Daniel Akaka

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I am pleased that the Senate is acting on S. 3023, the proposed Veterans' Benefits Improvement Act of 2008, as reported by the Committee on Veterans' Affairs. This omnibus veterans' benefits bill will provide much needed support to our Nation's veterans. It contains six titles and 34 provisions that are designed to enhance compensation, housing, labor and education, and insurance benefits for veterans. A full explanation of the bill is available in the committee's report accompanying this legislation, Senate Report 110-449. I believe that it is important that we view veterans' compensation, and indeed all benefits earned by veterans, as a continuing cost of war. This legislation reflects that perspective. I will highlight a few of the provisions that I have sponsored in the legislation that is before us today. This legislation would result in improved notices being sent to veterans concerning their claims for VA benefits. Following a number of decisions by the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, VA's notification letters to veterans about the status of their claims have become increasingly long, complex, and difficult to understand. These notification letters must be simplified, as veterans, VA, veterans' advocates, and outside review bodies have all recommended. The notices should focus on the specific type of claim presented. They should use plain and ordinary language rather than bureaucratic jargon. Veterans should not be subjected to confusing information as they seek benefits. To further improve the VA compensation system, this legislation would end the prohibition on judicial review in the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit of matters concerning the VA rating schedule. VA issues regulations which are used to assign ratings to veterans for particular disabilities. Under current law, actions concerning the rating schedule are not subject to judicial review unless a constitutional challenge is presented. This legislation would amend the law to treat actions concerning the rating schedule in the same manner as all other actions concerning VA regulations. I expect VA to comply with all laws passed by Congress in developing and revising the Rating Schedule. However, justice to our Nation's veterans requires that actions concerning the rating schedule be subject to the same judicial scrutiny as is available for the review of actions involving other regulations. VA's home loan guaranty program may exempt homeowners from having to make a down payment or secure private mortgage insurance, depending on the size of the loan and the amount of the VA guaranty. In general, eligibility is extended to veterans who served on active duty for a minimum of 90 days during wartime, or 181 continuous days during peacetime, and have a discharge other than dishonorable. Members of the Guard and Reserve who have never been called to active duty must serve a total of six years in order to be eligible for the benefit. Certain surviving spouses are also eligible for the housing guaranty. Public Law 108-454 increased VA's maximum guaranty amount to 25 percent of the Freddie Mac conforming loan limit determined under section 305(a)(2) of the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation Act for a single family residence, as adjusted for the year involved. The Economic Stimulus Act of 2008, Public Law 110-185, temporarily reset the maximum limits on home loans that the Federal Housing Administration may insure and that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac may purchase on the secondary market to 125 percent of metropolitan-area median home prices, but did so without reference to the VA home loan program. This had the effect of raising the Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and FHA limits to nearly $730,000, in the highest cost areas, while leaving the then-VA limit of $417,000 in place. On July 30, 2008, the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 was signed into law as Public Law 110-289. That law provided a temporary increase in the maximum guaranty amount for VA loans originated from July 30, 2008 through December 31, 2008 to the same level as provided in the Stimulus Act. S. 3023, as amended, would extend the temporary increase in the maximum guaranty amount until December 31, 2011. This would enable more veterans to utilize their VA benefit to purchase more costly homes. The committee bill would also increase the maximum guaranty limit for refinance loans and increase the percentage of an existing loan that VA will refinance under the VA home loan program. Under current law, the maximum VA home loan guaranty limit for most loans in excess of $144,000 is equal to 25 percent of the Freddie Mac conforming loan limit for a single family home. Public Law 110-289 set this value at approximately $182,437 through the end of 2008. This means lenders offering loans of up to $729,750 will receive up to a 25 percent guaranty, which is typically required to place the loan on the secondary market. Under current law, this does not include regular refinance loans. Current law limits to $36,000 the guaranty that can be used for a regular refinance loan. This restriction means VA will not guarantee a regular refinance loan over $144,000, essentially precluding a veteran from using the VA program to refinance his or her existing FHA or conventional loan in excess of that amount. VA is also currently precluded from refinancing a loan if the homeowner does not have at least 10 percent equity in his or her home. The committee bill would decrease the equity requirement from 10 percent to 5 percent for refinancing from an FHA loan or conventional loan to a VA-guaranteed loan. This would allow more veterans to use their VA benefit to refinance their mortgages. Many veterans do not have 10 percent equity and thus are precluded from refinancing with a VA-guaranteed home loan. Given the anticipated number of non-VA-guaranteed adjustable rate mortgages that are approaching the reset time when payments are likely to increase, the committee believes that it is prudent to facilitate veterans refinancing to VA-guaranteed loans. In light of today's housing and home loan crises, additional refinancing options will help some veterans bridge financial gaps and allow them to stay in their homes and escape possible foreclosures. These provisions would allow more qualified veterans to refinance their home loans under the VA program. The omnibus benefits bill would also make crucial updates to the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act, which protects servicemembers' rights to return to their prior jobs with the same wages and benefits. The provisions in the committee bill are derived from S. 2471, the proposed ``USERRA Enforcement Improvement Act of 2007,'' which Senator Kennedy and I introduced on December 13, 2007. This legislation would ensure that federal agencies assist servicemembers in a more effective manner, by requiring the Department of Labor to investigate and refer cases in a more timely manner, and by requiring reports from the Department of Labor on their compliance with the deadlines. Finally, the omnibus benefits bill includes