Floor Statements

Mr. President, on behalf of myself and Senator Murkowski, I introduce S. 49, the Alaska Floodplain and Erosion Mitigation Commission Act.

For the last several years, we have seen coastal river flooding and erosion destroy homes, public buildings, and runways, threatening the traditional lifestyle of our Alaska Native people and rural residents. Over 100 feet of land can be lost in a single storm, with homes and buildings literally being washed into the ocean.

Last year, the Federal Emergency Management Agency was called in after one storm and assessed millions of dollars in damages.

In Alaska, there are over 213 communities that have been identified as being affected by erosion, 4 of which are in imminent danger and will be forced to relocate.

Given the devastating impacts of erosion on Alaska Native villages, I held a full 2-day Appropriations field hearing in July of 2004. Senator Conrad Burns of Montana, Senator John Sununu of New Hampshire, and Senator Lisa Murkowski were all in attendance.

Testifying at the hearing were witnesses from the Federal Government, State of Alaska, and representatives from the villages most affected by coastal erosion and flooding.

These hearings examined the findings and recommendations from the Government Accounting Office, GAO, report on the severe flooding and erosion problems faced in many Native Alaska villages. Congress had previously directed GAO to study flooding and erosion of Alaska Native villages and to determine the extent to which these villages are affected, identify Federal and State flooding and erosion programs, determine the current status of

efforts to respond to flooding and erosion in nine villages, and identify alternatives that Congress may wish to consider when providing assistance for flooding and erosion.

This bill is a culmination of the GAO report and the field hearings I have mentioned. It will focus the efforts of the Federal agencies and the State of Alaska to better serve the impacted Native villages and rural residents. This bill is intended to provide relief for these communities. It is going to be a very difficult problem to solve.

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

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Veterans' Affairs be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Monday, January 24, 2005, for a hearing to consider the nomination of: Mr. R. James Nicholson to be Secretary of Veterans' Affairs.

The hearing will take place in room 418 of the Russell Senate Office Building at 10:00 A.M.

A markup on Mr. Nicholson's nomination will take place in room 418 of the Russell Senate Office Building at 2:00 P.M.

Parliamentary inquiry: It is my understanding that part of the time was to be yielded to another Senator.

At this time?

Mr. President, I rise to discuss this national intelligence reform bill with some reluctance, because as a member of the Governmental Affairs Committee I was also involved, as the chairman of the Appropriations Committee, in the enormous omnibus bill and I have not been able to pay the attention to this bill that I should have. I regret that some of my feelings about the bill reflect the fact I was not there to participate in those meetings. I do commend my colleagues in both Houses of the Congress for their hard work in coming to an agreement on this bill. As with every conference, each voice is heard but none can dominate, and compromise is absolutely required.

I commend Senator Collins and Senator Lieberman for their attention to the concerns of the people of this Nation and for this bill that addresses those concerns in the wake of September 11. I do not believe this bill fully resolved all of those concerns, but the American people should know that Congress has indeed passed a bill to reform our intelligence community.

This process has been a long and arduous one. I voted for the Senate version of this bill, when it passed the Senate, with reservations. I was concerned about the needs of the warfighters and the publication of the top line numbers of the intelligence community and the broad authorities granted to the Director of National Intelligence. It was my hope that these concerns would be addressed, and they have been partially met by this bill.

I still believe that some of the sections of the bill grant such authorities

to the Director of National Intelligence that place him or her above those of any member of the President's Cabinet, and by passing this bill we will have created an intelligence czar whose authorities will far exceed any governmental official other than the President himself. I believe this should be of some concern to every Member of the Senate, and Senator Byrd has outlined some of those concerns.

This Director of National Intelligence is not an elected official and is not directly accountable to the American people. The Director of National Intelligence will only be able to be reined in by the President himself, and that, I believe, puts an overwhelming burden on the President of overseeing this official and the actions of the Director of National Intelligence on a daily basis. No one else has any way to control this official.

The intelligence community has also provided support to the President, to the administration itself, and to the Congress. I fear this bill goes far beyond that role. When an individual or an organization is given such broad authorities, the lines between policymaking and information gathering become blurred. This is particularly true in the intelligence field, and I continue to have reservations as to how this new organization will integrate these duties with the overall governmental structure and particularly with those of the Secretaries of State, Defense, and Homeland Security.

These are extraordinary authorities that will be given to the Director of National Intelligence. That person will exercise power far beyond those I have seen even in wartime. In my years in the Senate, I have known 12 Directors of Central Intelligence. It has been my privilege to know each one of them personally. My roots in the intelligence community go back to World War II when I flew the OSS plane in China. Since then, I have had a great deal of interest in and contact with members of the intelligence community and continue to have a great interest in the operations of intelligence for our National Government.

Clearly, I believe I know a little history of intelligence. I challenge anyone to name any official of a friendly or adversarial intelligence service over the past century who has been granted the broad authority that this National Intelligence Director will have.

What this requires, in my judgment, is persistent oversight by the Congress. Each committee of the Congress with oversight of intelligence matters must scrutinize the actions of the intelligence community, and in particular this Director, to ensure there are checks and balances in this system that are required by our Constitution. We must aggressively remain attuned to assure that none of the freedoms we celebrate are hampered by this new entity or its Director.

Now, having said that, as I informed the President previously, I will vote for this bill, but it is my intention to ask that each general counsel in the intelligence community and the Department of Defense report to the next Congress, at least on a periodic basis, their interpretation and the subsequent implementation of this legislation in their Departments to ensure that these concerns of mine and those that have been expressed by other Senators on the floor do not come to fruition.

Again, this is a bill that is needed, authority that is needed in the post-9/11 period. I believe still, as I have stated repeatedly on the floor, there are many Members of the Senate who do not realize how much has been accomplished since 9/11, and I assume this bill will be interpreted in terms of the intelligence system as it exists today and not based upon the intelligence system that existed on September 11, 2001.

I thank the Chair.

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

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate stand in recess subject to the call of the Chair.

Mr. President, I am pleased to report that the House just passed the joint House-Senate Conference Report on the Foreign Operations Appropriations bill for fiscal year 2005. That Omnibus appropriations bill included the Agriculture Appropriations bill; the Commerce, Justice, State Appropriations bill; the Energy and Water Appropriations bill; the Foreign Operations Appropriations bill; the Interior Appropriations bill; the Labor, Health, and Human Services bill; the Legislative Branch Appropriations bill; the Transportation Appropriations bill; and the VA-HUD Appropriations bill.

