Floor Statements

Mr. President, this amendment adds $587 million in new spending to first responder grants, above the levels provided already in the bill. There is no offset. The bill already provides $3.4 billion for first responder grants. In addition, there is nearly $7 billion previously appropriated that State and locals have available to spend at this time for first responders. The funding pipeline is full of money. This amendment will cause the subcommittee to exceed its 302(b) allocation. The Budget Act point of order should be sustained.

Have the yeas and nays been ordered?

Mr. President, today, I am introducing the Teaching Geography is Fundamental Act. I am pleased to be joined by Senators Stevens, Dodd, Warner, Burns, and Akaka. The Act's purpose is to improve geographic literacy among K-12 students in the United States by improving professional development programs for K-12 teachers offered through institutions of higher education. The bill also assists States in measuring the impact of education in geography.

To begin to understand other people, we need to understand ourselves. Eudora Welty said that understanding begins with a sense of place. When we understand our own environment, we can better understand the differences in other places, and the people who live

in them. The diversity of cultures, land, and distances between states within our nation is the first evidence we have that a good understanding of geography is necessary. According to the National Geographic Society, home is where the knowledge of geography begins.

The 2005 publication, What Works in Geography, reported that elementary school geography instruction significantly improves student achievement. And, the 2002 National Geographic-Roper Global Geographic Literacy Survey shows that more than half of American adults best able to read a map had taken a high school geography course. That's the good news. Unfortunately, other recent studies show us that nearly one third of our elementary schools have reduced the number of geography courses in the last few years, and only 7 percent of our Nation's fourth graders are taught by teachers with specific undergraduate or graduate experience in geography. Geography is taught by less than 9 percent of K-12 social studies teachers and not even one quarter of high school students graduate with a geography class.

To expect that Americans will be able to work economically and diplomatically with the other people in this world, we need to be able to communicate and understand each other. It is a fact that we have a global marketplace, and that will continue to be the case. We need to be preparing our younger generations for global competition and ensuring that they have a strong base to be able to participate in future industry. Geography knowledge improves those job opportunities.

Approximately 20 percent of the U.S. GDP, that's $2.3 trillion annually, results from international trade. According to the CIA World Factbook of 2005, many U.S. workers need geographic knowledge for this global economy. Geographic knowledge is increasingly needed for U.S. businesses in international markets. For example, the inadvertent placing of Kashmir outside of Indian territory on a time zone map in a widely used computer operating system forced a costly recall, fix, and reissue of the software.

A comprehensive geography education provides training in geospatial technologies, such as remote sensing and geographic information systems. This high-growth industry is expected to reach $30 billion in annual revenues by the end of 2005, up from $5 billion in 2002. Geospatial technologies are one of the three biggest emerging fields identified by the Department of Labor, and they are providing 75,000 new jobs annually. A strong geographic education system is a necessity for this industry's continuing advancement.

Geography literacy is essential to a well prepared citizenry in the 21st Century. Last year, then Secretary of State Colin Powell said, ``To solve most of the major problems facing our county today--from wiping out terrorism, to minimizing global environmental problems, to eliminating the scourge of AIDS--will require every young person to learn more about other regions, cultures, and languages.''

We need to do more to ensure that the teachers responsible for the education of our students, from kindergarten through high school graduation, are prepared to participate constructively in solving those problems. Over the last 15 years, the National Geographic Society has awarded more than $100 million in grants to educators, universities, geography alliances, and others for the purposes of advancing and improving the teaching of geography. Their models are successful and research shows that students who have benefitted from this teaching out perform other students. State geography alliances exist in 19 States, including Mississippi, endowed by grants from the society. It is clear that their efforts alone are not enough. My bill establishes a Federal commitment to enhance the education of our teachers, focus on geography education research, and develop reliable, advanced technology based classroom materials.

I hope the Senate will consider the seriousness of the need to invest in geography and I invite other Senators to cosponsor the Teaching Geography is Fundamental Act.