a provision derived from S. 3000, the proposed ``Native American Veterans Access Act of 2008,'' which I introduced on May 8, 2008. This provision is intended to improve VA's ability to understand and respond to the needs of Native American veterans. While Native Americans are more likely to serve in uniform than the general population, many of them find cultural and geographical barriers between themselves and the benefits they earned through service. In addition, those returning to traditional homelands, especially reservation communities, frequently come home to dismal job opportunities and starved economies. The proposed bill would require a study to help us understand the employment needs of Native American veterans and how best to address them. I thank the committee's ranking member, Senator Burr, for the agreements we have been able to reach. I truly appreciate his cooperation and that of the other members of the committee that have aided our work. I look forward to working with all those on the committee and our colleagues in the House in order to bring this legislation to final action before the end of this month. I urge colleagues to support this important legislation that would benefit many of this Nation's nearly 24 million veterans and their families.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I congratulate our Little League team from Waipio, HI, for winning the 2008 Little League World Series last month in Williamsport, PA. On Sunday, August 24, the Waipio Little League team from West Oahu defeated international division champion Matamoros, Mexico in the Little League World Series Championship game, by a score of 12 to 3. Led by pitcher Caleb Duhay, who struck out seven, and infielder Tanner Tokunaga, who hit two home runs, the team from Waipio scored first and never trailed. Outfielder Iolana Akau added another Waipio home run and made a spectacular diving catch late in the game to lock in Waipio's victory. Waipio's team roster includes Matthew Yap, Kainoa Fong, Ulumano Farm, Christian Donahue. Iolana Akau, Trevor Ling, Jordan Ulep, Caleb Duhay, Jedd Andrade, Tanner Tokunaga, Pikai Winchester, Keelen Obedoza, and Khade Paris. The team is led by manager Timo Donahue and coaches Kiha Akau and Gregg Tsugawa. Waipio went undefeated in the Little League World Series Tournament, beating seven U.S. teams to get into the U.S. Championship game. Hawaii beat a spirited team from Lake Charles, LA, 7 to 5, in an exciting, come-from-behind victory, to advance to the World Championship game. I am proud of their impressive victory but more so of the humility and sportsmanship that the team from Waipio displayed as they won with aloha. I recognize the sacrifices made by the coaches, family members, and friends, who worked hard to help these youngsters follow their dreams. I applaud them all and wish them the best in future endeavors, both on the field and off.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I rise today to speak about the growing rate of suicide among Iraq and Afghanistan-era veterans. For all that is being done in this country to support our troops in battle, we must remember this truth: For many veterans, their battles do not end when they return from the war. Instead, war returns home with them and within them. That is a truth. Instead, they face an enemy that is hard to understand and harder to defeat. Their wounds and their enemy are unseen, but the reality and sometimes the deadly consequences of these invisible wounds cannot be ignored. I am deeply troubled by the latest information we have received from VA. The number of veterans lost to the enemy of suicide is rising. Suicide among Iraq and Afghanistan-era veterans is at an alltime high. The most recently recorded year--2006--saw 113 Iraq and Afghanistan-era veterans lost to suicide, almost as many as we lost in the years 2002 to 2005 combined. This is disturbing. Iraq and Afghanistan veterans are not the only ones suffering from service-related mental health injuries. Indeed, the number of veterans found to have service-connected PTSD is not just rising, it is rising several times faster than service-connected disabilities overall. Nor are suicide and mental health only a matter of concern among discharged veterans. Recent news reports show that suicides among Active-Duty soldiers are positioned to reach an alltime high, exceeding last year's record number. Much is being done to protect and heal veterans with mental health issues. VA has expanded mental health outreach. The Vet Centers, run largely for vets and by vets, offer a safe haven and readjustment counseling. For those in desperate need, VA now operates a 24-hour suicide hotline. In the 1 year it has been operating, they have received tens of thousands of calls and performed over a thousand rescues of veterans about to take their own lives. Unfortunately, these efforts are not enough. Veterans are committing suicide at a higher rate than their civilian counterparts. A recent RAND study found that nearly three out of four veterans in need of mental health care receive inadequate care or no care at all. This cannot be acceptable to a nation intent on protecting those who wear its uniform. More must be done in the days ahead, and not just by VA. This Congress took an important step by passing the Joshua Omvig Suicide Prevention Act. But in the final weeks of this session, comprehensive veterans mental health legislation is still waiting for a vote in the House. Through S. 2162, the Veterans' Mental Health Care Improvement Act, which passed the Senate with unanimous support, Congress can do more to prevent veteran suicide. Congress can strengthen veterans' mental health care, outreach, support the homeless, services for families, and leverage community resources. I hope this critical legislation will become law before this Congress ends. PTSD and other service-related invisible wounds are real injuries. They are also an enemy to veterans, to the families who support them, and to all Americans. It is not enough to bring our troops home; we must support them when the battle follows them home. It is unacceptable that veterans who come home safely later lose their lives to the enemy of suicide. We must do more to support those who have served us. Mr. President, I yield the floor, and I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. AKAKA

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