I would like to take this opportunity to clarify a few points in the bill to provide guidance to those who will implement it.

Denali Commission: The conferees provided $67,000,000 for the Denali Commission. In addition to the allocations outlined in the bill itself, there are a number of other projects to which the Denali Commission should give priority consideration: $2,000,000 for the Tok/Chistochina Intertie project; $500,000 for the Fire Island extension; $146,000 for Chenega Bay Utilities, $1,000,000 for Bristol Bay power generation; $2,000,000 for a Low Rank Fuel Demonstration project, and $1,500,000 for Cape Fox corporation for economic development. The commission is also encouraged to give the following projects priority consideration: the Petersburg Diesel Power Generation Facility project, the Valdez Electric project and funding for elder housing in Maniliq.

Corps of Engineers: Given tough budgetary constraints, Congress was unable to fund the full amount necessary to address the impending disaster that Hubbard Glacier poses to the community of Yakutat, AK. It is my expectation that the Army Corps of Engineers, the Forest Service, the Natural Resource Conservation Service, and the Federal Emergency Management Agency will, through available funds, provide the resources necessary to immediately address this situation. The conferees have included authorization for the Secretary of Army to undertake this task.

Energy projects: This year, the omnibus bill includes $5,000,000 to be used to support a solicitation for solid oxide fuel cell research to look at the application of solid oxide electrochemical technology for the co-production of hydrogen and electricity. The research will also focus on the storage of electricity through closed and open system regenerative fuel cells. This funding is intended to create a pilot project in Alaska to develop solid oxide fuel cell technology. The conferees are disappointed that the funds previously provided for this purpose were diverted by the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy.

There are a couple of matters I want to clarify to provide guidance to the agencies who will administer the bill.

Food Safety: The conferees have provided funds for a National Animal Identification System to monitor cattle to prevent mad cow disease, but did not specify the technology or means to accomplish that end. It has come to my attention that a chain traceable model could track cattle through private sector mechanisms at very little cost to the Government. I hope the new Secretary of Agriculture will look at a range of means to prevent mad cow disease from infiltrating into our food supply including market driven solutions.

In addition, it is my understanding that a new technology has been developed that can detect food borne pathogens like salmonella. A film covering food, similar to plastic wrap, turns color if the food has become contaminated. This technology offers exciting opportunities for the seafood industry in particular, and I urge the new Secretary to take whatever steps possible to bring this new technology to market.

The conferees expect USDA to pursue efforts to expeditiously reopen the border between Alaska and Canada. This border closure has devastated farmers in Alaska. USDA currently has a proposal to accomplish this task and they are urged to carefully evaluate its merits.

Rural Development Administration: Within the funds that are provided to the Rural Development Administration, the Alaska Region should give priority consideration to a grant for the Ketchikan Arts facility. I visited with the developers of that project and believe it would be an excellent community facility.

Likewise, last month after we had already marked up the bill, I was able to meet with leaders in Homer, AK concerning the need for a new library. That, too, is a meritorious project and the Alaska Region should give priority consideration to a grant application for that project.

Lastly, peat is a major commodity in the lower 48 States, especially organic peat which can be sold for huge profits. But, in Alaska peat is often considered a nuisance, since it has to be dug out before construction can go forward in many areas of the State. One way to offset that costly excavation while creating new economic opportunity is to develop peat as a saleable commodity. The conferees urge the Alaska Region to consider a grant to develop peat fields in Alaska as an emerging new industry.

High Cost Energy Program: The bill provides $28,000,000 for the high cost energy program to reduce the cost of energy for consumers paying about 20 cents a kilowatt hour or more. The underlying authorization allows most of those funds to flow to the Denali Commission in Alaska which serves the largest segment of high cost energy users in the country. Energy costs in rural Alaska are the highest in the Nation. To reduce those costs, within the funds provide to the High Cost Energy program, the conferees expect that $2,000,000 be provided to the Arctic Energy Office for research into energy and electric issues in remote and rural communities. These funds are critical to identifying ways of reducing costs in rural Alaska communities and Native villages.

City of Marshall water hook-ups: The measure includes $26,000,000 for rural water and sewer program in rural Alaska. The conferees note that Marshall, AK has Indian housing built through HUD, but no money to link the houses to water and sewer. Within the funds provided in this account, the Committee expects the Alaska Village Safe Water Program to fund the Marshall water hook-ups.

Pribilof Island clean-up: The conferees agree to provide $7,000,000 which may be used by NOAA for both clean-up of the Pribilof Islands and economic development activities. In consulting with the people of St. Paul and St. George, it is their preference that $6,500,000 of the funds be available for economic development and $500,000 be used to continue NOAA's clean-up activities. Congress passed the Pribilof Islands Transition Act, which among other things authorized funding for economic development on the islands. During the drafting of that legislation, it was agreed the funds would be split between the various entities according to specific ratios, which were then used in the Act to allocate the authorizations stated at 16 USC Sec. 1166(c)(1). The conferees support that allocation, and I have consulted with Congressman Young, the author of those bills, who agrees as well. The agency is urged to comply with the islanders' wishes.

Alaska Ocean Observing System: Due to a clerical error in the bill, Alaska Ocean Observing System is titled, ``Alaska Gulf Ecosystem Monitoring.'' It is the intent of the conferees that the $2,000,000 provided for this project shall be for the Alaska Ocean Observing System and not the Alaska Gulf Ecosystem Monitoring.

Economic Development Administration: The bill also provides funds for the Economic Development Administration, $15,000,000 of which is to assist coastal communities in Alaska pursuant to an agreement the Alaska delegation made with Secretary Evans when the Trade Act was considered. Within these funds, EDA should make $1,500,000 available to Cape Fox Corporation for economic development activities.

Office of Arctic Energy: Within the amounts provided for the Arctic Energy Office, it is the conferees expectation that $2,000,000 will be made available for shallow gas exploration and development in Ft. Yukon, AL, to assist

that community and address its energy needs; and $3,000,000 will be made available for work on the gas pipeline spur to Cook Inlet.

Fish and Wildlife Service: As part of the fiscal year 2005 Consolidated Appropriations Conference Report, Section 126 of Division E requires a comprehensive program for mass marking of hatchery produced salmon stocks originating from the Pacific Northwest. The State of Alaska currently conducts an extensive salmon stock identification program based on visual identification of fin clipped hatchery salmon that have been implanted with coded wire tags.

