Floor Statements

Madam President, we live in perilous times. The leader of the free world's power has become so neutered he cannot, even with the support of the majority of the Senate, appoint highly qualified individuals endorsed by the American Bar to a Federal court. He cannot conduct a war without being torn to shreds by partisans with their eyes set, not on he defeat of our enemy but on the defeat of our President.

The Senate has become just one big, bad, ongoing joke, held hostage by special interests, and so impotent an 18-wheeler truck loaded with Viagra would do no good.

Andrew Young, one of the most thoughtful men in America, recently took a long and serious look at the Senate. He was thinking about making a race for it. After visiting Washington, he concluded that the Senate is composed of:

A bunch of pompous, old--

And I won't use his word here, I would say ``folks''--

listening to people read statements they didn't even write

and probably don't believe.

The House of Representatives, theoretically the closest of all the Federal Government to the people, cannot restrain its extravagant spending nor limit our spiraling debt, and incumbents are so entrenched you might as well call off 80 percent of the House races. There are no contests.

Most of the laws of the land, at least the most important and lasting ones, are made not by elected representatives of the people but by unelected, unaccountable legislators in black robes who churn out volumes of case law and hold their jobs for life. A half dozen dirty bombs the size of a small suitcase planted around the country could kill hundreds of thousands of our citizens and bring this Nation to its knees at any time, and yet we can't even build a fence along our border to keep out illegals because some nutty environmentalists say it will cause erosion.

This Government is in one hell of a mess. Frankly, as Rett Butler said--my dear, very few people up here give a damn.

It is not funny. It is sad. It is tragic. And it can only get worse-- much worse. What this Government needs is one of those extreme makeovers they have on television, and I am not referring to some minor nose job or a little botox here and there.

Congressional Quarterly recently devoted an issue to the mandate wars, with headlines blaring: ``Unfunded Mandates Add to Woes, States Say; Localities Get the Bill for Beefed Up Security; Transportation Money Comes With Strings, and Medicare Stuck in Funding Squabbles,'' et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.

One would think that the much heralded Unfunded Mandate Reform Act of 1995 never passed. The National Conference of State Legislatures has set the unfunded mandate figure for the States at $33 billion for 2005. This, along with the budget problems they have been having for the last few years, has put States under the heel of a distant and unresponsive government. That is us. And it gives the enthusiastic tax raisers at the State level the very excuse they are looking for to dig deeper and deeper into the pockets of their taxpayers.

It is not a pretty picture. No matter who you send to Washington, for the most part smart and decent people, it is not going to change much because the individuals are not so much at fault as the rotten and decaying foundation of what is no longer a Republic. It is the system that stinks, and it is only going to get worse because that perfect balance our brilliant Founding Fathers put in place in 1787 no longer exists.

Perhaps, then, the answer is a return to the original thinking of those wisest of all men, and how they intended for this government to function. Federalism, for all practical purposes, has become to this generation of leaders, some vague philosophy of the past that is dead, dead, dead. It isn't even on life support. The line on that monitor went flat some time ago.

You see, the reformers of the early 1900s killed it dead and cremated the body when they allowed for the direct election of U.S. Senators.

Up until then, Senators were chosen by State legislatures, as James Madison and Alexander Hamilton had so carefully crafted.

Direct elections of Senators, as great and as good as that sounds, allowed Washington's special interests to call the shots, whether it is filling judicial vacancies, passing laws, or issuing regulations. The State governments aided in their own collective suicide by going along with that popular fad at the time.

Today it is heresy to even think about changing the system. But can you imagine those dreadful unfunded mandates being put on the States or a homeland security bill being torpedoed by the unions if Senators were still chosen by and responsible to the State legislatures?

Make no mistake about it. It is the special interest groups and their fundraising power that elect Senators and then hold them in bondage forever.

In the past five election cycles, Senators have raised over $1.5 billion for their election contests, not counting all the soft money spent on their behalf in other ways. Few would believe it, but the daily business of the Senate in fact is scheduled around fundraising.

The 17th amendment was the death of the careful balance between State and Federal Government. As designed by that brilliant and very practical group of Founding Fathers, the two governments would be in competition with each other and neither could abuse or threaten the other. The election of Senators by the State legislatures was the lynchpin that guaranteed the interests of the States would be protected.

Today State governments have to stand in line because they are just another one of the many special interests that try to get Senators to listen to them, and they are at an extreme disadvantage because they have no PAC.

You know what the great historian Edward Gibbons said of the decline of the Roman Empire. I quote: ``The fine theory of a republic insensibly vanished.''

That is exactly what happened in 1913 when the State legislatures, except for Utah and Delaware, rushed pell-mell to ratify the popular 17th amendment and, by doing so, slashed their own throats and destroyed federalism forever. It was a victory for special-interest tyranny and a blow to the power of State governments that would cripple them forever.

Instead of Senators who thoughtfully make up their own minds as they did during the Senate's greatest era of Clay, Webster, and Calhoun, we now have too many Senators who are mere cat's-paws for the special interests. It is the Senate's sorriest of times in its long, checkered, and once glorious history.

Having now jumped off the Golden Gate Bridge of political reality, before I hit the water and go splat, I have introduced a bill that would repeal the 17th amendment. I use the word ``would,'' not ``will,'' because I know it doesn't stand a chance of getting even a single cosponsor, much less a single vote beyond my own.

Abraham Lincoln, as a young man, made a speech in Springfield, IL, in which he called our founding principles ``a fortress of strength.'' Then he went on to warn, and again I quote, that they ``would grow more and more dim by the silent artillery of time.''

A wise man, that Lincoln, who understood and predicted all too well the fate of our republican form of government. Too bad we didn't listen to him.

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

Madam President, we live in perilous times. The leader of the free world's power has become so neutered he cannot, even with the support of the majority of the Senate, appoint highly qualified individuals endorsed by the American Bar to a Federal court. He cannot conduct a war without being torn to shreds by partisans with their eyes set, not on he defeat of our enemy but on the defeat of our President.

The Senate has become just one big, bad, ongoing joke, held hostage by special interests, and so impotent an 18-wheeler truck loaded with Viagra would do no good.

Andrew Young, one of the most thoughtful men in America, recently took a long and serious look at the Senate. He was thinking about making a race for it. After visiting Washington, he concluded that the Senate is composed of:

A bunch of pompous, old--

And I won't use his word here, I would say ``folks''--

listening to people read statements they didn't even write

and probably don't believe.