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, today I want to share a story with my colleagues about the accomplishments of one of my constituents. It begins with a feature story in Landscape Superintendent and Maintenance Professional magazine and ends with selection as the Air Force Association's 2008 Department of Veterans Affairs Employee of the Year Award. The link between the two is a fine veteran and fellow Hawaii resident, Mr. Larry L. Thornton. In June of last year, Landscape Superintendent and Maintenance Professional magazine featured an article entitled ``Maintaining Honor,'' on the quality of the grounds-keeping at the National Memorial Cemetery of the Pacific. The national cemetery, located on the island of Oahu and known to Hawaii locals as ``Punchbowl,'' is a crown jewel of America's memorials, and the last resting place of thousands who so valiantly served their Nation. Millions visit Punchbowl annually, to walk the grounds, to stand silently in its beauty, and to pay tribute to those laid to rest there. The article featured pictures of the groundskeepers, each identified by first and last name. Unbeknownst to the readers, these hard working stewards are injured veterans, some with disabilities for which others may have written them off as unable to contribute a day's labor. But thanks in large part to one man, one of their fellow veterans, they succeed beyond such expectations, one day at a time. That man, their supervisor for VA's Compensated Work Therapy Program for disabled veterans, managed to escape the feature photos. That man is Punchbowl's Cemetery caretaker foreman, Larry Thornton. Fortunately, Mr. Thornton could not escape the limelight when he finally received just recognition for his work with disabled veterans and for his dedicated labor to maintain a national shrine. This year his work was recognized and earned him the Air Force Association's Department of Veterans Affairs Employee of the Year Award for 2008. I join the Air Force Association in commending this fine veteran, Mr. Thornton, for his service to his fellow veterans and our Nation. His service began long before this award, and I am sure that it will continue long after it. I am doubly proud of him, as a Senator from Hawaii and as the chairman of the Veterans' Affairs Committee.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I rise today to speak on the motion to proceed to the National Defense Authorization Act. I ask unanimous consent that I be given 20 minutes to do so.

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the time be equally divided between the two parties.

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I rise today to urge my colleagues to set aside bipartisan differences and vote in favor of the motion to proceed to the National Defense Authorization Act. This bill is critically important to ensuring that our troops have the equipment and support they need in order to fulfill their mission. Voting against the motion to proceed would have significant consequences for the men and women who have made so many sacrifices for this Nation, as well as their families. It would mean delays in pay increases, delays in benefits, and delays in authorities that are necessary to train and equip our soldiers. This bill authorizes the military construction projects that directly affect the quality of life of our armed services members by giving them new, safer, more effective facilities in which to work. Under the leadership of Chairman Levin, the Armed Services Committee has produced a carefully crafted bill that addresses the many complex issues facing today's military. This includes language in direct support of our armed services members and their families, such as a 3.9-percent pay raise. Over the last 6 years, continuous combat operations have put a severe strain on our Nation's military capabilities. Consequently, one of the primary goals of this year's bill was to focus on restoring the readiness of our troops. As chairman of the Subcommittee on Readiness, I worked very closely with Ranking Member Thune on the readiness acquisition policy and military construction portions of this bill that are under the jurisdiction of my subcommittee. I would like to take this opportunity to thank Senator Thune for his hard work and cooperation during the markup of this bill. It was my privilege to work with him to advance the readiness of our Armed Forces. I also thank our personal staff members and the professional staff of the committees for their efforts, in particular Peter Levine, Mike McCord, Bill Sutey, Lucian Niemeyer, Greg Kiley, and Chris Paul. The Readiness Subcommittee has a broad mandate of policy oversight as well as jurisdiction over a substantial part of the DOD budget. In addition, it is responsible for the readiness and operation and maintenance provisions that support the essential requirements of the military services for the next fiscal year for the cost of normal operations. However, our goal remains simple: to maintain and, wherever possible, improve the readiness of our military. Altogether, this bill contains $162 billion for the programs within the jurisdiction of the Readiness Subcommittee, which represents over 30 percent of the DOD budget. That amount is within one-quarter of 1 percent of the amount requested. I believe all of us are concerned that our military forces have what they need to be trained and ready, but we are particularly concerned about the readiness of our ground forces. This bill fully funds the Army and Marine Corps readiness accounts, including the training and equipment maintenance request. With respect to revitalizing our defense facilities, this bill invests an additional $413 million above the budget request in our infrastructure to repair or replace our aging defense facilities and improve the quality of life and the productivity of our military. These military construction projects require both an authorization and an appropriation. I urge the Senate to pass both these important pieces of legislation--this authorization bill and the Military Construction and Veterans Affairs appropriations bill--as soon as possible. This year's Defense authorization bill also addresses the need for increased oversight of the acquisition programs and activities of the Department of Defense to ensure that taxpayers' dollars are well spent and not wasted. For example, this bill requires DOD to establish ethics standards to prevent personal conflicts of interest by contractor employees who perform acquisition functions on behalf of DOD. This bill ensures that private security contractors do not perform inherently governmental functions in an area of combat operations. It codifies existing DOD standards under which security operations are inherently governmental if they will be performed in highly hazardous public areas where the risks are uncertain. This bill prohibits contractor employees from conducting interrogations of detainees during or in the aftermath of hostilities. The provision has an effective date 1 year after the date of enactment to give DOD time to comply. This bill requires the military departments to ensure that urgent requirements documents developed by operational field commanders are presented to senior officials for review within 60 days of the time they are submitted. This is a response to reports that Marine Corps leadership failed to respond to requests for Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles, known as MRAPs, and other critical requirements for several years. This bill codifies the requirement for boards to review and approve-- or disapprove--any new requirements that could add to the costs of a major weapon system. This bill requires DOD to ensure that a contractor does not receive a competitive advantage by using foreign subsidiaries to avoid the payment of U.S. payroll taxes for its workers. This bill requires DOD to establish a database of information regarding the integrity and contract performance of contractors, to ensure that this information is available to acquisition officials making