The additional requirements imposed by Section 126, which provides for the implementation of ``a system of mass marking of salmonid stocks, intended for harvest, that are released from Federally operated or Federally financed hatcheries . . .'' could have significant financial implications on both the State of Alaska and on the Alaska commercial fishing industry. The Alaska Department of Fish and Game has serious concerns about the impact of mass marking requirements of this section on its ongoing salmon stock sampling program.

The Alaska Department of Fish and Game determined that if far-north- migrating chinook salmon are mass marked by clipping the adipose fin, the State will have two options: 1, continue with visual identification of marked fish, or, 2, convert to electronic sampling. Either option will cause the State's salmon stock sampling program to be far more costly. The conferees recommend that if mass marking is implemented, it should be done for Puget Sound and Columbia River Tule Chinook and not implemented for Columbia Upriver Bright or Washington Coastal Chinook salmon. These stocks of salmon represent a significant portion of the Alaska salmon fisheries and mass marking of these stocks will incur a high cost on the Alaskan fishing industry and the state's fisheries management program.

Further, the conferees recommend that mass marking of chinook salmon should not be implemented without the concurrence of state and federal agencies on an effective means of stock identification that will support the implementation of the Pacific Salmon Treaty and other state and federal laws and regulations. In addition, the conferees recommend that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service work with the State of Alaska and the United States Section of the Pacific Salmon Commission to ensure that the system of mass marking does not interfere significantly with data collection, salmon management programs, or the implementation of abundance-based management under the treaty. The conferees direct the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to ensure that changes in fishery and stock assessment programs needed to maintain the reliability of those programs are identified and that funding is secured for implementation of the changes made by this section.

Kenai Fjords National Park: The conferees have included bill language requiring the National Park Service to acquire land to construct a multi-agency visitor center that has been under discussion for nearly a decade notwithstanding any other provision of law. That means the Service will acquire the land at a negotiated price notwithstanding any other issues or obstacles. No more delays. It is time to get this project done. The conferees urge the service to expedite construction of the project as well. It should consider utilizing Section 1307 of the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act for the project if it will speed up the process. It should also consider a build-lease option which it used to acquire a new Alaska Region headquarters in Anchorage. The conferees note that this project has already been delayed and as a result missed Seward's centennial celebration. The authority we have provided will ensure that the project can now be completed with dispatch.

Lake Clark National Park: I am aware that the National Park Service and Cook Inlet Region Inc. are currently discussing options for the disposition of the Silver Salmon Camp. Until these issues are resolved, it is the expectation of the conferees that the National Park Service will issue a long term recreational permit to Cook Inlet Region Inc. or a related non-profit for the continued operation of the camp.

Denali Commission: The committee has provided $40,000,000 for the Denali Commission for health and social service construction projects. Within the funds made available for clinics, the conferees expect the Commission to provide the necessary funds for a joint clinic-library- community center in Girdwood, AK. It may use health funds for the clinic portion of the project and its general funds provided through the Energy and Water bill for the community center and library.

Special Education: The conferees have agreed to over $11,000,000,000 for special education. The Department of Education should consider making funds available to conduct a pilot program in Anchorage, AK to treat children suffering from attention deficit or hyperactivity disorder or FAS/FAE through biofeedback to determine whether this might be a useful alternative to drug therapy.

Section 115: The conferees have agreed to a provision to correct a drafting error that caused the earmarks provided to Alaska in the Fiscal Year 2004 Transportation bill to come out of the State of Alaska's mandatory formula funds under the highway bill instead of discretionary funds. This amendment clarifies that Alaska's earmarks are to be allocated out of discretionary funds and have no impact on highway funds Alaska receives through the formula.

Rural Air Service Improvement Act of 2004: Title J includes another provision called the Rural Air Service Improvement Act of 2004. This is an amendment worked on by the House Transportation Committee chairman, Don Young, and I. The State of Alaska has a very limited system of roads to connect communities. Most communities can only be reached by air. In order to connect the communities within the State, the Inter- Alaska bypass mail system was created to support affordable, safe air travel and establish a system where the Postal Service can meet its obligation to deliver mail to every house. The provisions within the appropriations bill refine the Inter-Alaska bypass mail system by eliminating unnecessary flights flown by mainline air carriers, by reducing the requirement to two schedule flights per week. The section also grants the United States Postal Service the discretion to increase the number of scheduled flights to a maximum of three in instances where there are not three consecutive scheduled flights in a week. This will allow the Postal Service to meet their service requirements to the communities within Alaska, while decreasing the unnecessary expenses associated with excessive scheduled flights.

The language included within the appropriations bill will give flexibility to the carriers and the Postal Service by allowing existing mainline carriers to temporarily subcontract mail shipments to another existing mainline carrier when additional or substitute aircraft are needed to meet the service needs of the Postal Service or the carrier's operating requirements. However, the providing carrier will still remain responsible for the mail from the origin to the destination.

Clarification of the definition of Existing Mainline Carrier is also provided in order to close a loophole that may have allowed carriers who are not qualified as existing mainline carriers to become one because they operated under a codeshare with an existing mainline carrier. Air Carriers who were not, on January 1, 2001, a Part 121 carrier qualified to provide mainline non-priority bypass mail service and actually engaged in the carriage of non-priority bypass mail tendered to it under its own designator code should not be defined as an existing mainline carrier.

Finally, the provision specifically exempts non-bypass mail from the dispatch requirements of the non-priority bypass mail system. It is intended to give the Postal Service the ability to dispatch postal products, other than non-priority bypass mail, as their service needs require.

Alaska Trails: The bill includes $4 million for the State of Alaska to develop statewide trails initiative. The funds are available to issue grants, on a competitive basis, for the development and reconstruction of trails within Alaska. The State of Alaska should take no more than one percent of the funds to cover any overhead costs. The eligible trails include: Arctic Valley

trails, Chugach Forest Russian River, Girdwood trails, Hatcher Pass trails, Iditarod trail, Juneau Nordic trails, Juneau Thunder Trail, Ketchikan Lewis Reef Road, Kodiak trails, Matanuska Susitna Gorsuch trails, Perseverance trail repairs, Russian River access road, Sitka Trailworks, Sitka World War II causeway, State of Alaska wildlife trails, Wrangell St. Elias Trails.

Transportation and Community and System Preservation Pilot Program: The conferees have agreed to provide $6,000,000 to the Matanuska Susitna Borough. Within the amounts made available to the Matanuska Susitna Borough, the conferees expect that $2,000,000 will be made available to Matanuska Susitna Gorsuch trails.