The House of Representatives, theoretically the closest of all the Federal Government to the people, cannot restrain its extravagant spending nor limit our spiraling debt, and incumbents are so entrenched you might as well call off 80 percent of the House races. There are no contests.

Most of the laws of the land, at least the most important and lasting ones, are made not by elected representatives of the people but by unelected, unaccountable legislators in black robes who churn out volumes of case law and hold their jobs for life. A half dozen dirty bombs the size of a small suitcase planted around the country could kill hundreds of thousands of our citizens and bring this Nation to its knees at any time, and yet we can't even build a fence along our border to keep out illegals because some nutty environmentalists say it will cause erosion.

This Government is in one hell of a mess. Frankly, as Rett Butler said--my dear, very few people up here give a damn.

It is not funny. It is sad. It is tragic. And it can only get worse-- much worse. What this Government needs is one of those extreme makeovers they have on television, and I am not referring to some minor nose job or a little botox here and there.

Congressional Quarterly recently devoted an issue to the mandate wars, with headlines blaring: ``Unfunded Mandates Add to Woes, States Say; Localities Get the Bill for Beefed Up Security; Transportation Money Comes With Strings, and Medicare Stuck in Funding Squabbles,'' et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.

One would think that the much heralded Unfunded Mandate Reform Act of 1995 never passed. The National Conference of State Legislatures has set the unfunded mandate figure for the States at $33 billion for 2005. This, along with the budget problems they have been having for the last few years, has put States under the heel of a distant and unresponsive government. That is us. And it gives the enthusiastic tax raisers at the State level the very excuse they are looking for to dig deeper and deeper into the pockets of their taxpayers.

It is not a pretty picture. No matter who you send to Washington, for the most part smart and decent people, it is not going to change much because the individuals are not so much at fault as the rotten and decaying foundation of what is no longer a Republic. It is the system that stinks, and it is only going to get worse because that perfect balance our brilliant Founding Fathers put in place in 1787 no longer exists.

Perhaps, then, the answer is a return to the original thinking of those wisest of all men, and how they intended for this government to function. Federalism, for all practical purposes, has become to this generation of leaders, some vague philosophy of the past that is dead, dead, dead. It isn't even on life support. The line on that monitor went flat some time ago.

You see, the reformers of the early 1900s killed it dead and cremated the body when they allowed for the direct election of U.S. Senators.

Up until then, Senators were chosen by State legislatures, as James Madison and Alexander Hamilton had so carefully crafted.

Direct elections of Senators, as great and as good as that sounds, allowed Washington's special interests to call the shots, whether it is filling judicial vacancies, passing laws, or issuing regulations. The State governments aided in their own collective suicide by going along with that popular fad at the time.

Today it is heresy to even think about changing the system. But can you imagine those dreadful unfunded mandates being put on the States or a homeland security bill being torpedoed by the unions if Senators were still chosen by and responsible to the State legislatures?

Make no mistake about it. It is the special interest groups and their fundraising power that elect Senators and then hold them in bondage forever.

In the past five election cycles, Senators have raised over $1.5 billion for their election contests, not counting all the soft money spent on their behalf in other ways. Few would believe it, but the daily business of the Senate in fact is scheduled around fundraising.

The 17th amendment was the death of the careful balance between State and Federal Government. As designed by that brilliant and very practical group of Founding Fathers, the two governments would be in competition with each other and neither could abuse or threaten the other. The election of Senators by the State legislatures was the lynchpin that guaranteed the interests of the States would be protected.

Today State governments have to stand in line because they are just another one of the many special interests that try to get Senators to listen to them, and they are at an extreme disadvantage because they have no PAC.

You know what the great historian Edward Gibbons said of the decline of the Roman Empire. I quote: ``The fine theory of a republic insensibly vanished.''

That is exactly what happened in 1913 when the State legislatures, except for Utah and Delaware, rushed pell-mell to ratify the popular 17th amendment and, by doing so, slashed their own throats and destroyed federalism forever. It was a victory for special-interest tyranny and a blow to the power of State governments that would cripple them forever.

Instead of Senators who thoughtfully make up their own minds as they did during the Senate's greatest era of Clay, Webster, and Calhoun, we now have too many Senators who are mere cat's-paws for the special interests. It is the Senate's sorriest of times in its long, checkered, and once glorious history.

Having now jumped off the Golden Gate Bridge of political reality, before I hit the water and go splat, I have introduced a bill that would repeal the 17th amendment. I use the word ``would,'' not ``will,'' because I know it doesn't stand a chance of getting even a single cosponsor, much less a single vote beyond my own.

Abraham Lincoln, as a young man, made a speech in Springfield, IL, in which he called our founding principles ``a fortress of strength.'' Then he went on to warn, and again I quote, that they ``would grow more and more dim by the silent artillery of time.''

A wise man, that Lincoln, who understood and predicted all too well the fate of our republican form of government. Too bad we didn't listen to him.

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

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that I be allowed to speak up to 15 minutes as in morning business.

Mr. President, after watching the harsh acrimony generated by the September 11 Commission--which, let me say at the outset, is made up of good and able members--I have come to seriously question this panel's usefulness. I believe it will ultimately play a role in doing great harm to this country, for its unintended consequences, I fear, will be to energize our enemies and demoralize our troops.

After being drowned in a tidal wave of all who didn't do enough before 9/11, I have come to believe that the Commission should issue a report that says: No one did enough. In the past, no one did near enough. And then thank everybody for serving, send them home, and let's get on with the job of protecting this country in the future.

Tragically, these hearings have proved to be a very divisive diversion for this country. Tragically, they have devoured valuable time looking backward instead of looking forward. Can you imagine handling the attack on Pearl Harbor this way? Can you imagine Congress, the media, and the public standing for this kind of political gamesmanship and finger-pointing after that day of infamy in 1941?

Some partisans tried that ploy, but they were soon quieted by the patriots who understood how important it was to get on with the war and take the battle to America's enemies and not dwell on what FDR knew, when. You see, back then the highest priority was to win a war, not to win an election. That is what made them the greatest generation.

I realize that many well-meaning Americans see the hearings as democracy in action. Years ago when I was teaching political science, I probably would have had my class watching it live on television and using that very same phrase with them.

There are also the not-so-well-meaning political operatives who see these hearings as an opportunity to score cheap points. And then there are the media meddlers who see this as great theater that can be played out on the evening news and on endless talk shows for a week or more.

Congressional hearings have long been one of Washington's most entertaining pastimes. Joe McCarthy, Watergate, Iran-Contra--they all kept us glued to the TV and made for conversations around the water coolers or arguments over a beer at the corner pub.