key contracting decisions. This bill requires DOD to take steps to ensure that contractor employees who are the victims of sexual assault and other crimes in Iraq and Afghanistan receive the help they need and the investigative assistance they deserve. This bill requires the military departments to establish business transformation offices to serve as a central focus for the reform of their business and financial systems and processes. This bill ensures that the chief lawyer for the DOD inspector general, or IG, serves at the discretion of the IG and reports only to the IG. It is my hope that the Senate will strongly support these provisions. In addition to working to improve the readiness of our troops as chairman of the Readiness Subcommittee, I was pleased in my role as chairman of the Veterans' Affairs Committee to work to include language in this bill that will improve care for this Nation's wounded warriors. One such provision responds to the need for comprehensive care for wounded warriors and their families by requiring the Secretary of Defense to provide referrals for legal assistance when appropriate in order to help with legal issues related to long-term care needs. The necessity to encourage and promote the treatment of service- related injuries was also addressed in this bill through the authorization of a pilot program to assess treatment approaches for all forms of traumatic brain injury and the establishment of a center of excellence for the treatment and rehabilitation of traumatic extremity injuries and amputations. In order to ensure that the Department of Defense and Department of Veterans Affairs continue to carefully coordinate these efforts to improve the process for the care, management, and transition of wounded and ill servicemembers, this year's bill also provides for a 3-year extension of the Senior Oversight Committee. Let me end by restating how vitally important it is for us to move forward with the debate of this bill. A little over 3 weeks ago, I attended the deployment ceremony for the members of the Hawaii Army National Guard's 29th Infantry Brigade Combat Team who are headed to Kuwait in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom for their second deployment. It was my great honor and privilege to say goodbye to these soldiers who are leaving their homes, their jobs, and their families in order to fulfill a commitment to defend and protect our Nation. I remind my friends and colleagues that we have also made a commitment to work together to pass a bill that provides our troops with everything they need to come home safely. The first step in this process is to adopt this motion to proceed so that we can begin debate on this very important bill. I yield back the remainder of my time, and I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. President, as a member of the Banking Committee, I have worked to improve the financial literacy of our country. My interest in financial literacy dates back to when my fourth grade teacher required me to have a piggy bank. We were made to understand how money saved, a little at a time, can grow into a large amount--enough to buy things that would have been impossible to obtain without savings. My experience with a piggy bank taught me important lessons about money management that have stayed with me throughout my life. More people need to be taught these important lessons so that they are better able to manage their resources. Too many Americans lack basic financial literacy. Americans of all ages and backgrounds face increasingly complex financial decisions as members of the nation's workforce, managers of their families' resources, and voting citizens. Many find these decisions confusing and frustrating because they lack the tools necessary that would enable them to make wise, personal choices about their finances. Without a sufficient understanding of economics and personal finance, individuals will not be able to appropriately manage their finances, effectively evaluate credit opportunities, successfully invest for long-term financial goals in an increasingly complex marketplace, or be able to cope with difficult financial situations. Unfortunately, today too many working families are struggling as they are confronted with increases in energy and food costs or the loss of a job. It is essential that we work toward improving education, consumer protections, and empowering individuals and families through economic and financial literacy in order to build stronger families, businesses, and communities. Today I am introducing the Improving Access to Mainstream Financial Institutions Act of 2008. This bill provides economic empowerment and educational opportunities for working families by helping bank the unbanked. It will also encourage the use of mainstream financial institutions for working families that need small loans. I thank my cosponsors, Senators Schumer, Lieberman, and Inouye. Millions of working families do not have a bank or credit union account. The unbanked rely on alternative financial service providers to obtain cash from checks, pay bills, and send remittances. Many of the unbanked are low- and moderate-income families that can ill afford to have their earnings diminished by reliance on these high-cost and often predatory financial services. In addition, the unbanked are unable to save securely to prepare for the loss of a job, a family illness, a down payment on a first home, or education expenses. My bill authorizes grants intended to help low- and moderate-income unbanked individuals establish bank or credit union accounts. Providing access to a bank or credit union account can empower families with tremendous financial opportunities. An account at a bank or credit union provides consumers with alternatives to rapid refund loans, check cashing services, and lower cost remittances. In addition, bank and credit union accounts provide access to saving and borrowing services. Low- and moderate-income individuals are often challenged with a number of barriers that limit their ability to open up and or maintain accounts. Regular checking accounts may be too costly for some consumers unable to maintain minimum balances or unable to afford monthly fees. Poor credit histories may also hinder their ability to open accounts. By providing federal resources for product development, administration, outreach, and financial education, banks and credit unions will be better able to reach out and bank the unbanked. The second grant program authorized by my legislation provides consumers with a lower cost, short term alternative to payday loans. Payday loans are cash loans repaid by borrowers' postdated checks or borrowers' authorizations to make electronic debits against existing financial accounts. Payday loans often have triple digit interest rates that range from 390 percent to 780 percent when expressed as an annual percentage rate. Loan flipping, which is a common practice, is the renewing of loans at maturity by paying additional fees without any principal reduction. Loan flipping often leads to instances where the fees paid for a payday loan well exceed the principal borrowed. This situation often creates a cycle of debt that is hard to break. There is a great need