Denali Docks: I am pleased the Transportation/Treasury subsection of the omnibus bill authorizes and appropriates $10 million to a new program for the Denali Commission which focuses on docks and the development of waterfront projects. There is no Federal Government program which funds docks for communities without roads. Through the newly authorized program within the Denali Commission, the rural communities of Alaska will be able to create, replace or repair the damaged docks within the following locations: Homer, Ugashik, Hoonah, Bristol Bay Borough, Old Harbor, Sitka, Coffman Cove, Perryville, Illiamna Lake, Auk Bay, Seldovia, Whittier, Cordova, Gustavus, and Kenai Peninsula Borough.

General Service Administration: I am pleased the conferees once again included money for the University of Alaska to continue planning for the State's 50th anniversary celebration including preserving pioneer papers throughout the state.

On another matter, the conferees urge the Service to work with the Alaska Railroad to effect a land transfer that will be mutually beneficial to both parties, and hope the national office will make the resources available for that purpose.

National Science Foundation: The conferees agreed to retain report language urging the administration to request funds to replace the Alpha Helix, one of its premier research vessels that has seen better days. But this is not the first year such language has been included. Some believe the Service has no intention of ever seeking the necessary funds. As I assume the role as chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee overseeing NSF, I want to put the agency on notice that Congress expects the administration to begin seeking the necessary funds to replace the vessel. If funds are provided and the vessel is built, it should be homeported in Seward, AK, its current home. But if the administration fails to request the necessary funds when the fiscal year 2006 budget is submitted, Congress expects the agency to develop an interim solution by leasing a research vessel that can operate out of Seward to conduct research in Alaska.

TAPS Quality Bank: As part of the fiscal year 2005 Consolidated Appropriations conference report I included legislative language that expresses Congress' concerns over a long standing regulatory and judicial dispute concerning the Trans Alaska Pipeline, TAPS. This report language is intended to provide guidance to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission as it evaluates the August 31, 2004 Initial Decision by the Administrative Law Judge, ALJ. This language does not have any effect on agreements reached between the parties. It is solely intended to address those issues still in dispute. Nor does this language have any effect on any other regulatory or judicial proceeding currently pending before the ALJ or the Commission, and should not be considered in evaluating any future rate cases.

Congress expects the Commission to carefully consider the specific equities of this case to prevent special hardship, inequity, or an unfair distribution of burdens to any party, evaluate all of the administrative law judge's decisions regarding the retroactive application of the modified Resid valuation, and to assess the equity of assigning retroactivity. The issue of retroactivity and its application in this case is problematic given the lack of clear Congressional action on the subject and the negative impacts an eleven year retroactive period will have on domestic refiners in the State of Alaska.

In addition, it is the expectation of Congress that this matter will be resolved in a fair and equitable manner which is necessary to limit business uncertainty associated with the use of the Trans Alaska Pipeline System, and to ensure continued domestic refinery activity in order to protect national fuel supplies. Ultimately, it is my hope that the parties in this case will be able to reach a settlement and finally end 15 years of litigation, and we appeal to the parties to work towards this end.

Mr. President, if the Senator would yield just for a second, I want to thank the Senator from Nevada and tell him that I spent 8 years in the whip's job and sought to move left. Unfortunately, it did not happen.

I do congratulate the Senator from Nevada, and we look forward to working with him and the assistant Democratic leader.

I thank, Senator Burns for his tenaciousness on this bill, and I want to acknowledge the really intense cooperation of the Senator from Arizona, Mr. McCain, and really praise my great and longtime friend Senator Byrd from West Virginia for having recognized the necessity to have this bill passed before we go home for the recess. We are really going to adjourn sine die.

I do congratulate the Senator. He listened to us. It is quite late. He has been quite gracious to proceed with us on the commitment that we will protect the appropriations process in the future and work with him to make certain that the provisions of the law that govern expenditures of the money covered by the bill we just passed be followed, as far as the protection of the Treasury. And we will be consistent with the Constitution, as he has urged us so many times to be.

I thank the Senator for his patience in keeping us in session, and I am prepared to take tickets here as we leave the floor.

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

Mr. President, I have served here long enough now that I have witnessed a lot of the comings and goings of many fine public servants whom I have known on the floor of the Senate.

Today, I would like to comment about those who are leaving us, and I want to start, first, with my good friend from South Carolina. Fritz Hollings and his wife Peatsy are very close friends of ours. They have been friends since we first came to the Senate. Fritz and I served in World War II. We have traveled to places where he served and I served in World War II, and we are comrades in the deepest sense of that word.

He is a very interesting man. I remember earlier this year, when I was asked to cut a tape to be used at a retirement dinner for Senator Hollings, I told my press secretary I did not think I could do it. As a matter of fact, I ended up appearing in person. As I told my staff, I really cannot conceive of the Senate without Fritz Hollings. It will be a different Senate. We have not always agreed, but we have always been friends.

There have been good times together. I can remember some of the fish that Fritz and Peatsy caught in Alaska, and I can remember tales about some that they did not catch, the big ones that got away.

But I do know that having visited with them in their home in South Carolina, and visiting with their friends in Charleston, they have a really great life to go home to. They are wonderful people, and we are going to miss them a great deal.

I will say this, that when I first heard of Senator Hollings, it was in a story about his role as Governor of South Carolina. He had become Governor, and as he entered the grounds of the Governor's house, he found there were places inside the grounds where prisoners were kept. There were literally, at that time, I think, cells that were partially underground. Fritz did not like that any more than I would have, and he found ways to free those people and to give them another life. As a matter of fact, I remember meeting one of them who was very devoted to Senator Hollings.

Senator Hollings is a man with a great heart and a great mind and a great spirit and a temper almost as bad as mine. We are going to miss him, miss him terribly.

I hope he will come back often and visit us. I think he has the longest career of all of those who are retiring, obviously, because he is the oldest. But he was one of the Ten Outstanding Men of the Year in the United States when he was young. I don't like to tell stories about him, but I think he actually attended a Republican Convention at one time.

As a member of the statehouse, as Governor, and as a member of the Hoover Commission, he distinguished himself in many ways, in commissions where he was appointed by both President Eisenhower and President Kennedy.

We are losing a man who has had a great role in public service. I hope we will all wish him well as he departs the Senate.

Don Nickles

Mr. President, another Senator who is leaving us is Senator Don Nickles. Senator Nickles is a man I first met when I was traveling through Oklahoma with my friend, Senator Bellmon. Senator Bellmon had served here as a Senator. He served as Governor of his State.

Senator Nickles, obviously, is a man of great capability, too. As a matter of fact, he is the first Oklahoma Republican Senator to be elected for four terms. He has had a commitment to his constituents and to his colleagues. He, as I, served as assistant Republican leader. That is the highest leadership position ever held by a Member of the Senate from Oklahoma.