Mr. President, today, I am introducing the Teaching Geography is Fundamental Act. I am pleased to be joined by Senators Stevens, Dodd, Warner, Burns, and Akaka. The Act's purpose is to improve geographic literacy among K-12 students in the United States by improving professional development programs for K-12 teachers offered through institutions of higher education. The bill also assists States in measuring the impact of education in geography.

To begin to understand other people, we need to understand ourselves. Eudora Welty said that understanding begins with a sense of place. When we understand our own environment, we can better understand the differences in other places, and the people who live

in them. The diversity of cultures, land, and distances between states within our nation is the first evidence we have that a good understanding of geography is necessary. According to the National Geographic Society, home is where the knowledge of geography begins.

The 2005 publication, What Works in Geography, reported that elementary school geography instruction significantly improves student achievement. And, the 2002 National Geographic-Roper Global Geographic Literacy Survey shows that more than half of American adults best able to read a map had taken a high school geography course. That's the good news. Unfortunately, other recent studies show us that nearly one third of our elementary schools have reduced the number of geography courses in the last few years, and only 7 percent of our Nation's fourth graders are taught by teachers with specific undergraduate or graduate experience in geography. Geography is taught by less than 9 percent of K-12 social studies teachers and not even one quarter of high school students graduate with a geography class.

To expect that Americans will be able to work economically and diplomatically with the other people in this world, we need to be able to communicate and understand each other. It is a fact that we have a global marketplace, and that will continue to be the case. We need to be preparing our younger generations for global competition and ensuring that they have a strong base to be able to participate in future industry. Geography knowledge improves those job opportunities.

Approximately 20 percent of the U.S. GDP, that's $2.3 trillion annually, results from international trade. According to the CIA World Factbook of 2005, many U.S. workers need geographic knowledge for this global economy. Geographic knowledge is increasingly needed for U.S. businesses in international markets. For example, the inadvertent placing of Kashmir outside of Indian territory on a time zone map in a widely used computer operating system forced a costly recall, fix, and reissue of the software.

A comprehensive geography education provides training in geospatial technologies, such as remote sensing and geographic information systems. This high-growth industry is expected to reach $30 billion in annual revenues by the end of 2005, up from $5 billion in 2002. Geospatial technologies are one of the three biggest emerging fields identified by the Department of Labor, and they are providing 75,000 new jobs annually. A strong geographic education system is a necessity for this industry's continuing advancement.

Geography literacy is essential to a well prepared citizenry in the 21st Century. Last year, then Secretary of State Colin Powell said, ``To solve most of the major problems facing our county today--from wiping out terrorism, to minimizing global environmental problems, to eliminating the scourge of AIDS--will require every young person to learn more about other regions, cultures, and languages.''

We need to do more to ensure that the teachers responsible for the education of our students, from kindergarten through high school graduation, are prepared to participate constructively in solving those problems. Over the last 15 years, the National Geographic Society has awarded more than $100 million in grants to educators, universities, geography alliances, and others for the purposes of advancing and improving the teaching of geography. Their models are successful and research shows that students who have benefitted from this teaching out perform other students. State geography alliances exist in 19 States, including Mississippi, endowed by grants from the society. It is clear that their efforts alone are not enough. My bill establishes a Federal commitment to enhance the education of our teachers, focus on geography education research, and develop reliable, advanced technology based classroom materials.

I hope the Senate will consider the seriousness of the need to invest in geography and I invite other Senators to cosponsor the Teaching Geography is Fundamental Act.

Mr. President, I am pleased to join my friend from West Virginia, the distinguished Senator who formerly served as chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee, in offering this amendment for the consideration of the Senate.

I appreciate Senator Byrd inviting me to be an original cosponsor of this amendment and join him in this effort to see that the memorial previously authorized to be constructed on the Mall here in the Nation's Capital in honor of Dr. Martin Luther King be funded so construction can begin and this memorial be completed.

The Martin Luther King Memorial was authorized to be constructed on a 4-acre tract on the Mall to recognize and honor the influence on civil rights and justice for all--for all Americans--to which Dr. King devoted a lifetime of courageous service and leadership.

