Floor Statements

Mr. President, today I rise, as I did 2 years ago, to ponder the terrible events that had occurred only a day before. I rose to express my anger and my sadness, my disbelief, and my disdain for the situation. I rose, as did most of my fellow Senators from both sides of the aisle.

I spoke of the strength and resolve of this great Nation. I spoke of the sad reality that thousands of families were directly affected and would never be the same; that some fathers and some mothers would never be coming home again; that some young sons and daughters would grow up to pictures of parents and grandparents lost in New York, Pennsylvania and across the Potomac at the Pentagon.

I also spoke of the horror yet to be seen and I spoke of our determination, as a country, to face whatever challenges lay ahead and I spoke of our President and the strength of character he would need to withstand such an attack and keep this Nation strong.

I rise today and speak of the same issues and my respect and admiration for the men and women of our military, proud of our President's resolve to stand up to such a challenge and leadership during these 2 years of conflict and proud of our country to rally around the cause of liberty and the defeat of terrorism. I am also proud of this body's dedication to support the ongoing war on terrorism.

It was popular and ``good press'' to support the initial tide of patriotism and rise against the actions of September 11, 2001. We all stood and swore to the world we would not be bowed or broken. We rallied to the cause and professed dedication to righting this most egregious wrong.

Two years have passed and some among us are starting to lose focus and the resolve necessary to wage this battle--and yes this is a battle. I can understand how that could happen. The more time passes the easier it is to allow other challenges, others programs, and other agendas to take center stage and we get back to the daily business at hand. But we, like our President and our military, must do our part to conquer this foe. We must remember the War on Terrorism does not have one lone face or name attached to it nor is it contained to the field of battle.

This war is being waged in Iraq and Afghanistan as we try to wage peace and raise those countries to when they can stand on their own with self-leadership and rule of law by their own people. The war on terrorism is being waged through the financial institutions, diplomatic arena, and the fields of conflict.

What this country and this Senate needs is the same kind of resolve to continue to support the efforts of this administration in Iraq and Afghanistan and whatever lands this fight takes us. Let us not be confused, the cost of freedom is high but the loss of our freedom and freedom of all nations is a much greater cost. Our only choice is to wage this battle and wage it fully. Our only choice is to wage this battle no matter where it takes us. Our only choice is to wage this battle through the courts and the banks, through the intelligence agencies and the embassies, through our combat capability and the United Nations.

In 2001 I spoke of our President and how he prayed the evening of September 11, 2001. As I close, I offer a suggestion to each of my distinguished colleagues. This evening before bed I will take time to pray. I will pray for all of the victims of September 11, 2001 and their affected families. I will pray for all of the victims of terrorism throughout the world whether by the hands of organized terrorism or random acts perpetrated by despicable men with warped ideas. I will pray for all of the men and women of our military especially those that have paid the ultimate sacrifice in defense of this Nation. I will also pray that our military is successful in defeating our foes in this war. I will pray for our President that he continue to lead this country during these trying times as he has done so honorably. Lastly I will pray for this body to continue to have the strength of character and fortitude to continue to support this cause through to completion no matter how long it may be.

Let this day be a day of remembering and a day of pride as well as sadness. Let this day be the day that we gain renewed resolve, clarity of thought and strength of purpose. May God bless this day and may God bless the United States of America.

Mr. President, are we under managed time?

Mr. President, I rise today in support of the resolution of disapproval regarding proposed changes in the media ownership regulations by the Federal Communications Commission. I personally thank Senator Dorgan for his leadership on this issue, as well as the rest of the Commerce Committee for so vigorously exploring the potential impact these regulations would have on the nature and content of the American media. These issues are of vital importance to the public, and I am pleased to be part of this effort, utilizing the congressional review process to ensure that the rulemaking process reflects the public interest.

Frank Blethen, the publisher of the Seattle Times, eloquently testified before the Senate Commerce Committee earlier this year. Mr. Blethen stated:

The America newspaper, large and small, and without

exception, belongs to a town, a city, at the most to a

region.

There is a certain pride and comfort to be taken from the notion that the media that so pervades our lives could be so rooted in focus and accountability. That comment reflects a core value that has led me to the position that I take today, that the Federal Communications Commission has proposed a series of historically broad rules changes that would make it easier for large media corporations to gobble up a greater share of local media, including television stations, in the same market.

The Commission, and those who already hold enormous control over the content of the press, claim that this will only enhance the ability of the media to meet the needs of the consumer. The world, they claim, has grown so large and so complex that only vast resources and centralized control can carry important stories across the globe. I respectfully disagree.

Consumers benefit from technology more today than in any time in history. In an age of satellite television and the Internet, I am not as convinced as some that the greatest hole in news coverage is the world beyond our region. The Consumers Union has correctly pointed out that the opposite is the case: Satellite provides no independent local news information and is struggling just to make local stations available to subscribers.