I particularly remember his role as chairman of the Budget Committee and his role in the Finance Committee because no one has been more strenuous in expressing his views concerning the level of spending in the United States and the necessity to have firm budget control over the processes of the Senate, particularly the appropriations process where I have served a great many years.

I do believe his commitment to making Federal Government more responsible and less intrusive, his commitment to the basic Republican principles that government nearest the people is best, has been demonstrated by his service in the Senate. We are going to have a tough time without his guidance. He, I am sure, will be somewhere near us--at least that is indicated.

But having met him even before he ran for the Senate, I felt really a great warmth of friendship for him because I know how hard he worked to become a Member of the Senate, and I know his commitment, having left his business and coming here to make a new life.

Linda and their four children have been known to all of us in one way or the other. I think he has a wonderful family, a wonderful wife, and we wish them well.

Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Will the Senator yield?

I would like to tell the chairman of the Finance Committee as chairman of the Appropriations Committee, I checked with Chairman Young, Bill Young of the House

Appropriations Committee. Neither of us was aware this had been inserted in the bill. It was inserted at the request of one staff to another, reliance on the statement made by one that the front office had been briefed and is fine with this.

That was not right. No Member had ever seen it. It came out during the readout. I am pleased that after it was presented to the body, it was found. It does not represent the policy of the Appropriations Committee. None of us have even ever discussed in a meeting either on this side or the House of Representatives any further access to taxpayer information. It came strictly from a staff request to another staffer.

It is absolutely a mistake. I apologize to the Senate. I am sorry that both the Senator from Iowa and his colleague, Chairman Thomas in the House, properly were exercised over it. It is a mistake. It will be deleted. We have made an agreement it will be totally deleted from this bill.

Will the Senator yield further?

The Senator from Arizona is absolutely warranted in his comments. As I said, I apologize to the Senate. We thought we had these bills read through twice. Both sides read them through twice by people who are involved in them.

I have to tell the Senator from Arizona, I do not sit there for 10 hours as that is being read. I rely on the people who have been with us now for years and years to tell us that it has been checked properly, that there is nothing in the bill that has not been approved by the bodies respectively and in conference.

But this error happened. I do apologize to the Senate. It is unfortunate. And it is more than a mistake; it is a terrible disaster, and we will have to examine our whole procedures to see if there is any way we can prevent it in the future. But it has happened now, and we do apologize.

Congressman Young is as disturbed about it as I am, and his statement was: ``Take it out now.'' And that is what we are going to do.

Mr. President, I just ran up here. I thought I heard the Senator from California say the chairman had sought this power?

I hoped that was not the case. In any event, the Senator from California did say it was a one-sided review, with the Republicans reviewing this. The staff reads out our bills--joint staff, House and Senate, Republican and Democrat. I don't want to embarrass anybody here tonight. I am sure every Senator and Congressman will talk to their staff about this mistake. I assure the Senate that there were members in the minority from the Senate and from the House and members from the majority from the Senate and House that read this bill through twice. It wasn't just the majority; it was the minority and the majority staff.

This is a mistake. It is clearly a mistake. It is an unfortunate mistake. I have talked to the chairman of the House committee. He was appalled, as I was, when we found it was in there. To my knowledge, no Member of the House and Senate was asked about this staff request. A representation was made that the front office had cleared it. Actually, we have to have a signoff from the minority as well as the majority staff for their section of these bills. We have that signoff.

If the Senator from California wishes, I will tell her the members of the staff on the Democratic side who reviewed this section and signed off on it. I don't want the Record to show it was a partisan review. We do not have partisan reviews of our bills. As a matter of fact, there is no committee that works on a bipartisan basis more than the Appropriations Committee.

Again, I apologize to the Senate. Members of my staff are going to answer to me tomorrow. I want the Senate to know it was a bipartisan staff from the House and the Senate that made this mistake, a terrible mistake. I question any staff member who would ever approve this language without referring to a Member of the Congress to whom he or she is responsible.

I hope the Senator from California understands it is not something we sought, not something we wanted. Both the chairman of the House committee and I sought to delete it the minute we found it. It was too late. The House had already passed it.

No objection.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the Senator have additional time, if he desires it.

I send to the desk a joint resolution.

Ms. LANDRIEU addressed the Chair.

I withdraw that.

Joint.

The Senator is correct that the provision would stay in the law. But we will pass a joint resolution. It is my understanding that will be passed and the Speaker of the House and chairman of the Appropriations Committee guaranteed this would be the case when the House reconvenes.

Meanwhile, it is our understanding that the President of the United States will issue a statement when he signs the bill that this section shall be disregarded because of the action taken by the Senate and the commitment of the House to act when it comes back. I think that is a good-faith effort to correct a serious mistake, a terrible mistake.

The Senator is right about the section. But I want to assure him the implication that either the chairman of the House committee or I, as chairman of this committee, ever wanted such authority is wrong. We never sought it. It was an accident, a mistake. A representation was made by one staff member that the front office in the other body had cleared this. On the basis of that, it was put into the section.

When it was before the bipartisan staff in both Houses, it was not even noticed. Under the circumstances, it is something the Senator from Arizona criticized and I too criticize it. It is something contrary to anything I have ever had happen in over 30 years on the committee. But it can be corrected and the law will not be permitted.

By the way, it takes the request of the chairman of either House to trigger it. We have stated categorically we will not trigger this section. It is not available to anyone else. It is available only to the chairman of the House Appropriations Committee or the chairman of our Senate committee. And I have stated categorically on the record we would never use that. We didn't seek this authority. We are as appalled as the Senator from North Dakota. I hope you would rely upon our good faith to try to correct the staff error. Certainly no Member of Congress that I know of, other than the person who originally suggested it in the House, ever sought this. I am led to believe the language is not what he sought, but it is one of those things that happened at the last minute. It is a terrible thing.

We are in this situation because we never had a budget. We never passed our appropriations bills at the time we should have. We had to construct a ceiling we would operate under. Senator Byrd and I have tried our best to comply with the circumstances. But we didn't get the chance to even look at it--the Appropriations Committee on these nine bills--until after we came back from the August recess. We have been under pressure now since we came back. We have been under pressure now for 3 days. Some of my people haven't slept for 2 days, and one of them made a mistake--one of my staff. I can tell you he had not had sleep for 2 days.