Although the legislation contemplates, as my friend from Virginia, Mr. Warner, points out, that all of the funds for the construction of the memorial would be raised from private sources, much in the same way as the World War II Memorial was constructed--there has been $42 million of private donations made for this purpose--there is needed additional funds. It is hoped that the adoption of this amendment will show the serious commitment of the Congress in seeing that this memorial is completed at the earliest possible date. This could jump- start the final stage of fundraising and enable construction to begin. It is my hope the Senate will support this effort and approve the amendment.

Mr. President, this morning the Washington Post carries an article about the death of GEN Louis Wilson who was a former Commandant of the U.S. Marine Corps. He died on June 21 at his home in Birmingham, AL. He was a native of my State of Mississippi and was a personal friend and a great soldier and a wonderful Commandant of the U.S. Marine Corps. He and his wife Jane lived here in Washington in the Marine barracks, the Commandant's residence, and befriended my wife Rose and me when I was a young Member of Congress before I was elected to the Senate. He was serving as Commandant of the Marine Corps.

We enjoyed many opportunities to visit with them when they were resident in Washington. He was a very distinguished officer in the Marine Corps during World War II. He was given the congressional Medal of Honor for gallantry during his service in the battle in Guam on Fonte Hill. The description of his exploits and gallantry are contained in the citation that was issued when he was awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor.

The article talks about his career in glowing terms, a well-earned tribute for a courageous and brave soldier, and the first Marine Corps Commandant to serve as a member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. He established a tradition when he was selected to serve on the Joint Chiefs of Staff which is carried on today. It was because of his strong leadership and his example that there is no question that a good decision was made to include in the Joint Chiefs of Staff the Commandant of the Marine Corps.

We mourn his passing, but we rejoice in the great life he lived and the inspiration that his career provided to marines in all of the succeeding generations of service in the U.S. Marine Corps.

I ask unanimous consent that the article in today's Washington Post and a copy of the citation for Louis Hugh Wilson, Jr., upon his being awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor be printed in the Record.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I appreciate the Senator's remarks. I assure him that I support everything he has said, and I agree it is now time for us to recognize that the initiative of the Senators from Louisiana, Senator Vitter and Senator Landrieu, and others, including my colleague from Mississippi, deserves to be supported. It deserves our support.

I understand the question about the budget, but I am reminded about an appeal that I had to defend one time in the Supreme Court of the State of Mississippi. The lawyer on the other side started off his brief he filed with the supreme court, and he said that this is a classic example of a claim not being paid on the basis of a mere technicality. Well, of course, there was a lot more to it than just that. The technicality was a real impediment to the appeal being filed by my opponent in that case. But I was reminded of that when I was walking over here. This is an issue that could go either way, in terms of the point of order and the provisions of the Budget Act. The Senator has made that point, and I congratulate him for doing that.

We are not quarreling with the fact that you can make a point of order, but you should not as a matter of the overriding national interest. It is a national interest; the integrity of the Gulf Coast States are at risk. We have before us a solution to the problem, and it is in the national interest that we support it. That is the argument that is being made to the Senate right now. So however this vote is couched, in terms of a motion to waive the Budget Act or on the validity of the point of order, I hope the Senate will come down on the side of the gulf coast Senators who are trying to solve a problem that is in the national interest. We ought to recognize that and vote that way on this issue.

Mr. President, fertilizers provide essential nutrients to the food we eat. Without fertilizer, roughly one-third of the world's people would go hungry. Ammonium nitrate fertilizer is an effective source of nitrogen that all crops need to grow. Thousands of American farmers value its use in certain applications including cool weather fertilization and other low-till cropping systems. Thus, the continued availability of ammonium nitrate fertilizer to U.S. farmers has economic, agronomic and environmental benefits to farmers and society as a whole.

At the same time, the April 1995 attack on the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City showed America that this highly valuable fertilizer can be subject to adulteration and misuse by criminals intent on engaging in acts of terror.

After the Oklahoma City tragedy, Congress enacted legislation calling for a study on the feasibility and practicability of imposing controls on certain precursor chemicals, including ammonium nitrate. Congress recognized that it is simply not possible for the agriculture community to guarantee against the criminal misuse of ammonium nitrate or for any community to guarantee that the thousands of everyday products that can be converted to criminal use will not be misused by those with the intent and capability to do so.