Radio provides another acute example. Prior to 1996, there was a 40- station national ownership cap in the radio industry. Today, Clear Channel alone owns almost 1,240 stations, and between one-third and one-half of all independent radio stations have been absorbed or run out of business, including many in Colorado. Suggesting allowing increased cross ownership does

not strike me as a policy in the greatest interest of the public whom the FCC is chartered to serve.

The current generation of Americans has seen the number of independently owned newspapers dwindle from 1,700 to 280. As Commerce Committee Chairman McCain noted this spring, this often equates to a loss of diversity of opinion in the pages of those newspapers with a common owner. I share the Chairman's opinion on this matter and am profoundly concerned with the homogenization of information being funneled in to local communities by multi-market media corporations. As Mr. Blethen stated in his testimony, the secret of the free press and vibrant public discourse depends upon voices in the communities themselves.

While those facts stand on their own, it is instructive to examine what we have witnessed in my home State of Colorado in recent years.

A number of family-owned newspapers in Colorado have recently been absorbed by a media giant, the Media One Corporation. In Northeastern Colorado both the Ft. Morgan Times and the Sterling Journal Advocate, as well as the Southeastern Colorado paper the Lamar Daily News, have gone from being locally owned family papers to being part of an enormous media machine headquartered far from those who rely on the news and information of those papers. I ask my colleagues, particularly those from States with large rural areas, what will happen to the information available in those communities if the rules are relaxed even further? Will those in Lamar, CO, receive all of their news from newspapers, radio and television outlets owned by the same company?

In my community of Loveland, CO, for example, I have seen a locally owned radio station become part of a syndicate of radio stations. We don't have the coverage of the local football games by the radio station anymore. We don't have local newscasters. A new station came in which was created by the city so you can tune into the station to get driving information in that small community in which I live. All of this was provided by a small radio station at an earlier time, before that larger conglomerate bought up that radio station in Loveland, CO.

This represents an enormous fiscal impact on large and small businesses as well as individuals, infringing on their ability to reach the consumers they relied upon for years. Those who can still afford to advertise are forced to pass these increased costs to consumers. It is important to note that this is the market today, without the new, more loose FCC regulations in effect. What will happen with newspapers and television stations are owned by the same corporation?

That is legitimate question. Capitol Broadcasting Company makes the following estimates for what will happen in Colorado under these proposed regulations:

One company could own six Colorado television stations.

One company could own an unlimited number of both daily and weekly newspapers in the Denver area or a combination of television stations and a majority of the print media.

The local cable company serving every Colorado home could be owned by one company.

The issue before the FCC and the Senate is not whether we need to re- debate the Telecommunications Act of 1996 or specific Joint Operating Agreements. The issue today is whether the public will be well served by another round of consolidation, particularly the wisdom of enhancing the ability of a large corporation to purchase broadcast outlets and newspapers in the same market. On several occasions I have contacted FCC Chairman Michael Powell to express my concern over the direction the FCC has taken and the speed with which it has moved.

In my opinion the FCC did not give the public nor Congress an adequate chance to comment on changes of such enormous consequence prior to the adoption of the new regulations.

I have been impressed and encouraged by the broad coalition of organizations expressing similar concerns over the FCC's press for action. The Consumers Union, National Rifle Association, Common Cause, the Traditional Values Coalition, CodePink Women for Peace, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, and the Future of Music Coalition are just a few of the organizations that share my concern for independent and diverse media in the United States. Given the actions of the FCC, we must carefully consider the prudence of these rule changes and the overall public interest at stake.

Reed Hundt, FCC Chairman during the passage of the Telecommunications Act, stated well the intention of the Congress. ``The Commission's goal in this proceeding is to further competition, just as we seek to promote competition in other communications industries we regulate. But in our broadcast ownership rules we also seek to promote diversity in programming and diversity in the viewpoints expressed on this powerful medium that so shapes our culture.'' What we must encourage is locally driven news coverage as opposed to national news that attempts to find a local perspective. National news for the sake of simplicity or sensationalism never gives local communities the in-depth coverage they should have. Do we want top down coverage or bottom up coverage? I opt for local to national.

I feel much more comfortable with news stories originating out of my hometown in Colorado and then, on their own merits, rising to the national level. I am not particularly comfortable with national news being created and local stations trying to find a local perspective for the national headline. So I think that the top down is a bad alternative; the bottom up is the best approach.

It is my hope that this body will listen to the many voices that are asking us not to chart a dangerous, wholly business-driven course for media and consumers in the coming years.

The FCC would have been wise to maintain the existing commitment made to the public, facilitating greater opportunity for Americans to do business, seek information, and enjoy entertainment from a vibrant, diverse, and healthy media. The FCC has failed in doing this by passing a sweeping slate of rules that will do only one thing for certain: put fewer hands in control of the Nation's media. Thanks to the tool at our disposal, the Congressional Review Act, Congress has the opportunity to prevent these rules from going into effect.

I urge my colleagues to stand up and send a loud and clear message to the FCC by voting in favor of this resolution of disapproval.