This is a serious situation. It shouldn't happen. The Senator from Arizona is right. It should never happen. I pray to God it will never happen. It will not happen under my watch. My watch is over tonight, but I guarantee you that during the time I am chairman, I will not use this authority and it will be taken out of this bill.

The first reaction of the chairman from Florida, Bill Young, was, take it out; take it out now. I share that reaction.

I thank the Senator.

Will the Senator yield?

I don't read anything in this provision that either chairman can release the information. He makes the assertion that if we use this power, we can release it. There is no such provision.

Will the Senator yield?

If the Senator says he has respect for this Senator, he will believe me. We didn't ask for that authority. We would not use that authority. We detest this section, and I am tired listening to people say somehow or other we intended to use it. We don't intend to use it. It is going to come out of this bill. It is going to come out of this law and it is not going to be used. I don't know how I can be any firmer. I am tired of it. We have been working hard on this bill. We did not do this. To imply we did--either Congressman Young or I did it--is wrong, wrong.

The Senator implied that I will use it; that I would disclose it.

Will the Senator yield again?

Mr. President, I want to state again the protection for the minority on this bill was in the people who were with my staff when it was read through. If there was a mistake in it, it is borne equally by your side of the aisle as well as ours. I have accepted the total responsibility as chairman. No question about it; a bad mistake was made. But let me go back.

Senator Byrd and I begged for a budget resolution in May, in June, in July, and when we came back in September. We didn't get a budget resolution. The Senator is on the Budget Committee. Why didn't we get a budget resolution? We said if we don't, we will have another one of those nights when we will have a big Omnibus appropriations bill. I preached it right here on the floor. I will dig it out, if you want. I said if you don't, we will have a midnight session again trying to get a bill through that no one knows what is in it because we have had to move and move these limits.

There are provisions in this bill that must become effective or people will lose rights as of Sunday. We are trying our best to get it done. A mistake has been made. I hope the Senate would take my word. It is my word. I don't think I have ever broken my word to any Member of this Senate. That was a mistake. It says as chairman of the Appropriations Committee I can trigger that and ask for access. I have said I would never do it. I did not seek it. The chairman of the House did not want it. He is appalled by it. It is a provision that, even if it becomes law, cannot be utilized except by Bill Young and me, Ted Stevens. We have said we will not do it.

Isn't that enough? Isn't that enough? Do I have to get down on my knees and beg the other side?

This bill must become law because people have rights that will be affected by it if we don't pass it until we come back in December. That is all there is to it. It is not my fault. I hate working under these pressures. My staff hates it. As a matter of fact, it is a terrible way to do business, but I had nothing other than to try to do it.

As a matter of fact, we had to take one bill and do it in the last 3 days because we could not get agreement between the people involved. It has been a terrible bill to handle.

I hope the Senate appreciates the work that people have done this last week to try and get to the point where we could pass it before we left.

I object.

I send a joint resolution to the desk and I ask unanimous consent we now proceed to this joint resolution, that it be read three times and passed, and the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table.

I renew my request, Mr. President.

I ask unanimous consent we proceed to the resolution, it be read three times and pass, and the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table.

May I answer that?

Four, Senator.

That is correct.

Neither did I.

We have that.

Mr. President, is it possible now to proceed to the conference report that is before us?

I ask unanimous consent that we proceed to the conference report before us.

Mr. President, I thank the Senator from West Virginia for his comments. He has been my good friend for a long time. He and I have worked together now through my 36 years in the Senate, and as he states, we have not always agreed, but we have always been able to work together in the spirit of friendship and real understanding. I really have great admiration for the Senator from West Virginia.

This is my swan song. I had expected to stand before the Senate and be proud of the product we have before us. I consider what happened in terms of the staff mistake a stain upon my service as the chairman.

Mr. President, H.R. 4818, the Foreign Operations Appropriations bill was the legislative vehicle for the fiscal year 2005 Omnibus appropriations bill.

The conference report includes $388.4 billion in discretionary funding for the following nine appropriations bills: Agriculture, Commerce-Justice-State, Foreign Operations, Interior, Energy and Water, Labor-HHS, Legislative Branch, Transportation-Treasury, and VA-HUD.

Our fiscal year 2005 spending will be within the $821.9 billion discretionary cap.

The conference report includes an across-the-board cut of 0.8 percent for each appropriations bills.

This bill will provide the needed funds to keep this Government going for this fiscal year.

As my chairmanship of our Appropriations Committee draws to a close, I want to take a few minutes to acknowledge and commend some close friends and some of the hardest-working and most dedicated staff I have had the privilege to work with.

Let me begin with my good friend from West Virginia, our committee's ranking member, Senator Byrd, who has been a member of the committee since 1958. He and I have worked together throughout my 36 years in the Senate and it has been an honor to lead this committee with him since 1997. We have not always agreed, but we have always been able to put our differences aside and work toward the common good. I especially want to thank him for his efforts over the past year. We both had hoped and worked toward getting our appropriations bills across the floor on an individual basis. But, this was not possible. And, I want my good friend to know how much I personally appreciate his and his staff's cooperation in recent days as we've brought this process to a close. I will miss the partnership we have shared on this committee.

Chairman Bill Young of Florida has been my partner across the Rotunda since 1999. He has become a good friend and ally in our steadfast efforts to complete our work. He, too, is stepping down from his chairmanship and I want to take this opportunity to thank him and his staff for their assistance and perseverance in getting our work completed. Bill has great respect for the institution that we serve and for his beloved House Appropriations Committee. His heart continues to be with the men and women of our Armed Forces. After the House recesses, he and his wife Beverly regularly visit wounded soldiers up at Walter Reed Medical Center. I hope Bill Young will be returning as chairman of the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee. We will continue to work as a team dealing with modernization of our weapons systems, our military personnel programs, and the national security of this great country.

Over the years, I have had opportunity to work with Dave Obey as both chairman and ranking member of the House Appropriations Committee. Congressman Obey and I have been on opposite sides of a number of issues, but I know of few Members who have his great intellect and passion. Dave Obey is a truly dedicated Member of Congress who cares about the institution, and the legislative process. He is a realist who gives his all in debate, but understands compromise and the need to move the business of Government forward.

I ask unanimous consent to have a chart printed in the Record.

Now, I would like to turn to the clerks of our subcommittees.

Pat Raymond has worked for me for more than three decades in the Senate and will be retiring at the end of the year. Pat began as my scheduler on my personal staff. She has supported me on the Governmental Affairs, Rules, and Appropriations Committees.

From flextime, to postal reform, to the Federal retirement system, and as staff director on this Agriculture Subcommittee, and earlier on the Treasury Subcommittee, Pat has never lagged in her dedication to hard work. Always thorough and precise, always a stickler for details, Pat's also well-known as a quick study.