Over the past 10 years, the security landscape has continued to change. The agriculture community and the fertilizer industry recognize that more needs to be done to strengthen the controls regarding the handling and purchase of ammonium nitrate fertilizer in order to ensure American farmers continue to have access to this valued input. Today, with my colleague from Arkansas Mr. Pryor, my colleague from Georgia Mr. Chambliss, and my colleague from Kansas Mr. Roberts, I am pleased to introduce legislation that provides a practical and workable solution to enhance the secure handling of ammonium nitrate ensuring that ammonium nitrate remains available for agricultural use.

The legislation is entitled ``The Secure Handling of Ammonium Nitrate Act of 2005.'' It calls for Federal and State cooperation to secure ammonium nitrate fertilizer. It requires any person who produces, stores, sells, or distributes ammonium nitrate to register their facility with their State department of agriculture and to maintain records of sales or distribution of the product. Additionally, it requires all purchasers of ammonium nitrate to register with their State department of agriculture.

We believe these requirements are necessary measures to help provide additional security for ammonium nitrate fertilizer and will not unduly burden agriculture professionals or farmers who use ammonium nitrate. Furthermore, we believe this important legislation will effectively enhance ongoing security measures and help to keep ammonium nitrate out of the hands of those who wish to harm our Nation.

I urge Senators to support this legislation.

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

Mr. President, fertilizers provide essential nutrients to the food we eat. Without fertilizer, roughly one-third of the world's people would go hungry. Ammonium nitrate fertilizer is an effective source of nitrogen that all crops need to grow. Thousands of American farmers value its use in certain applications including cool weather fertilization and other low-till cropping systems. Thus, the continued availability of ammonium nitrate fertilizer to U.S. farmers has economic, agronomic and environmental benefits to farmers and society as a whole.

At the same time, the April 1995 attack on the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City showed America that this highly valuable fertilizer can be subject to adulteration and misuse by criminals intent on engaging in acts of terror.

After the Oklahoma City tragedy, Congress enacted legislation calling for a study on the feasibility and practicability of imposing controls on certain precursor chemicals, including ammonium nitrate. Congress recognized that it is simply not possible for the agriculture community to guarantee against the criminal misuse of ammonium nitrate or for any community to guarantee that the thousands of everyday products that can be converted to criminal use will not be misused by those with the intent and capability to do so.

Over the past 10 years, the security landscape has continued to change. The agriculture community and the fertilizer industry recognize that more needs to be done to strengthen the controls regarding the handling and purchase of ammonium nitrate fertilizer in order to ensure American farmers continue to have access to this valued input. Today, with my colleague from Arkansas Mr. Pryor, my colleague from Georgia Mr. Chambliss, and my colleague from Kansas Mr. Roberts, I am pleased to introduce legislation that provides a practical and workable solution to enhance the secure handling of ammonium nitrate ensuring that ammonium nitrate remains available for agricultural use.

The legislation is entitled ``The Secure Handling of Ammonium Nitrate Act of 2005.'' It calls for Federal and State cooperation to secure ammonium nitrate fertilizer. It requires any person who produces, stores, sells, or distributes ammonium nitrate to register their facility with their State department of agriculture and to maintain records of sales or distribution of the product. Additionally, it requires all purchasers of ammonium nitrate to register with their State department of agriculture.

We believe these requirements are necessary measures to help provide additional security for ammonium nitrate fertilizer and will not unduly burden agriculture professionals or farmers who use ammonium nitrate. Furthermore, we believe this important legislation will effectively enhance ongoing security measures and help to keep ammonium nitrate out of the hands of those who wish to harm our Nation.

I urge Senators to support this legislation.

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

Mr. President, the Senate now has under consideration the conference report to accompany H.R. 1268, the fiscal year 2005 emergency supplemental appropriations bill. This bill was requested by the President to carry forward the spending and accounts of the Department of Defense, the Department of State, and other agencies and departments of the Government through the remainder of this fiscal year which will end on September 30.