for working families to have access to affordable small loans. My legislation would encourage banks and credit unions to develop payday loan alternatives. Consumers who apply for these loans would be provided with financial literacy and educational opportunities. Loans extended to consumers under the grant would be subject to the annual percentage rate promulgated by the National Credit Union Administration's, NCUA, Loan Interest Rates, currently capped at an annual percentage rate of 18 percent. Several credit unions have developed similar products. One example is the Windward Community Federal Credit Union in Kailua, on the island of Oahu, which has developed an affordable alternative to payday loans to help the U.S. Marines and the other members that they serve. I am very proud of the work done by the staff of the Windward Community Federal Credit Union. This program was developed with an NCUA grant. More working families need access to affordable small loans. More needs to be done to encourage mainstream financial service providers to develop affordable small loan products. My legislation will help support the development of affordable credit products at bank and credit unions. Working families would be better off by going to their credit unions and banks, mainstream financial services providers, than payday loan shops. I will work to enact this legislation so vital to empowering our citizens. In our current, modern, complex economy, not having a bank or credit union account severely hinders the ability of families to improve their financial condition or help them navigate difficult financial circumstances. Instead of borrowing money from payday lenders at outrageous fees, we need to encourage people to utilize their credit unions and banks for affordable small loans. Banks and credit unions have the ability to make the lives of working families better by helping them save, invest, and borrow at affordable rates. Mr. President I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill and letters of support be printed in the Record.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, today, I was pleased to vote in favor of the conference report to accompany the College Opportunity and Affordability Act, H.R. 4137. I congratulate my colleagues, particularly my good friend, Senator Kennedy, for their dedication and bipartisan efforts in moving this vitally important legislation forward. It is imperative during these difficult economic times, to do all that we can to help students achieve their educational goals by making college more accessible and more affordable. This legislation will assist students and their families in Hawaii and across the Nation by, among other things, simplifying the Federal financial aid application process, increasing the amount of Federal grants to students and their families who need them most, providing more authority to regulate private student loan lenders engaged in predatory practices, and holding colleges accountable for growing tuition rates. As chairman of the Veterans' Affairs Committee and a senior member of the Armed Services Committee, I was also pleased to support this legislation which will make higher education more accessible for the men and women who have volunteered to protect and defend our Nation. It includes a provision allowing the members of our Armed Forces to defer their payments, interest free, on Federal Direct Loans while they are on Active Duty and making reenrollment easier for service members who left college to join the military. It also benefits the families of our soldiers and sailors who have also sacrificed so much. First, by providing new scholarships for the children and family members of service members who have died since 9/11. And, second, by providing instate tuition for members of the military and their dependents who have lived in a state for more than 30 days. This legislation also incorporates several provisions which will specifically benefit students in Hawaii. These include the authorization of the creation of the Henry Kuualoha Giugni Kupuna Memorial Archives at the University of Hawaii as a repository for Native Hawaiian historical artifacts and the expansion of authorized grant programs for Native Hawaiian Institutions to include education designed to improve financial literacy. It also clarifies that Native Hawaiians and other Pacific Islanders are eligible for the Federally funded McNair Scholars Program. In addition, it benefits our State by authorizing the development and expansion of programs to improve science, technology, and mathematics education specifically focused on meeting the educational and cultural needs of Native Hawaiian students. Today, more than ever, a college education has become a key to future opportunities and financial stability. A student who desires to attend college should not have to delay or give up their dreams of a higher education because of the cost. With the passage of this bill today, we are helping students achieve this dream and I applaud its passage. Now, it is time for the President to sign this critically important bill into law and make it a reality.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, as we prepare to return to our home States, I believe it is important to remind our colleagues about the work we have done for the veterans of this Nation. As Chairman of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs, I have had the privilege of working with almost every entity and level of Government, veterans and military service organizations across the Nation, and every branch of the military, in an ongoing effort to better serve those who have served us. In the past 19 months, the committee has held over 50 hearings, taking testimony from over 320 witnesses. The committee staff has carried out over 140 days of investigations and visits across the country. I commend the hard-working members of our committee, on both sides of the aisle, for their work this session. After years of underfunding veterans programs, I wish to remind everyone that this Congress appropriated the largest increase in the history of the Department of Veterans Affairs. These funds are helping to provide better health care to veterans and enabling the Veterans Benefits Administration to hire thousands of new employees. It is my profound hope this investment will produce marked improvements in care and in reduced backlog of veterans' disability claims. Last year, in connection with the disclosures about Walter Reed, America learned of the disgraceful treatment of some of our disabled servicemembers and veterans. Congress responded promptly and the Armed Services and Veterans' Affairs Committees collaborated in an unprecedented manner to address the issues at Walter Reed and elsewhere. One result of this cooperation was the wounded warrior provisions included in last year's National Defense Authorization Act. I take special pride in one particular wounded warrior provision which more than doubled the period of automatic VA health care eligibility for returning troops. Servicemembers returning from Iraq and Afghanistan are now eligible for 5 years of VA health care upon separation from service. I am also pleased with the work we have done in seeking an