Even more important than the attributes I have mentioned, has been Pat's loyalty to me personally, to this institution, and to our Nation. As an Alaskan, she understands the true ``can do'' pioneer spirit that has made it possible for her to accomplish even the toughest of challenges.

The Energy and Water Appropriations bill, in particular, was put together in record time. The product represents a truly remarkable accomplishment. It is comprehensive, yet elegant in its simplicity. It sets out an ambitious course for the Corps of Engineers, Department of Energy, and Related Agencies. With few words, it cuts through years of red tape. After reading the bill, the phrase ``the Secretary shall'' has become one of my favorite phrases in the English language.

Tammy Cameron, our majority staff director, Drew Willison, our minority staff director, and their able staff worked on a bipartisan basis and negotiate a bill with the House in 48 hours. They pulled a rabbit out of a hat I thought was long dead. Tammy just took on this new assignment 2 years ago having worked with Senator Campbell on the Treasury Subcommittee. She has learned a complex subject matter in a very short time, and has earned the respect of the highest ranking generals in the Army. On behalf of Senator Byrd and the entire full committee, I want to congratulate Tammy and the entire staff and extend my heartfelt thanks. And, I hope when these proceedings are concluded, they will all go home to bed and sleep for a week.

Scott Gudes is one of those staffers who has become a member of my family. He keeps moving back into the

house. Scott began with me on the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee working with Sean O'Keefe, where he learned with a real master. And he has used what he learned with Sean ever since.

He served for almost 5 years as deputy under secretary for Oceans and Atmosphere at NOAA, and worked as the acting NOA administrator under secretary in 2001. 1 worked closely with him to resolve the Stellar sea lion crisis which threatened to close down Alaska's fisheries, and almost closed down the Senate. As many of my colleagues will recall, while others were drinking eggnog, Congress remained in session until days before Christmas while we resolved that crisis. Scott was instrumental in that effort, and helped administer the resolution we adopted.

He formerly worked for Fritz Hollings on the Commerce-Justice-State Subcommittee as well as on the House Foreign Operations Subcommittee. He has a reputation as a fair, even-minded problem solver, and has a heart for the world's oceans. As NOAA administrator, he had a reputation for rolling up his sleeves and working as crew on research vessels, and he has rolled up his sleeves for us.

The senior Senator from Pennsylvania often refers to Bettilou Taylor as the 101st, and for good reason. She has helped me craft new initiatives in Alaska to address health care, labor, and education. Just yesterday, I got a report on the Denali Commission clinic effort, a program Bettilou created. To give an example of the difference just one person can make, since she instituted this program, there are now 41 new health care clinics in remote villages in Alaska that had none, and another 67 in the planning stage and another 26 under construction. Because of Bettilou and her staff, thousands of rural Alaskans now have health care where they had none before.

She is hard driving, but fair; creative but down to earth; demanding yet caring. She knows health policy and education probably better than any single person in the Senate including her subcommittee chairman, and she can run circles around her adversaries. The word ``can't'' is not in her vocabulary. I once described one of her bills as a ``work of art.'' She is truly one of the Mona Lisa's of the Senate.

Mary Dietrich began with me on the Labor/HHS Subcommittee. She has worked now for several years as the clerk on the DC Subcommittee, and I think it is no small coincidence that the District's finances turned around about the same time Mary showed up. She has worked closely with the City government in helping them shepherd the city toward financial solvency, and has taken a particular interest in programs for children and the arts. At the staff level, she almost single handedly pushed through the DC voucher program that no one else thought had a chance of succeeding. But she persevered, and today hundreds of poor children are attending some of the cities best private schools. They will never know who Mary Dietrich is and will never be able to thank her, but today I say thank you on their behalf and on behalf of the Senate.

While Bono has led the public effort to address the worldwide crisis of AIDS/HIV, there is another rock star behind the scenes who has shaped our Nation's response to that crisis. Paul Grove has drafted dozens of provisions to improve the lives of people around the world-- from people living with AIDS and TB to children without limbs who receive wheelchairs. Together we have created a new program to bring fresh water to dozens of African villages which has changed thousands of lives each day.

Paul is a child of the Foreign Service and has lived across the globe, including 2 years with the International Republican Institute in Cambodia. Paul is quietly competent, but his actions speak loudly about the kind of person Paul is and the difference he has made in the world.

Rebecca Davies is a woman who has found her moment in history. Tough and uniquely qualified, Rebecca Davies has undertaken the task of helping create a whole new department of the government with the most important role of our time, protecting our Nation from terrorism. She formerly served as Deputy of the Appropriations Committee with service on the Budget Committee. I can probably count on one finger the number of people who have the knowledge of the Federal budget process that Rebecca Davies carries in her head.

She has worked on the Treasury Subcommittee, Agriculture Subcommittee and each time left her mark. Together we created a series of programs for rural America while she was at Agriculture from rural water and sewer programs to funding to reduce the high cost of energy to funds to address public facilities in poor rural communities. As a result of her efforts, the honey bucket, what used to be the primary sewer system in Alaska, will soon be the subject of a museum exhibit.

I rest better each night knowing that Rebecca Davies is looking out for our Nation's homeland.

Bruce Evans began his career on the Alaska scene with my former colleague, Slade Gorton. A product of the Senate, Bruce is known by all as a practical problem solver with a great wit and a ``can do'' attitude. Of all the subcommittees I have worked with, I have probably thrown as much at Bruce Evans as any staffer on my committee. From timber harvest to oil and gas development, if I am working on a controversial issue, you can bet Bruce Evans is finding the solution.

With Bruce's insight and quiet competence, together we have improved the lives of Alaska Natives from health clinics to alcohol treatment to fire fighting to save villages from destruction. And while I don't have a public reputation as an environmentalist, Bruce has worked quietly on my behalf to protect Alaska's wildlife. He created the State wildlife grant program funded this year at about $70 million, provided resources for research on wildlife from walrus to polar bears, provided the funds to take the Aleutian Canada goose off the endangered list, and restored Alaska's fisheries. Denali National Park is often called the crown jewel of the national park system. Bruce Evans is one of the crown jewels of the Appropriations Committee.

Carrie Apostolou began her career with me on the VA-HUD Subcommittee. Intensely organized and detail oriented, ``slipping through the cracks'' is something you never have to worry about with Carrie. She has shepherded the Capitol Visitor Center through the process, and is responsible for the unprecedented security improvements we all see everyday. When the Capitol Visitor Center opens in 2006, it will be a testament to Carrie's persistence.