The bill was passed in the Senate on April 21, and we began conference discussions with our colleagues from the other body on April 27. A bipartisan majority of the conferees reconciled differences between the two bills and reached agreement on the provisions of a conference report on Tuesday, May 3.

The House approved the conference report on May 5 by a rollcall vote of 368 to 58. The conference agreement provides a total of $82.041 billion, slightly less than the President's request of $82.042 billion. Almost $76 billion in emergency supplemental appropriations is provided to the Department of Defense to cover the costs of continuing the operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Title II of the conference agreement provides $4.128 billion for international programs and assistance for reconstruction and the war on terror. Title III provides $1.184 billion for domestic programs in the war on terror. And title IV provides $907 million in relief for the Indian Ocean tsunami disaster.

Finally, division B of the conference agreement carries the House- passed REAL ID Act and other provisions relating to immigration issues.

This conference agreement embodies a genuine compromise between the two bodies on legislation that is of utmost importance to our troops who are deployed in the war on terror and for our allies around the world. It is supported by the administration, and I hope the bill, as reflected in the conference report, will receive bipartisan support in the Senate.

We are pleased to have the benefit of comments by other members of the committee or Senate to explain specific provisions of this conference agreement. We are prepared to try to respond to any questions that any Senators may have about the provisions of the conference report, and we will be hopeful, however, that the Senate will proceed with some dispatch to the approval of the conference report because it is an urgent supplemental appropriations conference report. The funds provided in this conference report are urgently needed by our forces in the field and by our State Department for accounts that have been depleted in connection with programs administered by that Department.

The administration is urging that we act quickly, and I hope we will not unnecessarily prolong consideration of the conference agreement in the Senate but respond enthusiastically with the challenge from the administration to act with dispatch on this conference report.

Mr. President, before I yield the floor, if I may have one more moment of indulgence from the Senator from California, on behalf of the majority leader, I ask unanimous consent that there be 3 hours and 15 minutes of debate under the control of the ranking member and 1\1/2\ hours of debate under the control of the chairman; provided further that following the use or yielding back of time, the Senate proceed to a vote on adoption of the conference report, with no intervening action or debate.

Mr. President, I have no objection to the Senator speaking as in morning business.

I do not want her to talk forever.

How long does the Senator expect to talk?

I have no objection, and I have no objection with that being done in spite of the agreement we have reached on the time for debate of the supplemental.

Mr. President, will the Senator yield for a question?

Mr. President, I am curious to know when the Senator plans to complete her remarks. At the beginning of her remarks, she assured the Senate that she would take about 30 minutes. We are on the conference report on the supplemental appropriations bill which is an urgent supplemental bill. We have about 4 hours divided among Senators on both sides to complete debate. I don't want to push the Senate into the evening hours, if we are going to have a prolonged discussion of this issue when we thought it was going to be 30 minutes. It is almost an hour now.

Mr. President, before the Chair announces the recess for the policy luncheons, I have eight unanimous consent requests for committees to meet during today's session of the Senate. They have the approval of the majority and minority leaders. I ask unanimous consent that these requests be agreed to and the requests be printed in the Record.

Reserving the right to object, let me ask the Senator, if I may, does the total of that amount of time exceed the amount under the order that your side of the aisle has been granted, or is it less than that?

I have no objection.

Mr. President, as Senators know, there is time for debate of the conference report, for Senators to come over and speak, if they so choose, about the provisions of this bill and the effort we have made to meet the challenge the President has laid before us, and that is to produce a bill that provides funding for support for our troops and other officials from the State Department and other agencies who are engaged in operations in Iraq and Afghanistan and in the global war on terror. The majority of the money provided in this legislation is for those purposes.

I am pleased the committee was able to restrain the temptation that always exists to add money that was over and above the request made by the President. The fact of the matter is that this committee showed discipline and commitment to fiscal restraint. We brought a bill back in the initial stages of this process that was below the request made by the President and that was below the request provided in the House- passed bill.