I yield the floor.

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

Mr. President, I rise today to honor one of our fallen heroes of my State and this great Nation. SSG Mark A. Lawton was killed in action while serving our country in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom.

Sergeant Lawton served honorably with the 244th Engineer Battalion, U.S. Army Reserve of Grand Junction, CO. He was one of the many citizens soldiers who took up the charge and left family and career when asked to defend the principles of freedom and democracy. Like all reservists and National Guard members, he balanced his responsibilities to his country with those to all that cared for and depended on him.

Staff Sergeant Lawton's unit was activated in February and are responsible for constructing roads and bridges, improving irrigation and building playgrounds for the children of Iraq. The 244th is creating a better place for Iraqis, and Sergeant Lawton helped raise the quality of life. Colorado is proud of the actions of Sergeant Lawton, the 244th and all of our servicemen and women serving during this operation.

Staff Sergeant Lawton lived in Hayden, CO, with his wife, Sherri, and two sons, Dustin and Tanner.

Mr. President, I rise today to posthumously thank Staff Sergeant Lawton for his service and ultimate sacrifice to this great Nation and applaud him as a hero to Colorado and all of the United States.

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 text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, for nearly 15 years, our country engaged in a bitter struggle with the tyrannical regime of Saddam Hussein. We argued, negotiated, debated, and compromised with this brutal dictator, and yet the results were always the same: deception, deceit, and lies. In the meantime, thousands of innocent Iraqis were raped, tortured, or murdered. Some disappeared entirely, never to be seen again. Meanwhile, Iraq's enormous wealth was pilfered and squandered by Saddam's cronies who were more concerned about their collection of foreign sports cars than ensuring the Iraqi people had running water and sufficient electricity.

It is easy to lose sight of how far we have come. As we constantly hear stories of the guerrilla style warfare, of secret Iraqi resistance groups, and the criticism regarding the pace of reconstruction, we forget about the people we have saved or the freedom we have provided. Iraqis are now truly free, and we must remember that.

Change is not instantaneous, particularly when it comes to freeing a people who have been oppressed for over 25 years. As the Center for Strategic and International Studies recently reported, the reconstruction in Iraq will be an enormous task. We cannot and should not expect immediate results: decades of neglect and degradation cannot be overcome by the simple exertion of will. No, rebuilding of Iraq will be a slow and deliberate process. It cannot be rushed, and we must remember that we have only been rebuilding for 11 weeks.

The recommendations from the CSIS report were helpful in identifying those areas that we need to work on. For example, the CSIS team found that public safety remains the primary concern for many Iraqis as well as American commanders and recommends quickly expanding the Iraqi civilian defense forces. Another critical recommendation is finding work for unemployed Iraqis who have far too much time to consider their plight. Realistically, I believe agriculture and construction could provide that employment.

Though we still have a long road ahead, we should also recognize how far we have come. Saddam's brutal dictatorship is no longer in power, and we have taken steps to track down members of his former regime. The recent killing of Saddam's two sons was an important victory, and it appears that it will only be a matter of time before we catch Saddam. The Iraqi people are starting to realize that Saddam is not coming back to power and that freedom is truly theirs.

We have also restored most of the public utilities and improved security. Thousands of Iraqis are joining the country's new civil defense force, which will free up thousands of American troops for other missions. And oil revenue is increasing daily, helping defray the costs of running the country.

Perhaps most significantly, Iraq's governing council has convened and the process of developing a formal structure for governing the country has begun. We also must not forget that 85 percent of the cities are now governed by local Iraqi leaders.

Despite this amazing progress, some have criticized the administration's approach to Iraq. For example, many have wanted to know when our troops will come home for some time. Unfortunately, the Army was unable to provide a rotation schedule until recently because of ongoing military operations and security concerns.

This concern resonated in my home State as well. In Colorado, we have been awaiting word on when the local soldiers from the 3rd Armored Cavalry based at Fort Carson might return since the end of Operation Iraqi Freedom. Thankfully, the Army recently announced its unit rotation schedule, which means that if all goes according to plan, many of the units in Iraq, including the 3rd Armored Cavalry, will be home within a year.

This information will bring joy to our troops who have served so valiantly over the last several months. It will also give hope to the many families who had been patiently awaiting for information on when their loved ones might return. We should not forget that without their support and sacrifice, our troops would not be able to function. It is their families who give our troops strength.

This is why I have been working with nonprofit organizations like the Armed Forces Foundation that have been providing support to these families during this prolonged deployment. During the August recess, for example, I will be joining the Armed Forces Foundation in organizing a fishing trip for the children of the soldiers form Fort Carson. While activities like the children's fishing trip cannot replace a mother or father, they can lift the spirits of these families who have sacrificed so much.

Other criticism, however, is completely unjustified at this time. For example, some pushed for cost estimates on our future operations in Iraq, which everyone knows is nearly impossible to predict at this time. Department officials can't look into their crystal ball and pull out the magic number. Future operations in Iraq may cost more than the $4 billion we are currently spending or they may cost less. We just don't know at this time, and we won't know until Iraq is completely stabilized.