expanded outreach to veterans of the National Guard and Reserve. It is vital that the growing role they play in our all-volunteer military be recognized and that those who have been deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan be recognized and helped. Congress also enacted the 21st Century GI bill of rights. Like others who served in World War II, I personally know how that GI bill changed our country for the better. I hope this improved benefit will provide similar help for today's and tomorrow's troops. But for all we have done, much remains unfinished in these waning weeks. Important legislation is pending in both the House and the Senate. To name two bills, we are still waiting for action on S. 1315 and S. 2162. S. 1315, the Veterans' Benefits Enhancement Act of 2007, would provide needed assistance to veterans young and old, including the Filipino veterans of World War II who served under U.S. command but were denied veterans status for over 60 years. S. 2162 is the Veterans' Mental Health and Other Care Improvements Act of 2008. This bill responds to the growing need among veterans for high quality mental health care. Many veterans return from war suffering from invisible wounds. If left untreated, these wounds can infect a veteran's life and livelihood, with dire consequences. The bill represents a tribute to Justin Bailey, a young Iraq veteran who overdosed while under VA care. We must not let other veterans suffer a similar tragedy. Both of these bills passed the Senate with unanimous or nearly unanimous support, and both count strong supporters in the House. I hope that before this session ends, we will see both become law. I do not report today that our work for veterans is anywhere near done, but I do say it is work in progress. I thank my colleagues in both Chambers and both parties for their support and cooperation.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. President, as a member of the Banking Committee, I have worked to improve the financial literacy of our country. My interest in financial literacy dates back to when my fourth grade teacher required me to have a piggy bank. We were made to understand how money saved, a little at a time, can grow into a large amount--enough to buy things that would have been impossible to obtain without savings. My experience with a piggy bank taught me important lessons about money management that have stayed with me throughout my life. More people need to be taught these important lessons so that they are better able to manage their resources. Too many Americans lack basic financial literacy. Americans of all ages and backgrounds face increasingly complex financial decisions as members of the nation's workforce, managers of their families' resources, and voting citizens. Many find these decisions confusing and frustrating because they lack the tools necessary that would enable them to make wise, personal choices about their finances. Without a sufficient understanding of economics and personal finance, individuals will not be able to appropriately manage their finances, effectively evaluate credit opportunities, successfully invest for long-term financial goals in an increasingly complex marketplace, or be able to cope with difficult financial situations. Unfortunately, today too many working families are struggling as they are confronted with increases in energy and food costs or the loss of a job. It is essential that we work toward improving education, consumer protections, and empowering individuals and families through economic and financial literacy in order to build stronger families, businesses, and communities. Today I am introducing the Improving Access to Mainstream Financial Institutions Act of 2008. This bill provides economic empowerment and educational opportunities for working families by helping bank the unbanked. It will also encourage the use of mainstream financial institutions for working families that need small loans. I thank my cosponsors, Senators Schumer, Lieberman, and Inouye. Millions of working families do not have a bank or credit union account. The unbanked rely on alternative financial service providers to obtain cash from checks, pay bills, and send remittances. Many of the unbanked are low- and moderate-income families that can ill afford to have their earnings diminished by reliance on these high-cost and often predatory financial services. In addition, the unbanked are unable to save securely to prepare for the loss of a job, a family illness, a down payment on a first home, or education expenses. My bill authorizes grants intended to help low- and moderate-income unbanked individuals establish bank or credit union accounts. Providing access to a bank or credit union account can empower families with tremendous financial opportunities. An account at a bank or credit union provides consumers with alternatives to rapid refund loans, check cashing services, and lower cost remittances. In addition, bank and credit union accounts provide access to saving and borrowing services. Low- and moderate-income individuals are often challenged with a number of barriers that limit their ability to open up and or maintain accounts. Regular checking accounts may be too costly for some consumers unable to maintain minimum balances or unable to afford monthly fees. Poor credit histories may also hinder their ability to open accounts. By providing federal resources for product development, administration, outreach, and financial education, banks and credit unions will be better able to reach out and bank the unbanked. The second grant program authorized by my legislation provides consumers with a lower cost, short term alternative to payday loans. Payday loans are cash loans repaid by borrowers' postdated checks or borrowers' authorizations to make electronic debits against existing financial accounts. Payday loans often have triple digit interest rates that range from 390 percent to 780 percent when expressed as an annual percentage rate. Loan flipping, which is a common practice, is the renewing of loans at maturity by paying additional fees without any principal reduction. Loan flipping often leads to instances where the fees paid for a payday loan well exceed the principal borrowed. This situation often creates a cycle of debt that is hard to break. There is a great need for working families to have access to affordable small loans. My legislation would encourage banks and credit unions to develop payday loan alternatives. Consumers who apply for these loans would be provided with financial literacy and educational opportunities. Loans extended to consumers under the grant would be subject to the annual percentage rate promulgated by the National Credit Union Administration's, NCUA, Loan Interest Rates, currently capped at an annual percentage rate of 18 percent. Several credit unions have developed similar products. One example is the Windward Community Federal Credit Union in Kailua, on the island of Oahu, which has developed an affordable alternative to payday loans to help the U.S. Marines and the other members that they serve. I am very proud of the work done by the staff of the Windward Community Federal Credit Union. This program was developed with an NCUA