Our Senate Appropriations Committee reported legislation providing funding that was lower than either one of those documents. In conference with the House, we did resolve differences. There was give and take. Both sides had their opportunity to speak. We met on two separate occasions with our Senate conferees, joining representatives from the House in a wide range of discussion. Nobody was cut off when they wanted to discuss the issues or offer alternatives to provisions of the House-passed bill. The REAL ID provision that has come up, which some have complained about, was not a product of the Senate's action. It was put into the bill on the House side, but it was in conference. Because that legislation contained immigration issues and the identification issue, there were those in the Senate who offered germane amendments on the broad, general subject of immigration policy, guest worker provisions, quotas, workers who could come from foreign countries into the United States. The Senate will remember that we have debated several amendments on those subjects. We approved some and we rejected some.

In conference with the House, a majority of the conferees of the Senate worked with a majority of the conferees in the House to get a compromise conference report. That has been brought back to the House now and passed by a substantially overwhelming margin, 368 to 40- something, as I recall.

The Senate is prepared to wind up debate in a matter of an hour or two, under the order that has been entered. I hope the Senate will give support to this conference report and overwhelmingly approve it. It reflects strict discipline in the appropriations process, but at the same time it provides the funds needed for those who are engaged in the important operations in Iraq and Afghanistan to safeguard the security of our country and to promote democracy and help ensure a safer world. I am hopeful the Senate will approve the conference report.

I am prepared to yield the floor. Seeing no Senator seeking recognition, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Mr. President, I was curious when I put in the suggestion that a quorum be present as to how time would be charged under the time that is being used now under the quorum call.

Mr. President, since there are no Senators on either side present, I ask unanimous consent that the time be charged equally between both sides.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum and ask unanimous consent the time under the quorum be charged equally to both sides.

Mr. President, I am pleased to see that Senators have endorsed the conference report in a bipartisan way. We appreciate the support that this is receiving. In every conference, there are always issues that

arise that cannot be resolved to suit all Senators or all Members of the other body. But I must say to the Senate that this was a conference that was open, fair, and it allowed for the participation of all conferees, both parties in the Senate, and the same with the House. We had two sessions; one was in the Capitol over on the House side and another was on the Senate side in the Mansfield Room, where any Senator or any Member from the House who wanted to speak before the conference had the right to do so. In addition, Members had the opportunity to offer motions, amendments, or suggestions for the benefit of members of the conference.

I was very pleased to acknowledge, at the time, the important participation of the ranking member on the Democratic side in the Senate committee, Senator Byrd, who took an active role in the discussions, who offered a motion at one point to insist upon the position of the Senate in the conference. Other members could have done the same or argued against including any provision of the House-passed bill.

There has been some discussion today about the REAL ID provision. I didn't think that was a wonderful idea myself. It was not included in the Senate bill. It was a House provision. But the House Members insisted that it be included in the conference report. Anyone who wanted to resist that had an opportunity to argue against it or to offer a motion that the Senate insist upon its position that it not be included. No Senator elected to do that.

I didn't know how many meetings were going to be required of the conference. I had no idea what the House would do in terms of insisting on provisions in this bill as that conference began. I was, frankly, surprised that we didn't have but two meetings of the conference. I expected that we would have other meetings. But the House didn't think it was important or necessary, and I got the impression that there were going to be no more meetings but only after the second meeting had concluded. Members of the committee continued to discuss issues with House conferees, and we finally reached agreement.

I think this is a good conference report. It is a reasonable compromise between the two bills that were passed by the House and the Senate. We didn't get everything we wanted in the conference with the House; neither did the House get everything they wanted in conference with our Senate conferees. But I think this is a fair conference report. It reflects a commitment to support the President, to provide funding that is needed for military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. It is an urgent supplemental bill, and it ought to be passed today by the Senate. I am confident that it will be.

I appreciate very much the assistance and the affirmative way members of our conference worked to ensure that we could get a conference report that would be adopted by the Senate. I think we have accomplished that goal.