Another criticism centers on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs. Almost all of us believed, and many of us still believe, Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. And what happened to these weapons is a legitimate question.

Our forces have not found these weapons yet, but that does not mean they didn't exist or that we wont' find them in the future. There are few matters that our intelligence agencies have ever conclusively agreed on. One of those was that Iraq was developing weapons of mass destruction. Last October's National Intelligence Estimate clearly lays out the intelligence supporting this belief.

What attracted so much attention, unfortunately, was the use of particular pieces of intelligence in speeches by administration officials. The President's State of the Union Address for example included a statement that the administration now admits did not rise to the level of certainty required for Presidential speeches.

While I won't attempt to justify the inclusion of such a statement, I will say that the matter does not deserve the attention it has received. The President's statement was not false, and it was only one statement in a series that laid out Iraq's effort to develop weapons of mass destruction. In fact, British intelligence still stands behind the statement. And no one has questioned the veracity of the other statements in the President's speech.

So despite this statement, it seems clear to me that the President laid out a very convincing case that the American people and Congress agreed with. I also remind my colleagues that we voted to force Iraq to comply with United Nations resolutions 3 months before the President's speech.

Mr. President, Operation Iraqi Freedom was a spectacular campaign that resulted in the freeing of millions from tyranny and oppression. We should take pride in bringing freedom and liberty to the Iraqi people. Our troops are performing admirably and continue to believe in their mission. We still have much to accomplish, but with patience and perseverance, we will make a difference in this long-troubled region of the world.

Mr. President, last week, the Under Secretary of the Air Force, Peter Teets, announced the Air Force's determination that the Boeing Company had committed serious violations of Federal law by illegally acquiring thousands of documents from its chief competitor, Lockheed Martin. Apparently, the Boeing Company used this information to underbid Lockheed during the billion-dollar Evolved Expendable Vehicle competition. Boeing's illegal activity probably cost Lockheed Martin hundreds of millions of dollars in contracts and did serious damage to the Federal Government's procurement process.

As a result, the Air Force has punished the Boeing Company by suspending Boeing's Launch Systems, Services, and Delta business units for an indefinite period of time. The Air Force also reduced the total number of Boeing launches by seven. The Air Force increased the total number of launches for Lockheed by the same number.

The Air Force granted Lockheed Martin permission to develop a west coast launch capability at Vandenberg Air Force Base, which will give Lockheed an opportunity to compete for launches from this critical base. This decision will give the Air Force more flexibility in awarding launches in the future.

I was pleased by the Air Force's decision. Integrity of the procurement process is essential and nothing less than the highest standards should be expected. Boeing's actions are a major disappointment, and it is my hope that the Air Force's decision will serve up as a wake-up call, not just for this company, but for all companies doing business with the Department of Defense.

Boeing must not take measures to ensure that its employees know that this activity is unacceptable. To this end, the hiring of former Senator Warren Rudman to review the company's policies and procedures regarding ethics and the handling of competitive information was a good first step. It saddens me to think that a handful of individuals could have caused such problems for the 160,000 hard-working men and women employed by the Boeing Company.

We should keep in mind that the Department of Justice is continuing its own investigation into the criminal activities of these former employees. I will also be requesting through the Senate Armed Services Committee that the General Accounting Office investigate whether defense consolidation has resulted in a situation where the Federal Government's ability to punish those companies that violate the procurement process has been limited.

To be clear, I continue to support the Air Force's policy of sustaining two launch providers for the EELV program. Last February, I sent a letter to the Secretary of Defense emphasizing my belief that reliance on only one provider could jeopardize our ability to utilize space. Assured access to space requires sufficient launch capability, which would be lost with the elimination of one launch service providers. And, while redundancy is expensive, I believe we need to ensure space assets are there for our men and women in the Armed Forces when they are needed.

Mr. President, I rise to pay tribute to our colleague and a friend, Strom Thurmond. We were all deeply moved by the recent passing of this gracious gentleman, and I would like to take a few minutes to reflect on his rich life and to honor his memory.

Strom Thurmond had a long and distinguished career. Over recent weeks we have heard many descriptions of the achievements of this remarkable man. But Senator Thurmond was distinguished for much more than the length of his Senate service or the number of ``firsts'' he achieved during his life. Rather, Senator Thurmond is distinguished by his love for America. For although Strom Thurmond was perhaps best known as a politician, he was first and foremost a patriot. His military service, his time as a governor, and his tenure in the U.S. Senate were all fueled by his deep and abiding love for America.

Just as deep as his love for America was his love for South Carolina and its residents. Senator Thurmond and his staff were well known for their accessability and outstanding constituent service. He believed in hard work and service, and never shied away from his convictions.