Dennis Ward, came to our committee 2 years ago with a strong and wide ranging military background. He served in the Air Force as an officer for 18 years, taught political science at the U.S. Air Force Academy, and was a political affairs officer at the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization. He is diligent and tenacious and his abilities were evident to all of us when he worked fervently to complete action on the Military Construction Appropriations bill earlier this year. I look forward to a continued close working relationship with Dennis, as I continue my work on defense issues.

Jon Kamarck is one of the leading public housing experts in the Congress. He is known as a tough adversary, but kind and compassionate. He has exercised the committee's oversight responsibilities with vigor, and many an agency has trembled in its boots when Jon finds indifference or incompetence. He has a reputation for demanding compliance with the laws he helps write, because he is as passionate about good Government as he is about helping people. There is a kinder, gentler side of Jon Kamarck agencies don't always see but I have seen as he meets with Eskimo people with no running water or works with low income people living in squalor. If ever there was a staffer who embodied my personal motto it is Jon Kamarck: ``to hell with the politics, just do what's right.''

And last of all, but first among equals is Sid Ashworth. Sid knows more about the Department of Defense than just about any one I know. She is responsible for the largest annual budget of any department, and has overseen revolutionary changes in our national defense from smart bombs to stealth bombers. She has the daily burden of reading intelligence reports, living every day with the knowledge of the threats that plague us. A former Defense civilian from Hawaii, Sid has

forged a close working relationship with Charlie Houy that mirrors my own relationship with Dan Inouye. Sid is a woman who operates in what is sometimes viewed by some as a man's world. She has broken through stereotyped, and is universally revered by secretaries and generals alike. She is innately fair, intensely dedicated, and fiercely loyal. I am glad I have her by my side every day.

I also want to acknowledge a few of the hardworking staff from the other side of the aisle. Terry Sauvain, Senator Byrd's staff director on our committee, has worked tirelessly along side of my staff to get our work done for the year. Terry has long been known as someone who is able to effectively work on both sides of the aisle. He is known as the master of West Virginia and my staff has learned a great deal from him since I became chairman in 1997.

Chuck Keiffer, Senator Byrd's minority staff director, also deserves my thanks. He came to the Appropriations Committee 4 years ago from the Office of Management and Budget and has vast experience on the fiscal issues. I want to acknowledge him and thank him for his assistance and service during my tenure as chairman.

And finally, I want to thank Charlie Houy, the minority clerk for the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee. Charlie has been with the Appropriations Committee for nearly 20 years, working for both the minority and majority. He is a consummate expert on defense issues and is well respected by those at the Department of Defense and his colleagues on the Hill. As chairman of the Defense Subcommittee, I look forward to continuing to work with Charlie and thank him for all of the hard work he has put in over the past year. I am proud to say he is my friend.

Mr. President, we deal with a lot of important and controversial issues in this body. Maybe nowhere is that more the case than on this Senate Appropriations Committee.

I have been fortunate to have had the opportunity to chair this committee with so much history and tradition. Senator Byrd has often reminded us of the historical context of this committee and our role which was specified by our Founding Fathers in the Constitution. And, I would be remiss if I did not note that I and all our members have been fortunate to have been supported by such outstanding professional staff.

I remember when Senator John C. Stennis was preparing to leave the Senate in 1988. And he attributed his long and distinguished career to just a few things. The first, was good staff.

So, I want to take a minute to recognize one such individual, our committee staff director, Jim Morhard. Jim is a consummate professional. He has truly done it all here on appropriations. He joined the committee after a career in the Navy Comptroller's office, and then in the Senate under Senators Wilson and Kasten. Jim staffed the military construction bill as both the minority and majority staff director. Jim worked on Defense Subcommittee and with some reluctance, answered my request for him to take over the Commerce-Justice-State Subcommittee. This is considered by many the most difficult of our 13 subcommittees to handle.

At Commerce-Justice-State, Jim Morhard distinguished himself working as ``clerk'' or staff director under Senator Judd Gregg. Jim dealt with a variety of issues from Securities and Exchange Commission fees to NOAA fisheries programs to small business technical assistance. Long before September 11, 2001, Senator Gregg and Jim sought to wake up the Justice Department and FBI and enhance our counterterrorism programs. On September 11, many of those first responders had taken part in training in counterterrorism exercises that were put forward by our Commerce-Justice-State Subcommittee.

In early 2003, I asked Jim to move up and become staff director for the entire committee. There was no staff that I considered more capable or prepared. Jim has always carried out his tasks with tact, fairness and bipartisan spirit. He has great expertise at the technical aspects of the appropriations job. He can make ``the numbers work'' and draft the bill and report language. And, he has the creativity to critically analyze programs and policies and come up with compromises that move the institution forward.

I think about the same day Jim came on board, we began work on the first of two Iraq/Afghanistan supplementals. I think he has been working tirelessly ever since, shepherding through these bills and helping me get the 2004 and this 2005 omnibus appropriations bills through the Senate, through conference and to the President for signature.

The executive branch has countless programs to recognize employees and excellence. Unfortunately, we here in the legislative banch do not. But, one should not assume that we do not recognize personal and professional excellence when we see it. And, I want to express my appreciation to Jim on behalf of the committee and the entire Senate for a job well done.

the bering sea nonpollock groundfish fisheries buyback program

Mr. President, as part of the fiscal year 2005 Consolidated Appropriations conference report there is a section that provides for a vessel buyback program for the Bering Sea/Aleutian Islands nonpollock groundfish fisheries. Senator Murray, is it your intention that section 219 of Title II of the 2005 Consolidated Appropriations conference report is only to provide for a non-pollock groundfish fishery capacity reduction program for catcher processor vessels engaged in these fisheries in the Bering Sea/Aleutian Islands?

It is my understanding that the North Pacific Fishery Management Council will develop the fishery management plans for the Bering Sea/Aleutian Islands non-pollock groundfish fisheries and nothing in this section should be construed to impede or change the council's development of these plans. Is this your understanding?

Senator Murray, there is language in this section that states that future amendments to the fishery management plans in the Bering Sea/Aleutian Islands should not ``penalize'' members of any catcher processor subsector for achieving capacity reduction under this act or any other provision of law. Could you explain in greater detail what this means? In particular, I want to make sure that nothing in this act would preclude the North Pacific Fishery Management Council from accommodating CDQ interests in future Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands non-pollock fishery management plans.

I ask for passage of the bill, and I yield back the remainder of my time.