grant. More working families need access to affordable small loans. More needs to be done to encourage mainstream financial service providers to develop affordable small loan products. My legislation will help support the development of affordable credit products at bank and credit unions. Working families would be better off by going to their credit unions and banks, mainstream financial services providers, than payday loan shops. I will work to enact this legislation so vital to empowering our citizens. In our current, modern, complex economy, not having a bank or credit union account severely hinders the ability of families to improve their financial condition or help them navigate difficult financial circumstances. Instead of borrowing money from payday lenders at outrageous fees, we need to encourage people to utilize their credit unions and banks for affordable small loans. Banks and credit unions have the ability to make the lives of working families better by helping them save, invest, and borrow at affordable rates. Mr. President I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill and letters of support be printed in the Record.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, as chairman of the Veterans' Affairs Committee, I normally come to the Senate floor and speak on various veterans issues--I advocate for increased screening and treatment and mental health issues for our veterans; I remind my fellow Senators that veterans of their home States must file income taxes for 2008 in order to receive their tax rebates; I argue for increased funding for VA's vital mission; and I urge the Senate to approve a new GI bill. Today, however, I come to the Senate floor to speak about one particular veteran--a Vietnam veteran who has dedicated his long career, enormous talents, and tireless efforts to better the treatment and the lives of all who have served our Nation in uniform. Today, I will speak of my staff director, William Brew. Bill has just completed 20 years of service to the Senate. His entire tenure in the Senate has been at the Committee on Veterans' Affairs. Bill started in the Senate on April 3, 1978. At that time, his desk was in what is now the committee's hearing room. The chairman was Alan Cranston of California. The major issues were Agent Orange, judicial review, and the emerging medical condition that had newly been labeled post-traumatic stress disorder. As a former naval officer, and a lawyer, Bill was thrown right into these issues, and his presence made a huge difference. An immediate and pressing need was to provide psychological counseling to Vietnam veterans at a time when the war and, sadly, even those who fought in it, remained a divisive issue for our Nation. Men and women who had served during that conflict did not return to heroes' welcomes, yellow ribbons, and joyous neighborhood celebrations we so often see today. In 1980, in Van Nuys, CA, one of the very first vet centers opened and offered a means of providing community-based counseling and outreach services to those who were returning from Southeast Asia. Now, there are 232 scattered around the country. Millions of veterans and their families from all wars have received counseling and support through these centers. Bill was instrumental in developing the legislation that established these facilities and was present at the creation of vet centers. Bill was deeply involved in the debates surrounding Agent Orange and quickly became an expert on an issue whose vocabulary resolved around dioxin, defoliation, Ranch Hand, and a variety of health problems and concerns. His efforts contributed to the development of wide-ranging initiatives designed to address the needs of those who believe their exposure has adversely affected their health. Bill was instrumental in the passage of legislation in 1996, which fundamentally changed the law with regard to eligibility for VA health care. Eligibility Reform, as this law is known, eradicated the line between inpatient and outpatient care. VA, for the first time, was authorized to provide a standard benefits package of services in the most appropriate care setting. This seemingly simple change enabled VA to open up community-based clinics all across this country. Veterans care has been dramatically improved because of the increased access to the now 700 clinics dotting the landscape. Assisting disabled veterans to reenter civilian life has always been a high priority for the committee. Bill worked on legislation to revamp federally assisted State vocational rehabilitation programs, giving priority to the most seriously disabled. Bill was instrumental in the establishment of the Court of Veterans Claims, which gave judicial review to veterans' benefit determinations, and the committee recently approved legislation to expand the Court. It is little known that Bill has served on both sides of the aisle, working not only for Chairmen Cranston and Rockefeller, and now myself, but also working for Chairman Alan Simpson, my Republican colleague from Wyoming. In 1980, when the Democrats entered the minority, Bill remained a majority staff member under Chairman Simpson for 9 months before returning to Ranking Member Cranston's staff. I congratulate Bill for his service and tell him that I am grateful for that, and to thank him for his 20 years of dedicated and faithful service to the Senate and to our Nation's veterans. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. As chairman of the Senate Committee on Veterans' Affairs, I note my strong support for Senate passage of S. 2617, the proposed Veterans' Compensation Cost-of-Living Adjustment Act of 2008. This measure, which I introduced earlier this year and which the Committee on Veterans' Affairs reported on July 24, would direct the Secretary of Veterans' Affairs to increase, effective December 1, 2008, the rates of veterans' disability compensation to keep pace with the rising cost of living. The rate adjustment would be equal to that provided to Social Security recipients, based on the Bureau of Labor Statistics' Consumer Price Index. Congress regularly enacts an annual cost-of-living adjustment, COLA, for veterans' compensation in order to ensure that inflation does not erode the purchasing power of the veterans and their families who depend upon this income to meet their needs. This past year Congress passed, and the President signed into law, Public Law 110-111, which resulted in a COLA increase of 2.3 percent for 2008. At this time, the Congressional Budget Office estimates that the cost-of-living adjustment for 2009 will be 2.8 percent. The COLA affects, among other benefits, veterans' disability compensation and dependency and indemnity compensation for surviving spouses and children. According to the latest figures from VA, there are 2.8 million veterans currently receiving compensation for disabilities incurred in the line of duty, as well as over 316,000 surviving spouses of veterans receiving dependency and indemnity compensation. Current U.S. military deployments in Iraq and Afghanistan will ensure that there will be new recipients of these benefits in the coming years. The brave men and women who voluntarily put themselves in harm's way to keep our country safe need to be certain that we will fulfill our responsibility to ensure that those who are injured during service are provided with the help they need to provide for their families' economic security. Many of the more than 3 million recipients of these VA benefits depend upon these tax-free payments not only to provide for their own basic needs but those of their spouses, children and parents as well. Without an annual COLA increase, these veterans and their families would see the value of their hard-earned benefits slowly dwindle, and we, as a Congress, would have neglected our duty to ensure that those who sacrificed so much for this country receive the benefits and services to which they are entitled. I urge all of our colleagues to support passage of this COLA increase and for their continued support for our Nation's veterans.