A congressional hearing in Washington, DC is the ultimate aphrodisiac for political groupies and partisan punks. But it is not the groupies, punks, and television-sotted American public that I am worried about. This latter crowd can get excited and divided over just about anything, whether it is some off-key wannabe dreaming of being the American idol, or what brainless bimbo ``The Bachelor'' or ``Average Joe'' will choose, or who Donald Trump will fire next week. No, it is the real enemies of America that I am concerned about. These evil killers who right now are gleefully watching the shrill partisan finger-pointing of these hearings and grinning like a mule eating briars.

They see this as a major split within the great Satan, America. They see anger. They see division, instability, bickering, peevishness, and dissension. They see the President of the United States hammered unmercifully. They see all this, and they are greatly encouraged.

We should not be doing anything to encourage our enemies in this battle between good and evil. Yet these hearings, in my opinion, are doing just that. We are playing with fire. We are playing directly into the hands of our enemy by allowing these hearings to become the great divider they have become.

Dick Clarke's book and its release coinciding with these hearings have done this country a tremendous disservice and some day we will reap its whirlwind.

Long ago, Sir Walter Scott observed that revenge is ``the sweetest morsel that ever was cooked in hell.''

The vindictive Clarke has now had his revenge, but what kind of hell has he, his CBS publisher, and his axe-to-grind advocates unleashed?

These hearings, coming on the heels of the election the terrorists influenced in Spain, bolster and energize our evil enemies as they have not been energized since 9/11.

Chances are very good that these evil enemies of America will attempt to influence our 2004 election in a similar dramatic way as they did Spain's. And to think that could never be in this country is to stick your head in the sand.

That is why the sooner we stop this endless bickering over the past and join together to prepare for the future, the better off this country will be. There are some things--whether this city believes it or not--that are just more important than political campaigns.

The recent past is so ripe for political second-guessing, ``gotcha,'' and Monday morning quarterbacking. And it is so tempting in an election year. We should not allow ourselves to indulge that temptation. We should put our country first.

Every administration, from Jimmy Carter to George W. Bush, bears some of the blame. Dick Clarke bears a big heap of it, because it was he who was in the catbird's seat to do something about it for more than a decade. Tragically, it was the decade in which we did the least.

We did nothing after terrorists attacked the World Trade Center in 1993, killing six and injuring more than a thousand Americans.

We did nothing in 1996 when 16 U.S. servicemen were killed in the bombing of the Khobar Towers.

When our embassies were attacked in 1998, killing 263 people, our only response was to fire a few missiles on an empty tent.

Is it any wonder that after that decade of weak-willed responses to that murderous terror, our enemies thought we would never fight back?

In the 1990s is when Dick Clarke should have resigned. In the 1990s is when he should have apologized. That is when he should have written his book--that is, if he really had America's best interests at heart.

Now, I know some will say we owe it to the families to get more information about what happened in the past, and I can understand that. But no amount of finger-pointing will bring our victims back.

So now we owe it to the future families and all of America now in jeopardy not to encourage more terrorists, resulting in even more grieving families--perhaps many times over the ones of 9/11.

It is obvious to me that this country is rapidly dividing itself into two camps--the wimps and the warriors: the ones who want to argue and assess and appease, and the ones who want to carry this fight to our enemies and kill them before they kill us. In case you have not figured it out, I proudly belong to the latter.

This is a time like no other time in the history of this country. This country is being crippled with petty partisan politics of the worst possible kind. In time of war, it is not just unpatriotic; it is stupid; it is criminal.

So I pray that all this time, all this energy, all this talk, and all of the attention could be focused on the future instead of the past.

I pray we would stop pointing fingers and assigning blame and wringing our hands about what happened on that day David AcUology has called ``the worst day in all our history'' more than 2 years ago, and instead, pour all our energy into how we can kill these terrorists before they kill us--again.

Make no mistake about it: They are watching these hearings and they are scheming and smiling about the distraction and the divisiveness that they see in America. And while they might not know who said it years ago in America, they know instinctively that a house divided cannot stand.

There is one other group that we should remember is listening to all of this--our troops.

I was in Iraq in January. One day, when I was meeting with the 1st Armored Division, a unit with a proud history, known as Old Ironsides, we were discussing troop morale, and the commanding general said it was top notch.

I turned to the division's sergeant major, the top enlisted man in the division, a big, burly 6-foot-3, 240 pound African American, and I said: ``That's good, but how do you sustain that kind of morale?''

Without hesitation, he narrowed his eyes, and he looked at me and said: ``The morale will stay high just as long as these troops know the people back home support us.''

Just as long as the people back home support us. What kind of message are these hearings and the outrageously political speeches on the floor of the Senate yesterday sending to the marvelous young Americans in the uniform of our country?

I say: Unite America before it is too late. Put aside these petty partisan differences when it comes to the protection of our people. Argue and argue and argue, debate and debate and debate over all the other things, such as jobs, education, the deficit, and the environment; but please, please do not use the lives of Americans and the security of this country as a cheap-shot political talking point.

I yield the floor.

(Mrs. DOLE assumed the Chair.)

Madam President, I rise today to honor the 175th anniversary of the Fayetteville First Baptist Church, which has faithfully served the spiritual needs of its congregation since its humble beginnings in 1828. The church's mark and influence on the community is evident by the good works that her congregation has taken part in over the last 175 years. Fayetteville First Baptist's commitment to worship the Lord and serve the public has established it as a beacon of hope to the surrounding community and has held it in high standing among the churches of the South Metro Baptist Association.

Fayetteville First Baptist's message has found its way out of the present chapel, built in 1939, and in to the greater community through its missionaries and ministers, through the sister churches that it has established, and through the spiritual and social opportunities that it has brought to so many. Our places of worship are vital to the social fabric of our Nation, and Fayetteville First Baptist is no exception. It has taken on this responsibility and remained steadfast in its mission for the last 175 years. I am proud of this wonderful church and ask that my colleagues join me in wishing its congregation a happy 175th anniversary.

Mr. President, I want to speak about a great veteran of the U.S. Army, Mr. Lynn Austin Monroe. Mr. Monroe is a World War II veteran who honorably and proudly served his country in the European Theater as a mess sergeant in the Sixth Field Hospital. Prior to his overseas duty, he was an instructor in the Bakers and Cooks school at Camp Pickett, VA. Major Reiber said Sergeant Monroe was the best instructor he ever had. From there he was sent to be the first mess sergeant to open the Finney General Hospital, Thomasville, GA. His next assignment was the transfer to England to serve as mess sergeant for the Sixth Field Hospital. He remained in that capacity until the war's end.