I am proud of the work that was done by the members of our staffs. They worked very, very hard in the preparation of the conference report that is before the Senate today. I especially want to thank our staff director, Keith Kennedy; Terry Sauvain, his counterpart on the Democratic side; Chuck Keiffer on the Democratic side, who also worked very hard; Charlie Houy, who has been a stalwart member of the staff of the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee for many years; Rebecca Davies on the Homeland Security Appropriations Committee; Sid Ashworth, the clerk of the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee. Senator Stevens, chairman of that subcommittee and former chairman of the full committee, was enormously influential in this conference. I have been very grateful for his support and assistance. I also thank Clayton Heil, counsel to our Senate Committee on Appropriations, who has been very helpful as well. And there are others.

Mr. President, I appreciate the assistance of other Senators on the full Committee on Appropriations. We had strong support in the signing of the conference report. It has been a bipartisan achievement. It is not a partisan bill, and we appreciate the fact that it is not.

Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum and ask unanimous consent that the time under the quorum be charged equally to each side.

I move to reconsider the vote.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate now proceed to the consideration of S. Con. Res. 31, which was submitted earlier today.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the concurrent resolution be agreed to and the motion to reconsider be laid on the table.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation be authorized to meet on Tuesday, May 10, 2005, at 2:30 p.m., on Identity Theft.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary be authorized to meet to conduct a hearing on ``Continued Oversight of the USA PATRIOT

Act'' on Tuesday, May 10, 2005 at 9:30 a.m. in Dirksen Senate Office Building Room 226.

Panel I: The Honorable Larry E. Craig, United States Senator, R-ID, The Honorable Richard J. Durbin, United States Senator, D-IL.

Panel II: The Honorable Bob Barr, Former Member of Congress, Chairman, Patriots to Restore Checks and Balances, Atlanta, GA; David Cole, Professor of Law, Georgetown University Law Center, Washington, DC; Daniel P. Collins, Partner, Munger, Tolles & Olsen LLP, Los Angeles, CA; James X. Dempsey, Executive Director, Center for Democracy & Technology, Washington, DC; Andrew C. McCarthy, Attorney and Senior Fellow, The Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, Washington, DC; Suzanne E. Spaulding, Managing Director, The Harbour Group, LLC, Washington, DC.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Select Committee on Intelligence be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on May 10, 2005, at 2:30 p.m. to hold a hearing.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on Airland be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, May 10, 2005, at 3:30 p.m. in closed session to mark up the Airland Programs and provisions contained in the National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 2006.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on Employment and Workplace Safety be authorized to hold a hearing during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, May 10, 2005, at 2 p.m. in SD-430.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on National Parks be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, May 10, 2005, at 2:30 p.m.

The purpose of the hearing is to review the National Park Service's funding needs for administration and management of the National Park System.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on Seapower be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, May 10, 2005 at 2:30 p.m. in closed session to mark up the Seapower programs and provisions contained in the National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 2006.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on Emerging Threats and Capabilities be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, May 10, 2005 at 5 p.m. in closed session to mark up the emerging threats and capabilities programs and provisions contained in the National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 2006.

Mr. President, I am pleased to bring to the Senate's attention the distinguished career of Charles W. Capps, Jr., who has served with distinction and honor as a member of the Mississippi State House of Representatives from Bolivar County since 1971.

My friend, Charlie Capps has announced that he will retire from the legislature in June. As a member of the House of Representatives, Charlie Capps has earned the respect of eight governors, the members of the Mississippi Congressional Delegation, and all who have called upon him for advice and assistance over the past three decades.

Charlie Capps is well known throughout our State for his contributions to higher education, highways, wildlife conservation, job development, and job training. He made special efforts to improve the quality of life in the Mississippi Delta.

He has held many positions of responsibility including service as Chairman of the Committee on Appropriations from 1988 to 2003. During those years, the State has experienced unprecedented economic growth. Today, workforce training centers, mental health facilities, university libraries, recreational lakes, and distance learning centers are part of the legacy of this great Mississippian.

I congratulate Charlie Capps for his distinguished career of public service and for his indelible contribution to our State.

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

Mr. President, we have no objection to the amendment being called up. We have discussed the amendment with the Senator from New Jersey and the Senators from Kansas and Ohio. We have no objection to proceeding to consider the amendment.

We are not going to join that request.

I ask unanimous consent the reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote and I move to lay that motion on the table.

The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.