That same accessability and attitude of service carried over to his interaction with fellow members as well. I was honored to serve with Senator Thurmond on the Armed Services Committee, and I still remember the helpful guidance he gave me as a new member on the committee. His passion for our military members and his concern for their well-being was evident, and I hope that I can emulate that same care.

I also remember how generous Senator Thurmond was with his personal time. Obviously as a senior Member of the Senate and the Senate President pro tempore he had a number of responsibilities. However, he still made time to serve this member. Several years ago I was honored when he graciously agreed to speak at the Capitol Conference I hold for Colorado constituents each year. To this day I am deeply appreciative of the time that he spent making remarks, fielding questions, and taking photos with my constituents. Many of the participants later remarked on his wit and vitality, remarkable for any member, but especially for one of his years. Even in their short time with him they were able to see the courtesy and conviction that we witnessed each day.

I feel fortunate to have had the opportunity to get to know Strom Thurmond as the person behind the military hero and political legend. To see the small ways in which he expressed his interest in and appreciation for those around him, such as taking the Senate pages for ice cream. He also expressed personal concern about the health and well being of his staff and Members, which was perhaps necessitated in some part by the candy he was always handing out. I only hope that we can all learn from and retain some part of his charm, confidence, depth of conviction, and commitment.

Although Strom Thurmond may no longer be here with us physically, his legacy will live on. The United States Senate and America are better for his strength, service, and self-sacrifice.

Finally, I would like to take this opportunity to express my sincere condolences to Senator Thurmond's family and friends. He was a proud father, and recently, grandfather. His love for his family was well known, and our thoughts and prayers are with them. My wife Joan and I hope that they are able to find comfort and peace during these difficult days.

I am proud to have called Strom Thurmond my colleague and friend, and today I join the rest of America in honoring this great service and mourning his passing.

Mr. President, I rise today to thank the Foreign Relations Committee for their hard work on the legislation before us. Specifically, I am pleased to see included in S. 925, the State Department authorization, a provision relating to the international military education training and foreign military financing for Indonesia.

The committee has seen fit, and rightly so, to deny the release of any of these funds to Indonesia without certification from our President that the Indonesian Government has taken effective measures to conduct an investigation into the August 2002 attacks on American citizens and to prosecute those responsible.

By now I know that my colleagues in the Senate are aware of the tragedy that occurred last August in West Papua, Indonesia, which resulted in the deaths of two Americans. Justice has still not been found for Rick Spier or Ted Burgeon, and I am grateful that the Foreign Relations Committee has recognized the need for Indonesia and its military apparatus to determine what has occurred. Hopefully, this provision will demonstrate to the Indonesian Government that the United States Senate will not allow this issue to fall to the wayside, and that we remain committed to finding and punishing those responsible.

Mr. President, as the month of August nears and the remaining summer days dwindle, many Americans are turning their attention to the highway as they plan family vacations and road trips, setting their sights on destinations that may be close to home or several States away. As they plot their travel plans, they must take into account several road-related factors, including, what route to take, which highway to use and how long it will take to get to their. Road safety, highway quality and congestion will undoubtedly be major considerations that will enter this equation.

In addition to personal mobility, roads also serve as the backbone of the national economy. Our economic success depends on a sound transportation system that efficiently carries goods to and from the marketplace. We must work diligently throughout the upcoming highway re-authorization to provide a policy framework that facilitates access to both markets for goods and places for people.

It is for these reasons, among others, that I rise today to introduce the Freeing Alternatives to Speedy Transportation Act, or for short, the FAST Act--legislation that will ease and alleviate traffic congestion, increase highway capacity, decrease pollution and improve the quality of life for millions of Americans. The legislation has already been introduced in the House of Representatives by Congressman Kennedy of Minnesota. His bi-partisan version of the bill has gained strong support and momentum, and I thank him for his leadership on transportation matters.

It is easy to say how important our roads are to our success. But the question that has everyone stumped is how to pay for it all. We must look to creative policies that place the State in the drivers seat toward ending the transportation funding dilemma--policies that capitalize on user choice and private financing. The FAST Act provides just that--flexibility and innovation to move forward with important Interstate highway expansion projects--projects that would not be possible with out the FAST Act--to ease congestion and alleviate the strain on our roads.

The FAST Act removes the obstacles that prevent States from collecting user fees on Interstate highway expansion projects. It allows a State to create an authority that collects user fees to finance expansion lanes on Interstates, while building in several protective measures that boost consumer confidence and protection. The fees are collected only on the expansion land--the existing lanes remain open and free of charge. Fees can be used only for the construction of the FAST lane and accompanying structures--the money cannot be diverted to other accounts or projects. It allows the State to collect, as part of the fee, a maintenance reserve for that lane, and guarantees that the fee will be removed once the project is paid off. In other words, the fee pays for the project, ends, and the FAST lane then becomes available to everyone free of the fee. While I realize this bill is but one avenue in bridging our highway policy needs, the options it opens through user-choice and dedicated funding will promote sound State planning and decision making.