Oftentimes he had to prepare meals without notice to feed a company of soldiers instead of a squadron. On one occasion, a hungry soldier came to Sergeant Monroe, who asked for a second helping of meat, which was chicken that day. The soldier said, ``The chicken is so good, it ain't nothing but a Georgia bird, anyway.'' Wish granted. That was one happy soldier. In emergency situations, the Sixth Field Hospital kitchen staff would help unload patients who were flown in from the combat zone. Sergeant Monroe's joy as a serviceman in ``The Greatest Generation'' was feeding the Army of our great country as they fought to save freedom and democracy for future generations.

The Old Testament prophet, Amos, was a sheep herder who lived back in the Judean hills, away from the larger cities of Bethlehem and Jerusalem. Compared to the intellectual urbanites like Isaiah and Jeremiah, Amos was just an unsophisticated country hick. But Amos had a unique grasp of political and social issues, and his poetic literary skill was among the best of all the prophets.

That familiar quote of Martin Luther King, Jr.:

Justice will rush down like waters and righteousness like a

mighty stream. . . .

Those are Amos's words.

Amos was the first to propose the concept of a universal God and not just some tribal deity. He also wrote that God demanded moral purity, not rituals and sacrifices.

This blunt-speaking moral conscience of his time warns, in Chapter 8, verse 11 of the Book of Amos, as if he were speaking to us today:

The days will come, sayeth the Lord God, that I will send a

famine in the land. Not a famine of bread or of thirst for

water, but of hearing the word of the Lord.

And they shall wander from sea to sea and from the north

even to the east. They shall run to and fro to seek the word

of the Lord, and shall not find it.

``A famine in the land,'' has anyone more accurately described the situation we face in America today? A famine of ``hearing the word of the Lord.'' Some will say Amos was just an Old Testament prophet who lived 700 years before Christ.

That is true. So how about one of the most influential historians of modern times, Arnold Toynbee, who wrote the acclaimed 12-volume ``A Study of History.'' He once declared:

Of the 22 civilizations that have appeared in history, 19

of them have collapsed when they reached the moral state

America is in today.

Toynbee died in 1975, before seeing the worst that was yet to come. Yes, Arnold Toynbee saw the famine, ``the famine of hearing the word of the Lord,'' whether it is removing a display of the Ten Commandments from a courthouse or of a nativity scene from a city square, whether it is eliminating prayer in the city schools or eliminating ``under God'' in the Pledge of Allegiance, whether it is making a mockery of the sacred institution of marriage between a man and a woman, or, yes, telecasting around the world made-in-the-USA filth masquerading as entertainment.

The culture of far left America was displayed in a startling way during the Super Bowl's now infamous half-time show, a show brought to us on behalf of the Value-Les Moonves and the pagan temple of Viacom- Babylon.

I asked the question yesterday: How many of you have ever run over a skunk with your car? I know the President has, somewhere over there around Frog Hollow. I have, many times. I can tell you that the stink stays around for a long time. You can take the car through a carwash and it is still there. So the scent of this event will long linger in the nostrils of America.

I am not talking just about an exposed mammary gland with a pull-tab attached to it. Really, no one should have been too surprised with that. Wouldn't you expect a bumping, humping, trashy routine entitled ``I'm Going To Get You Naked'' to end that way?

Does any responsible adult ever listen to the words of this rap-crap? I would quote you some of it, but the Sergeant at Arms would throw me out of this Chamber, as well he should.

Then there was that prancing, dancing, strutting, rutting guy, evidently suffering from jock itch because he kept yelling and grabbing his crotch. But, then, maybe there is a culture of crotch grabbing in this country I don't know about. But as bad as all that was, the thing that yanked my chain the hardest was seeing this ignoramus with his pointed head stuck up through a hole he had cut in the flag of the United States of America, screaming about having ``a bottle of scotch and watching lots of crotch.''

Think about that. This is the same flag to which we pledge allegiance. This is the same flag that is draped over coffins of dead young uniformed warriors, killed while protecting Kid Crock's boney butt. He should be tarred and feathered and ridden out of this country on a rail. You talk about a good reality show? That would be one.

The desire and will of this Congress to meaningfully do anything about any of these so-called social issues is nonexistent and embarrassingly disgraceful. The American people are waiting and growing impatient with us. They want something done.

I am pleased to be a cosponsor of S.J. Res. 26, along with Senator Allard and others, proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relating to marriage; and S. 1558, the Liberties Restoration Act, which declares religious liberty rights in several ways, including the Pledge of Allegiance and the display of the Ten Commandments.

Today, I join Senator Shelby and others with the Constitution Restoration Act of 2004 that limits the jurisdiction of Federal courts in certain ways.

In doing so, I stand shoulder to shoulder, not only with my Senate cosponsors and Chief Justice Roy Moore of Alabama, but more importantly with our Founding Fathers in the conception of religious liberty and the terribly wrong direction our modern judiciary has taken us.

Everyone today seems to think the U.S. Constitution expressly provides for separation of church and state. I guess you could ask any 10 people if

that is not so and I will bet you most of them will say, well, sure that is so. And some would point out that is in the First Amendment.

Wrong. Read it. It says:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of

religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.

Where is the word ``separate''? Where are the words ``church'' and ``state''? They are not there; never have been, never intended to be. Read the Congressional Record during the 4-month period in 1789 when the amendment was being framed in Congress. Clearly their intent was to prohibit a single denomination in exclusion of all others, whether it was anglican or Catholic or some other.

I highly recommend a great book entitled Original Intent by David Barton.

It really gets into how the actual Members of Congress, who drafted the First Amendment, expected basic Biblical principles and values to be present throughout public life and society, not separate from it.

It was Alexander Hamilton who pointed out that ``judges should be bound down by strict rules and precedents, which serve to define and point out their duty.''

``Bound down.'' That is exactly what is needed to be done. There was not a single precedent cited when school prayer was struck down in 1962.

These judges who legislate instead of adjudicate do it without being responsible to one single solitary voter for their actions.

Among the signers of the Declaration of Independence was a brilliant young physician from Pennsylvania named Benjamin Rush.

When Rush was elected to that First Continental Congress, his close friend Benjamin Franklin told him ``We need you . . . we have a great task before us, assigned to us by Providence.''

Today, 228 years later there is still a great task before us assigned to us by Providence. Our Founding Fathers did not shirk their duty and we can do no less.

