percent higher, 510 percent higher for alcoholism, 229 percent higher for motor vehicle crashes, 189 percent higher for diabetes, 61 percent higher for homicide and 62 percent higher for suicide. American Indian and Alaska Native infants die at a rate of 8.5 per every 1,000 live births, compared to 6.8 per 1,000 for all U.S. races.

Housing statistics are no better--12 percent of American Indian and Alaska Native homes lack safe and adequate water supply and waste disposal facilities compared to one percent of the U.S. general population.

This is the profile of native communities in Alaska, and in the lower-48 states as well, despite a vibrant cultural legacy and abundant natural resources on and under their lands and in their waters. Many native communities have marketable timber, huge reserves of coal, natural gas, oil, fish and shellfish and other natural amenities.

At the same time, native economies are hobbled by geographic remoteness, distance from markets and population centers, poor physical infrastructure, and a lack of governmental transparency, contributing to stagnating Native American economies.

Because native economies are often plagued by the same challenges as the economies of the developing world, native economies are likely to benefit from the application of proven models employed in international development efforts, most notably the Millenium Challenge Act of 2003. This initiative aims to foster those policies that are known to be effective and in the process, reduce poverty and promote sustainable economic growth in the host country. Typically, the activities that are assisted are related to agriculture, irrigation, and related land practices; physical infrastructure development to facilitate marketing of goods and services; and a variety of health care programs.

Similarly, the objectives of the legislation I am introducing today are just as straightforward: enhancing the long-term job creation and revenue generation potential of Native economies by creating investment-favorable climates and increasing Native productivity.

The Foreign Aid Lessons for Domestic Economic Assistance Act would also authorize administering federal economic development assistance in a novel manner to promote economic growth, eliminate poverty, and strengthen good governance, entrepreneurship, and investment in native communities.

A corollary, but equally important, objective is to improve the effectiveness of existing Federal economic development assistance by encouraging the integration and coordination of such assistance to benefit Native economies. Accordingly, this legislation requires that any assistance provided must be coordinated with other Federal economic development assistance programs for Native Americans.

A critical component of the Foreign Aid Lessons for Domestic Economic Assistance Demonstration is in its demand for accountability in the performance of the Compact terms and use of financial resources. This legislation requires that eligible entities submit to the Secretary of Commerce written reports on an annual basis detailing activities undertaken and progress made through assistance from this program.

Mr. President, I hope my colleagues will join me in supporting this legislation.

I yield back the time.

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

I suggest the absence of a quorum.