The FAST Act has the support of the Colorado Department of Transportation, think tanks, State governments and many others who hope to find new ways to expend highways. Tom Norton, Executive Director of the Colorado Department of Transportation, wrote in support of the FAST Act, ``With nationwide transportation needs continually increasing, Federal Government, as well as the States, must seek new funding sources to keep up with this demand. This needed legislation provides States the ability to explore a new source in order to fund highway expansion.'' In addition to the backing the legislation has received from the Colorado Department of Transportation, both the Minnesota and Washington DOTs support the bill as well.

Earlier this week, the Joint Economic Committee released a white paper, noting ``roads are deteriorating while congestion worsens every year.'' The paper highlights the FAST Act as a new funding mechanism for highways, noting that many economists believe that the new authorization bill should grant the states more flexibility in raising money for funding transportation projects. It concludes by stating that the FAST Act is a modest measure that can help bridge the financing chasm.

Numerous organizations and associations across the country have either endorsed the FAST Act or have strong and positive interest in the legislation. These groups include: Americans for Tax Reform, American Highway Users Alliance, Associated General Contractors of America, National Taxpayers Union, Association for Commuter Transportation, and the American Association of State and Highway Transportation Officials.

As the population of the United States continues to surge and miles traveled by automobiles increase every year, transportation planners must find new and innovative ways to expand highway congestion. With today's budget crisis, this task becomes even more formidable as States look for new ways to stretch every dollar. The FAST Act give States one more tool in their battle against congestion. It creates a new source of revenue through user choice. It give them flexibility in managing construction and maintenance, encourages public-private partnerships and speeds traffic through a series of electronic gateways instead of creating logjams at toll booths. It is one more tool in the toolbox of innovative finance options that will lead to a more efficient, safer highway system.

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

Mr. President, as the month of August nears and the remaining summer days dwindle, many Americans are turning their attention to the highway as they plan family vacations and road trips, setting their sights on destinations that may be close to home or several States away. As they plot their travel plans, they must take into account several road-related factors, including, what route to take, which highway to use and how long it will take to get to their. Road safety, highway quality and congestion will undoubtedly be major considerations that will enter this equation.

In addition to personal mobility, roads also serve as the backbone of the national economy. Our economic success depends on a sound transportation system that efficiently carries goods to and from the marketplace. We must work diligently throughout the upcoming highway re-authorization to provide a policy framework that facilitates access to both markets for goods and places for people.

It is for these reasons, among others, that I rise today to introduce the Freeing Alternatives to Speedy Transportation Act, or for short, the FAST Act--legislation that will ease and alleviate traffic congestion, increase highway capacity, decrease pollution and improve the quality of life for millions of Americans. The legislation has already been introduced in the House of Representatives by Congressman Kennedy of Minnesota. His bi-partisan version of the bill has gained strong support and momentum, and I thank him for his leadership on transportation matters.

It is easy to say how important our roads are to our success. But the question that has everyone stumped is how to pay for it all. We must look to creative policies that place the State in the drivers seat toward ending the transportation funding dilemma--policies that capitalize on user choice and private financing. The FAST Act provides just that--flexibility and innovation to move forward with important Interstate highway expansion projects--projects that would not be possible with out the FAST Act--to ease congestion and alleviate the strain on our roads.

The FAST Act removes the obstacles that prevent States from collecting user fees on Interstate highway expansion projects. It allows a State to create an authority that collects user fees to finance expansion lanes on Interstates, while building in several protective measures that boost consumer confidence and protection. The fees are collected only on the expansion land--the existing lanes remain open and free of charge. Fees can be used only for the construction of the FAST lane and accompanying structures--the money cannot be diverted to other accounts or projects. It allows the State to collect, as part of the fee, a maintenance reserve for that lane, and guarantees that the fee will be removed once the project is paid off. In other words, the fee pays for the project, ends, and the FAST lane then becomes available to everyone free of the fee. While I realize this bill is but one avenue in bridging our highway policy needs, the options it opens through user-choice and dedicated funding will promote sound State planning and decision making.

The FAST Act has the support of the Colorado Department of Transportation, think tanks, State governments and many others who hope to find new ways to expend highways. Tom Norton, Executive Director of the Colorado Department of Transportation, wrote in support of the FAST Act, ``With nationwide transportation needs continually increasing, Federal Government, as well as the States, must seek new funding sources to keep up with this demand. This needed legislation provides States the ability to explore a new source in order to fund highway expansion.'' In addition to the backing the legislation has received from the Colorado Department of Transportation, both the Minnesota and Washington DOTs support the bill as well.

Earlier this week, the Joint Economic Committee released a white paper, noting ``roads are deteriorating while congestion worsens every year.'' The paper highlights the FAST Act as a new funding mechanism for highways, noting that many economists believe that the new authorization bill should grant the states more flexibility in raising money for funding transportation projects. It concludes by stating that the FAST Act is a modest measure that can help bridge the financing chasm.