By the way, Benjamin Rush was once asked a question that has long interested this Senator from Georgia in particular. Dr. Rush was asked, Are you a democrat or an aristocrat? And the good doctor answered, ``I am neither''. ``I am a Christocrat. I believe He, alone, who created and redeemed man is qualified to govern him.''

That reply of Benjamin Rush is just as true today in the year of our Lord 2004 as it was in the year of our Lord 1776.

So, if I am asked why--with all the pressing problems this Nation faces today--why am I pushing these social issues and taking the Senate's valuable time, I will answer: Because, it is of the highest importance. Yes, there is a deficit to be concerned about in this country, a deficit of decency.

So, as the sand empties through my hourglass at warp speed--and with my time running out in this Senate and on this Earth--I feel compelled to speak out for I truly believe that at times like this, silence is not golden. It is yellow.

Thank you, Mr. President.

Mr. President, I stand here proudly next to a copy of the U.S. Constitution. It is a document that has stood the test of time. It is a document that is revered throughout the world. As a history professor, I have read it many times. But I need to know tonight where in the U.S. Constitution does it say the President's nominees for the judiciary must have a supermajority to be confirmed? Where does it say that? I have searched high and low for that clause and that provision. I cannot find it. Maybe these old 71-year-old eyes are getting kind of dim. Perhaps I need a magnifying glass.

I seek. I search. I hunt in vain. For is it not there. Even if I had the eye of an eagle I could not find it because it is simply not there.

No, the U.S. Constitution says only the Senate is to advise and consent on the President's nominees. Somehow that has been twisted and perverted into this unmitigated mess we have today where 59 votes out of 100 cannot pass anything because 41 votes out of 100 can defeat anything. Explain that to Joe Sixpack in the Wal-Mart parking lot.

Explain that to this man, James Madison, who wrote that Constitution. He predicted and he feared some day someone would try to finagle this system, that they would try to plot and conspire and pervert the process in just the way they have. James Madison warned about this in Federalist Paper 58. He said: If that should happen, ``The fundamental principle of free government would be reversed. It would be no longer the majority that would rule. The power would be transferred to the minority.''

But don't just take my word for it. Look at others who are far smarter, far wiser than I will ever be and how they have expressed the kinds of things that are going on around here.

On June 1, 1950, a brave woman who was then the Senator from the State of Maine, Margaret Chase Smith, gave one of the most courageous speeches ever given on the floor of this Senate. It has been called the ``declaration of conscience'' speech. Senator Smith questioned what was happening at that time in the Senate. It was not about filibusters but, make no mistake, it was about intrigue, and it was about character assassination.

Let me give you a few excerpts from Senator Smith:

The United States Senate has long enjoyed worldwide respect

as the greatest deliberative body in the world. But recently

that deliberative character has too often been debased to the

level of a forum of hate and character assassination

sheltered by the shield of congressional immunity.

She went on:

It is ironic that we senators can during debate in the

Senate [and in committee], directly or indirectly, by any

form of words, impute to any American who is not a Senator

any conduct or any motive unworthy or becoming an American--

and without that nonsenator American having any legal redress

against us.

She went on:

It is strange that we can verbally attack anyone without

restraint and with full protection, and yet we hold ourselves

above the same type of criticism here on the Senate floor.

Surely, the United States Senate is big enough to take self-

criticism and self-appraisal. Surely we should be able to

take the same kind of character attacks we dish out to

others.

She continued:

I think it is high time for the United States Senate and

its members to do some real soul searching and to weigh our

consciences as to the manner in which we are performing our

duty for the people of America and the manner in which we are

using or abusing our individual powers and privileges.

I think it is high time we remembered that we have sworn to

uphold and defend the Constitution. I think it is high time

that we remembered that the Constitution, as amended, speaks

not only of the freedom of speech but also of trial by jury

instead of trial by accusation.

So said Margaret Chase Smith in 1950.

Let me tell you what Thomas Sowell, in his recent book ``The Quest for Cosmic Justice'' writes about the role of a judge:

The traditional conception of the role of judges was

expressed thousands of years ago by Aristotle, who said that

a judge should ``be allowed to decide as few things as

possible.'' His discretion should be limited to ``such points

as the lawgiver has not already defined for him.''

A judge cannot ``do justice'' directly in the cases before

him. This view was strongly expressed in a small episode in

the life of Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes. After having lunch

[one day] with Judge Learned Hand, Holmes entered his

carriage to be driven away. As he left, Judge Hand's parting

salute was: ``Do justice, sir, do justice.'' Holmes ordered

the carriage stopped. ``That is not my job,'' Holmes said to

Judge Hand. ``It is my job to apply the law.''

Elsewhere Holmes wrote that his primary responsibility as a

judge was ``to see that the game is played according to the rules whether I like them or not.''

Lastly, I want to quote a Georgian named Phil Kent. In his book ``The Dark Side of Liberalism,'' he takes the liberal argument in this controversy and states it. He says:

The United States [according to the liberals, according to

the Democrats in this debate we are in today] comprises

diverse people and cultures. As such, judges should have the

power to change laws when circumstances dictate. The U.S.

Constitution is a document in flux, and is many times

irrelevant in modern society. Therefore, federal judges

should be chosen on the basis of their views or the positions

of their issues and should be tested on their ideologies.

That is what the Democrats have been saying to us in all this debate. Then Kent answered that premise:

We are a nation of laws, not of men. Our government is

constitutional, not political. Our highest court is the

arbiter of constitutional controversies, and the protector of

unalienable rights. As former President Ronald Reagan

underscored, ``Freedom is indivisible--there is no ``s'' on

the end of it. You can erode freedom, diminish it, but you

cannot divide it and choose to keep some freedoms while

giving up others.''

Ignoring the law, whether seen as politically expedient or

ideologically sound, suggests that the courts are merely

devices to be used to change policy.

The courts, however, are partners with specific duties

separate and apart from lawmaking and law execution. We've

missed that point as a nation for too long, to our great

peril.

That brings me to this map of the United States. I ask you to look at the faces on this map. They are the faces of America. These are the faces of America. There is Miguel Estrada, who spoke little English when he came to this country as a teenage immigrant from Honduras. But a few years later, this immigrant graduated magna cum laude from Columbia College in New York and from Harvard Law School. He clerked for Justice Anthony Kennedy on the highest court in this land, the U.S. Supreme Court. He continued to soar with a very distinguished law career. Yet the Democrats in this Chamber have decided this man could not even have an up-or-down vote. It is a shame, and it is a disgrace.

There is Bill Pryor, a devout Catholic and a southerner who grew up in a house where both John F. Kennedy and Ronald Reagan were revered. He graduated magna cum laude from Northeast Louisiana University and Tulane University Law School. He also has had a very distinguished law career, including winning statewide election twice as Alabama's attorney general. Yet the Democrats in this Senate will not give him an up-or-down vote.

Then there is Charles Pickering, another southerner, a grandfather, a courageous and a deeply religious man. He graduated at the top of his law school

class at the University of Mississippi, served in elective office for 12 years, practiced law for 30 years, and has served this country ably on the U.S. District Court since 1990. Yet the Democrats in this Senate refuse to give Judge Pickering an up-or-down vote.

There is Priscilla Owen, who grew up on a farm in rural Texas and later rose to win election to the Supreme Court of Texas. Along the way she graduated in the top of her class at Baylor University Law School and practiced law for 17 years. In her successful reelection bid to the Supreme Court in 2000, every major newspaper in Texas endorsed her. Yet in this Senate, this woman cannot get an up-or-down vote.

Finally, there is Janice Rogers Brown. I have spent a lot of time with this woman. I have read dozens of her speeches. I love and admire her. The daughter of an Alabama sharecropper who rose to serve on the California Supreme Court, she attended segregated schools until she was in high school and decided to become a lawyer after seeing African- American attorneys in the civil rights movement praised for their courage. In 1998, 76 percent of Californians voted to retain Justice Brown, an approval rating most of us can only dream of. Yet this African-American woman will not be given an up-or-down vote because the Democrats in this Chamber refuse to let her do it. They are standing in the doorway and they have a sign: Conservative African-American women need not apply, and if you have the temerity to do so, your reputation will be shattered and your dignity will be shredded. Gal, you will be lynched.

These are the faces of America, men and women who pulled themselves up, who worked hard, who played by the rules, and excelled in the field of law, and now all of their hard work and success has landed them in the doorway of the Senate, and each one of them is having that door slammed in their faces. The very least they deserve, the very least they deserve is an up-or-down vote. Surely, in the name of all that is fair and reasonable, surely, in the name of James Madison, surely in the United States of America in 2003, that is not too much to ask, just an up-or-down vote, just an up-or-down vote, just an up-or-down vote.

The majority of this Senate deserves to have its voice heard.

Mr. President, I am honored and humbled to serve as the Senate Co-chairman of the 2003 National Bible Week. During the week of November 23 to 30, communities and churches across this Nation will participate in this fine tradition by reading and reflecting on the teachings of the Bible. I am very proud to be a part of this celebration and I salute the National Bible Association for its sponsorship of this annual event.

The very first National Bible Week was organized in 1941, during World War II. Organizers created National Bible Week as a way to extend comfort and hope to our Nation during a troubled time. Today, in 2003, we are facing another troubled time when our country could use a dose of comfort and hope. The Holy Bible is our richest source of great inspiration, spiritual guidance and strength. That is why so many refer to it as their solid rock, their foundation.

During National Bible Week, I encourage everyone to read the Bible every day and to pledge to continue to turn to this Good Book throughout the year. Reflecting on Scripture, using the Bible's stories to teach our children right from wrong, and seeking to appreciate the literature on which our great United States of America was established is always time well spent. I congratulate the National Bible Association for its dedication to the celebration of God's word, the Holy Bible.

Mr. President, I rise today to talk about a good and brave man from the State of Mississippi, Judge Charles Pickering. I also rise today to talk about a judicial nominating process that is badly broken and out of control. Judge Charles Pickering has been victimized by inaccurate race baiting and political trash talk of the news media, Members of Congress, and Washington's liberal elite. Judge Pickering's critics continue to unfairly label him a racist and segregationist. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Judge Pickering has worked courageously in difficult times--difficult times many in this body could not hope to understand--to eliminate racial disparities in Mississippi and the South. My good friend, former Governor William Winter of Mississippi, a Democrat and one of the South's most respected progressives, came to Washington to support Judge Pickering's nomination. Sadly, Governor Winter's praise and firsthand account of Pickering's true record fell on deaf ears by most Capitol Hill Democrats.

Charles Pickering deserves an up-or-down vote on his nomination, as does another fine nominee who has been treated in the same shameful manner, Justice Janice Rogers Brown of California. On both of these nominees, I fear we are about to cave in once again to the left-leaning special interest groups. These special interest groups, like termites, have come out of the woodwork to denounce Justice Brown simply because she is an African American who also happens to be conservative. Never mind that Justice Brown is intelligent, articulate, chock-full of common sense, and highly qualified to serve on the Federal appeals court bench. Never mind that in 1998, 76 percent of Californians voted to retain Justice Brown. That is a job approval rating most of us could only dream of.

The special interest groups don't care about any of that. They don't want to hear how qualified Justice Brown and Judge Pickering are, or how much the voters like the job they have done.

No, their only mission is to assassinate these good people's character and to take them down one way or another because they fear they won't cater to their liberal agenda. They are right; they won't. These fine nominees are much too independent and much too intelligent to be held hostage to anyone's extreme agenda. Or as Thomas Sowell wrote of Justice Brown in a column headlined ``A Lynch Mob Takes Aim at Judicial Pick'':

What really scares the left about Brown is that she has

guts as well as brains. She won't weaken or waver.

So they can publish all the racist cartoons they want and they can demonize Judge Pickering and brutally and callously reduce Justice Brown to tears at her committee meeting. They can sneeringly accuse them both of being outside the mainstream. But President Bush knows and the voters of California and Mississippi know, and the majority of this Senate knows, Charles Pickering and Janice Rogers Brown are not the ones who are outside the mainstream. The ones who are completely out of touch are the special interest groups that have taken this nominating process hostage and those in this body who have aided and abetted their doing so.

Speaking of lynch mobs, my all-time favorite movie is ``To Kill a Mockingbird.'' In the movie's key scene, you may remember, Atticus Finch, a lawyer who is raising two small children, is defending a black man unjustly accused of rape. That lynch mob also tries to take justice into its own hands. Atticus confronts them at the jailhouse door. His daughter Scout joins him and sees that the leader of the mob is someone she knows. She calls to him by name: Hey, Mr. Cunningham. Remember me? You are Walter's daddy. Walter is a good boy. Tell him I said hello.

After a dramatic pause, Mr. Cunningham turns away and says to the mob: Let's go home, boys.

This group, bent on injustice, was turned aside by a small girl who appealed to them as individuals.