Numerous organizations and associations across the country have either endorsed the FAST Act or have strong and positive interest in the legislation. These groups include: Americans for Tax Reform, American Highway Users Alliance, Associated General Contractors of America, National Taxpayers Union, Association for Commuter Transportation, and the American Association of State and Highway Transportation Officials.

As the population of the United States continues to surge and miles traveled by automobiles increase every year, transportation planners must find new and innovative ways to expand highway congestion. With today's budget crisis, this task becomes even more formidable as States look for new ways to stretch every dollar. The FAST Act give States one more tool in their battle against congestion. It creates a new source of revenue through user choice. It give them flexibility in managing construction and maintenance, encourages public-private partnerships and speeds traffic through a series of electronic gateways instead of creating logjams at toll booths. It is one more tool in the toolbox of innovative finance options that will lead to a more efficient, safer highway system.

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

Mr. President, I ask that the pending amendment be temporarily laid aside.

I send amendment No. 1017 to the desk.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Mr. President, Medicare home health providers are in a paperwork crisis. Current regulations of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, CMS, requires that caregivers administer voluminous paperwork to patients when they administer care.

These paperwork requirements are too excessive for both patients and caregivers. Caregivers must administer numerous forms including data collection, patient privacy information, a plan of care, advance directives, a visit schedule, a comprehensive assessment, and more.

One of these requirements, called OASIS, or the Outcome and Assessment Information Set, is 94 questions long and takes a few hours to fill out. Before a nurse or physical therapist administers care, she and the patient must sit down and answer questions and fill out this paperwork. Colorado providers have told me they spend more time filling out paperwork than they do caring for patients.

As a result of this excessive data collection and dissemination, home health caregivers are leaving the home health industry. Two weeks ago a home health administrator in Colorado Springs came to share with me the situation in her agency. On her plane trip here, three of her newly- home health physical therapists called to tell her they were leaving the agency because of excessive paperwork requirements. They said they were going to leave the home health industry and return to the hospital industry.

We cannot afford this. Home health care is a vital player in health care for seniors and all individuals. If this paperwork crisis continues, home health care will continue to lose caregivers and bloat its current caregiver shortage.

Currently CMS requires that home health caregivers administer OASIS to Medicare patients, to Medicaid patients, and to patients who have private health insurance. The problem with this regulation, however, is that the data collected for private health insurance patients is not even used. This data literally sits in the offices of home health agencies with no current purpose.

The fact is CMS requires that home health agencies encode the OASIS data for Medicare and Medicaid patients only and to transmit it to their States. Then the information is transmitted into the Federal OASIS Repository.

For all private insurance patients, the home health agencies do not have to encode or transmit the data. So these nurses, physical therapists, occupational therapists, and nurse practitioners are required to collect this data for no reason.

It is my understanding CMS intends to require the transmission of data for private health patients at some point. But it has been 4 years and they have not done it yet.

In the meantime there are still many problems with OASIS. Until CMS issues the improved regulation, caregivers should be allowed to stop collecting unused data that ends up in the filing cabinets of home health agencies.

The amendment I am offering with Senators Feingold, Collins, Kohl, and Leahy would suspend the CMS requirement of collecting OASIS data for private insurance patients, non-Medicare and non-Medicaid patients, until an outcome by CMS's two OASIS working groups is reached.

Specifically, OASIS would be suspended until the 2 months immediately after HHS issues its regulations about OASIS. The regulations will be based on the information collected from and the recommendations of CMS's two working groups that are determining over the course of 3 years ways to improve OASIS data collection and quality assurance.

Our amendment is supported by caregivers in home health who administer OASIS, including physical therapists, nurses, nurse practitioners, occupational therapists, and speech therapists. Congresswoman Nancy Johnson, chairwoman of the Oversight Subcommittee of the House Committee on Ways and Means, also strongly supports this amendment. In addition, our language was included in Medicare reform bills in the Senate in the last 2 consecutive years. Further, I commend

Senator Feingold for introducing legislation last Congress to reform OASIS and I commend Senator Murkowski and Senator Kerry for their work on the MARCIA regulatory reform legislation, which included an OASIS suspension.

My colleagues and I believe OASIS data collection is helpful and should be applied. Even providers and patients, who must comply with the law, believe this. Yet the requirements to collect data should be achievable and inexcessive.

I am pleased to offer this amendment and urge my colleagues to support this effort for caregivers and patients.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the two additional cosponsors be added to the amendment, Senator Kohl and Senator Leahy.

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 text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, I rise to tell my colleagues about an extraordinary volunteer program that is dramatically impacting the lives of underprivileged, underachieving students in Denver, CO.

It is called Whiz Kids and, frankly this program is a classic example of what happens when men and women of faith, who love kids, decide to make things happen.

Each week, over 700 volunteers tutor elementary students in the Denver, Aurora, and Jefferson County school districts. Most of the tutoring takes place at urban churches, but at each of 44 sites, Whiz Kids provides books, computers, snacks, club time-spiritual values, a sense of community and, most of all, the love of men and women who care enough about the kids to invest a few hours a week to help them read.