My friends in this Chamber, I know you, and I appeal to each of you as individuals, as fathers, mothers, colleagues and friends. Most of you were taught in Sunday school to do unto others as you would have them do unto you. This is not treating someone as you would want to be treated yourself. This extreme partisanship and deliberately planned obstructionism has gone on long enough in this body. I wish we could do away with the 60-vote rule that lets a small minority rule this Chamber and defeat the majority, reversing the rule of free government everywhere; everywhere, that is, except in the Senate.

I hope we can have an up-or-down vote--just an up-or-down vote, Mr. President.

Mr. President, I rise today to note with deep regret the passing of a true American hero, entrepreneur, and fellow serviceman, Lewis ``Red'' Pursley.

Red Pursley's journey through life came to a quiet and peaceful end on September 30, 2003, at a hospice facility near his home in Douglasville, GA. A veteran of World War II and of the battlefields of corporate commerce, as well as a loving father and pillar of his local community, Mr. Pursley embodied the virtues that define the term American citizen.

As a young man in Clover, SC, Red Pursley heeded his country's call when he was needed most, like so many others of what history would later call the ``greatest generation.'' Entering into active service in late 1942, Mr. Pursley and his comrades knew the dangerous nature of their duty, but attacked it with the confidence that their services were necessary to the allied effort and conducted in the name of a righteous cause.

A flight engineer and top turret gunner on a B-17 bomber crew based in England with the 8th Army Air Corps, Sergeant Pursley and the other 9 members of his crew flew 14 successful missions over Northern Europe before being shot down while on a mission over Frankfurt on January 29, 1944. Of the 10 crewmembers onboard, four died in the air and two escaped capture, but Sergeant Pursley and three others were taken prisoner by the Germans.

For the next 16 months, Sergeant Pursley, along with thousands of his fellow servicemembers, endured long marches, malnutrition, and despair in a number of Nazi prison camps, before he was liberated on May 6, 1945, just four days shy of the end of the European Campaign. Though his health suffered throughout the heroing ordeal, Sergeant Pursley's sense of pride in his service and faith in his cause never wavered.

For his service, Mr. Pursley earned numerous decorations including the Silver Star and the Purple Heart. Upon his return from Europe and separation from the Army Air Corps, Mr. Pursley moved to Georgia and, in 1957, started Redrock Carpet, a commercial carpet company that he has run ever since with his son. Mr. Pursley excelled as a businessman and the products that he manufactured have been used to carpet such notable locales as Air Force One and the private residence quarters in the White House.

Red Pursley was a man we all should admire, as it was efforts of men like him that helped forge our present greatness. He took an active part in the last half century as a solider and a citizen, as a community leader and a businessman, and as a living link to our past. His distinguished career, both in the service of his country and in the private sector, is a demonstration of the highest standards of integrity, professionalism, and patriotism.

Red died on the morning of September 30, 2003, at the age of 82 after succumbing to a long bout with cancer. He leaves behind his loving wife and partner of nearly 61 years, Catherine Robinson Pursley, two children, three grandchildren, and four great-grandchildren. Red also leaves behind an indelible mark on his Douglasville, GA community and on the lives of all of those that he touched. He will be missed, but as long as the legacy of the greatest generation lives on, so too will he.

Madam President, I rise today to reflect on the life of a great American, a legendary marine, and a native Georgian. I refer to GEN Raymond G. Davis, who passed away yesterday in Georgia at the age of 88.

General Davis was one of this country's greatest military heroes. He courageously served his country as a marine in World War II, in Korea, and in Vietnam during his 33 years of military service. General Davis was a noble veteran, tireless advocate, and distinguished recipient of the Medal of Honor.

I know we have a lot of very important things going on in this Chamber today, but I don't think it is too much to take 3 or 4 minutes to remember one of the great battles in military history and the role this man played in it. I refer to the Chosin Reservoir in Korea, known as the Frozen Chosin. In the biggest shock of the war, 300,000 Chinese Communist soldiers crossed the Yalu River from China into North Korea and trapped 8,000 members of the first marine division at the Chosin Reservoir. There was only one way out, an icy road that twisted around steep mountains. If the Chinese gained control of it, all of the marines would be annihilated.

Then LTC Raymond Davis was a 35-year-old Georgia Tech graduate with already two Silver Stars for heroism in Korea, and the Navy Cross, our second highest award, for gallantry at Peleiu.

He commanded a battalion of marines faced with an impossible task: to get the marines on Fox Hill linked up with them or the thousands would be trapped at the reservoir and would be doomed.

That afternoon, at 24-below-zero weather, the battalion began struggling up the side of a steep ridge. Davis's men climbed 1,000 yards before the Chinese opened up. The marines kept clawing their way, inch by inch, up the icy slopes. They battled enemy soldiers who seemed tucked into every crevice. Atop the first ridge, the men's sweat froze on their eyebrows and beards. They put their wounded on stretchers and pushed on. The men rose and trudged toward still another ridge. All along, snipers picked at the slow exposed line, but there was no time for the marines to stop and fire back. They went downhill by sliding on the ice. Davis was so numb that three times he forgot a compass reading taken only moments before.

At 4 a.m. this great Georgian halted his unit. The battalion was close to Fox Company, but it lost radio contact. Trying to reach that unit in the darkness without communication might get them caught in a crossfire. They would rest until daybreak. As Davis started to nap, a sniper's bullet pierced his sleeping bag and grazed his head. He tried again to sleep.

By first light there was still no radio contact with Fox Company and Davis feared the unit had been overrun. Then came word from his radio operator: Colonel, he announced, we have Captain Barber on the radio.

As the two officers talked, still hundreds of yards apart, both fought back tears. Late in the morning, Davis's battalion arrived atop Fox Hill. The Chinese had lost the battle for Toktong Pass.

Within hours, two marine battalions were moving through the pass away from the Frozen Chosin. Many icy miles and more bitter fighting lay ahead before the marines reached the port, but the stand at Toktong Pass had opened the way.

In 5 days, Fox Company had killed 1,000 of the enemy. Only 82 of the 220 marines were able to walk off that hill. In 2 weeks, the first marine division moved over icy roads and ridges through eight Chinese divisions. The Americans brought out all their wounded, their dead, and the equipment. On the way, they killed 25,000 of the enemy. The marines lost 730 of their numbers.

Such is the legacy of GEN Raymond Davis and those brave marines. General Davis received the Medal of Honor, a symbol of unusual human courage above and beyond the call of duty for his valiant efforts during the war. Over 1 million Americans served in Korea, and 131 of those were named recipients of the Medal of Honor. After the general's passing, only 36 of them live to wear it today. That medal is a tribute to perhaps the only thing truly noble in the horror of war.

Although General Davis earned this Nation's highest military honor for valor while on active duty, his service to the country was far from over. Over the last 30 years, in a civilian capacity, General Davis has continued to lead in ways that few other Americans could match. Since his retirement, General Davis became a pillar of the community, working diligently on behalf of all of our Nation's veterans.

Beginning in 1987, first as vice chairman and then later as chairman, General Davis was the one who directed the efforts of the Korean War Veterans Memorial Advisory Board, and it was his determination and personal initiative that led to the approval of the Korean War Veterans Memorial design and its construction and finally its dedication in July of 1995.

The Nation's citizens, and in particular all Korean war veterans and marines and their families, are indebted to Raymond G. Davis for his inspired leadership and service. In war and in peace, as an active duty marine and as a private citizen, GEN Raymond Davis' outstanding courage, unswerving devotion to duty, inspiring leadership, and sound judgment have represented the highest traditions of military service and citizenship. This man was a true American hero.

Mr. President, if my colleague from Georgia would yield for a moment, Atlanta is the largest city in the south, with one of the busiest airports in the country, as well as being home to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Therefore, I find it shocking that Atlanta was not considered a high-threat urban area.

I was unaware that Indianapolis did not receive funds under this vitally important program. As both Senators realize, it is essential that all our large cities obtain adequate funding for homeland security. It seems remarkable that two cities with such a large quantity of critical infrastructure did not receive any funds under the program.

If my colleague from Georgia would yield for a question, would you expand on any ongoing training missions in disaster preparedness at Fort Gordon at this time and how these missions incorporate other agencies?

If the Senator from Georgia would yield for another question, it is my understanding that implementing a training mission at Fort Gordon would greatly contribute to the national security of this country. For the benefit of our colleagues, would you expand on that point?

Mr. President, I rise this evening to pay tribute to one of Georgia's finest, one of this Nation's finest. I pay tribute to the life and legacy of former mayor of Atlanta, Maynard Jackson. In a city known for its great civil rights leaders, Maynard Jackson was truly one of the greatest. The people of Atlanta and Georgia have lost one of our strongest and most articulate fighters. Indeed, the State of Georgia tonight is mourning the passing of one of our greatest citizens.

Maynard Jackson was such a positive presence in all that has happened in Atlanta and in Georgia over the past 30 years that I simply cannot imagine what our city and our State would be like if he had not come our way.

His impact stretched far beyond the red clay hills of Georgia. He touched the lives of many people all around this world. For me, Maynard Jackson was a good friend, a friend whose counsel I always sought because I knew he would give it to me straight. In Atlanta the City Hall and the State Capitol are right across the street from each other. He and I crossed that street to talk on many occasions.

Maynard's rise to prominence began at an early age. As a child prodigy he entered Morehouse College at age 14. He graduated in 1956 with a bachelor's degree of political science and history. In 1964 he graduated from North Carolina Central University Law School. Maynard then returned to Atlanta as an attorney for the National Labor Relations Board followed by a time at the Emory Community Legal Services Center where he provided legal counsel for low-income Atlantans.

He ran for the Senate in 1968 and lost. But we all knew at that time the world would come to know the voice of this very remarkable, articulate, and passionate young man. In 1973, at the age of 35, he became mayor of Atlanta after winning nearly 60 percent of the vote in a runoff against incumbent mayor Sam Massell. This great-grandson of slaves served 12 years as mayor of the South's largest city. His tenure saw the construction of what would become the world's busiest airport, Hartsfield International.

He was a fierce advocate for those who thought they were forgotten. He became their voice. In him, they found a great fighter.

The New York Times wrote of Maynard's tenure as mayor it created ``a political revolution in the heart of the South. Seemingly overnight, it transformed Atlanta into a mecca for talented, aspiring blacks from all across the country.''

The Washington Post described Maynard's impact this way:

African Americans around the country looked at Jackson's

win . . . and saw even greater possibilities. If they did it

in Atlanta in the heart of the Confederacy, they could do it

at home, too . . .

Vernon Jordan, himself a native of Atlanta, said his most dramatic awareness the South had changed and the city of Atlanta had changed was the day Maynard took the oath of office as mayor of Atlanta. Vernon said it was an unforgettable moment.

As the angels now sing the praises of Maynard Jackson on the other side of that river, I join the chorus of those who yet remain in glorious song to this glorious individual, his life and legacy truly an example for all of us. And he will not be forgotten anytime soon.

Mr. President, as you know I have had a longstanding interest in an issue that requires chief executive officers to sign their company's tax returns. My amendment has been made part of the corporate inversion provisions as well as the CARE Act. I am hopeful to have this provision enacted into law because I believe that if Joe Sixpack is required to sign his tax return for his family and sign the oath that says ``Under penalties of perjury, I declare that I have examined this return and accompanying schedules and statements and to the best of my knowledge and belief they are true, correct and complete'', why shouldn't Josepheus Chardonnay be required to sign that same oath for his big corporation?

I understand my CEO provision came into the current tax bill when the underlying corporate shelter language was included and that it has been taken out at the same time that the corporate inversion language was taken out of the tax bill.

I would just like to reiterate that I am still interested in getting this CEO signature provision enacted into law. I think it is an important tool for improving corporate accountability. I would like to ask my colleague Senator Grassley if we may continue to work with the Committee on Finance to get this amendment enacted in either the CARE Act or the next best legislative opportunity.

I thank the Senator and look forward to having this measure brought back to the Senate floor before the end of this year.

Child Care Funding Within State Aid

Mr. President, I would like to pay tribute to Lorraine Johnson, Georgia's 2003 Teacher of the Year and a finalist for National Teacher of the Year.

This Coweta County seventh grade teacher was selected as one of four finalists for the National Teacher of the Year award by a panel made up of members from 15 national education organizations. She attended a ceremony yesterday at the White House where the President recognized this great achievement, and I was honored to be part of the audience.

Ms. Johnson has been an outstanding educator for over 18 years and has taught seventh-grade English and language arts at Arnall Middle School in Newnan, GA, for the past 8 years. This past year, Ms. Johnson has been on a sabbatical to travel across the State of Georgia giving speeches and conducting workshops for her peers at other Georgia schools.

Ms. Johnson told a reporter recently that she hopes she can inspire other teachers to have pride in their profession, and I think she is achieving that goal. Though her commitment and dedication to teaching she has influenced hundreds of students and made Georgia and our entire country a better place.