The results have been nothing short of fantastic--the average youngster in Whiz Kids improves his or her reading ability by 1-3 grades each year, according to tracking by Denver Public Schools. The target for Whiz Kids is schools and students with scores below average in CSAP, Colorado's statewide student testing program.

Whiz Kids is an 11-year-old, nonprofit organization which is supported by over 700 volunteer tutors and more than 80 other key volunteer leaders. Each tutor make a 1-year commitment to the program and the tutor retention rate is an amazing 95 percent with 60 percent of volunteer tutors re-upping from one year to the next.

Whiz Kids operates on a shoestring--the total cash budget is only $360,000 per year. But the dramatic results of this tutoring program, and its commendable cost efficiency, have called forth tremendous support from over 150 churches of many denominations.

The Colorado business community has also pitched in to help by donating 120 computers and other in-kind contributions and financial support from companies such as AV Hunter, Best Buy, Janis, JD Edwards, Kinder Morgan, King Soopers, Houghton Mifflin, Western Union, and others.

Additional support comes from the Anschutz Family Foundation, Coors Foundation, Daniels Foundation, El Pomar, Fund for Colorado's Future, Jack A. Vickers Foundation, PK Foundation, Sam S. Bloom Foundation, the Schlessman Family Foundation, Schramm Foundation and TYL Foundation.

The Denver Nuggets donated the entire Pepsi Center to Whiz Kids for a 1-day Slam Dunk Saturday event at which 2,000 mentors and kids gather for basketball clinics and drills. Then, mentors and kids are guests of the Nuggets for the evening game. This is the largest gathering of its kind in the NBA. The Nuggets donate additional tickets for tutors, kids, and their parents throughout the season.

The Denver Broncos donate tickets to their kids camp. Whiz Kids has received the Denver Broncos Quarterback Award 2 years in a row. The Colorado Rapids annually donate game tickets for kids and tutors.

Each year, Whiz Kids holds its year end Run to Read event at Denver's City Park. More than a thousand tutors and kids gather for games, music, and fun to celebrate achievements of the year. Last year, this event also raised pledges of more than $20,000 from tutors to buy additional supplies for the following school year.

From start to finish, kids and tutors have a lot of fun, but the main purpose is completely serious--to get kids who are falling behind in reading back on track. It is a program that is working.

Whiz Kids has been called one of the top three faith-based tutoring programs in America by Tony Campbell of America's Promise. And no wonder, it is already being copied in eight other States.

I hope my colleagues will take a moment to read a recent letter from the Denver Public Schools which describes why Whiz Kids is such an ``excellent model of collaboration'' between the public schools and the private sector.

``To Whom It May Concern: In support of the Whiz Kids Tutoring Program, this letter shall serve to detail the collaborative relationship between our organizations. Whiz Kids Tutoring operates in partnership with the Denver Public Schools Office of Community Partnerships, as an independent agency providing services to our students. Because of this partnership by acting as the interface between the program and the principals and teachers of our district. At the beginning of each school semester, we assist the program by identifying students and facilitating student participation, and by coordinating the participation of DPS liaison teachers. Our office provides additional salary compensation for liaison teachers, based upon the number of sessions attended in a given school year. This compensation totaled over $29,000 for the 2001-02 school year. In addition, our office provides Colorado Bureau of Investigations background screening for all incoming volunteers to the program, and we assist

Whiz Kids with $500 in vouchers for books and other materials for each new study hall session that opens. We also conducted an evaluation of the program (1998/99) in conjunction with the Graduate School of Education at the University of Denver. This study showed us that students engaged with Whiz Kids tutors gained between one and three academic grade levels in reading competencies over a 1-year time frame.

``For their part, Whiz Kids Tutoring provides Denver Public Schools with a wonderful benefit each school year. Nearly 600 of our students receive one-on-one academic support and mentoring each year, making Whiz Kids the largest single provider of such services to the district. The agency provides excellent support and training to its volunteers, which is reflected by the extremely high commitment level the volunteers exhibit. Recruitment, training, and management of all volunteers are provided by Whiz Kids, eliminating any costs to DPS in these areas. Also, by partnering with neighborhood churches and community centers to provide space for group activities, Whiz Kids greatly reduces the overhead costs of the program, which might otherwise be incurred by the district in a school-based operation.

``The relationship between Whiz Kids Tutoring and Denver Public Schools is an excellent model of collaboration and provides a vital service to the children of our district. I appreciate your consideration of the Whiz Kids Tutoring grant proposal and give it my full endorsement as a partner. Should you require additional details regarding our partnership, please feel free to contact me at 303-764- 3580. Sincerely, Christine Smith, Director, Denver Public Schools Office of Community Partnerships and Enterprise Activity.''

Mr. President, Whiz Kids is a great program which enriches the lives of students, provides a fulfilling opportunity for volunteers, and gives them a wonderful opportunity to put their faith into action. Every community ought to have a program like this.