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 will meaningfully address the housing crisis in our country. I appreciate the leadership of my friends, Banking Committee Chairman Dodd, and Ranking Member Shelby, in developing this vital legislation. Too many families are losing their homes. Not enough working families have access to affordable housing options or are able to secure credit. This legislation protects homeowners across the country, prevents foreclosures, increases the supply of affordable housing, and assists our Nation's veterans. This act will modernize and improve the Federal Housing Administration, FHA, to provide homeowners with additional access to fixed rate mortgages. Additional resources will be provided by this legislation for housing counseling to assist homeowners in finding solutions to their difficult situations. Mortgage disclosures will be made more meaningful to consumers by this act. My home State of Hawaii has a severe shortage of affordable housing. Hawaii ranks as the most expensive housing jurisdiction in the country according to the National Low Income Housing Coalition's 2007-2008 Out of Reach report. This bill creates an affordable housing trust fund and a capital magnet fund to increase access to affordable housing. These additional resources help build and preserve affordable housing units for working families. I also appreciate the inclusion of provisions that would assist veterans and servicemembers during this housing crisis. I especially appreciate the inclusion of a provision that is derived from my legislation, S. 2768. This corrects an oversight in the Economic Stimulus Act of 2008 and extends the temporary home loan guaranty increase to veterans so that more of them can realize the dream of home ownership. The VA Home Loan Guaranty was part of the original G.I. bill in 1944. It provided veterans with a federally guaranteed home loan with no down payment. This landmark legislation made the dream of home ownership a reality for millions of returning veterans. The amount of the home loan guaranty was last adjusted by the Veterans Benefits Improvement Act of 2004. The maximum guaranty amount was increased to 25 percent of the Freddie Mac conforming loan limit determined under section 305(a)(2) of the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation Act for a single family residence, as adjusted for the year involved. Using that formula, because the Freddie Mac conforming loan limit for a single family residence in 2008 is $417,000, VA will guarantee a veteran's loan up to $104,250. This guaranty exempts homeowners from having to make a down payment or secure private mortgage insurance. The newly enacted Economic Stimulus Act of 2008, however, temporarily reset the Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and FHA home loan guarantee limits to 125 percent of metropolitan-area median home prices, without reference to the VA home loan program. This had the effect of raising the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac limits to nearly $730,000, in the highest cost areas, while leaving the VA limit of $417,000 in place. This important group of Americans may benefit from an increased home loan guaranty in this time of economic uncertainty. I am hopeful that this increased guaranty limit will assist those veterans and servicemembers who are struggling to purchase a home during this time. The bill also authorizes a financial education and prospective homeownership counseling demonstration program, which I helped develop with my colleagues Senators Menendez, Carper, and Dodd. This program will help working families prepare for purchasing a home. We must provide greater financial literacy opportunities to empower families to make better informed financial decisions. I will work with my colleagues to secure the necessary funding so that the Department of the Treasury can effectively implement and evaluate this demonstration program. Mr. President, this essential legislation helps families remain in their homes, expands access to credit, creates more affordable housing opportunities, provides much needed improvements to veterans' housing benefits, and authorizes a prospective home ownership counseling financial literacy demonstration program.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, technology continues to affect both the strengths and the vulnerabilities of Government. Advances over the past decades in computer technology have enabled us to generate and access unprecedented amounts of data, and make information easily accessible to citizens as well as Government employees seeking to assist them. Technology allows information to travel from one coast to the other in the blink of an eye, offering the possibility that as technology improves so will the efficiency of Government. Unfortunately, the possibilities of the information age include an increased risk of data theft. According to the Identity Theft Resource Center, identity theft is the fastest growing crime in America. As we learned in 2006 with the theft of a Department of Veterans Affairs' laptop, which put into question the security of the personal information of 26.5 million veterans, neither Government Departments nor the people who rely on them are immune to these new and changing risks. In response to the VA computer theft, I, along with a number of my colleagues in the Senate and the House, requested the Government Accountability Office to conduct a study to determine whether existing privacy laws and guidance were adequate to protect the Federal Government's collection and use of personal information. Last month, GAO reported back to Congress, and recommended we consider revising existing Federal privacy laws. Following a June 18, 2008, Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee hearing on this and other matters related to privacy security, I joined committee Chairman Joe Lieberman and Ranking Member Susan Collins in calling for changes to modernize the Privacy Act. The Privacy Act of 1974 is the foundation of the Federal Government's privacy protection law. While this act provides a worthwhile basis for the protection of privacy, it was written in a different time when the Government faced different challenges. Mr. President, 1974 does not seem that long ago, but it was well before the emergence of many computer technologies that have changed the demands of data security. At that time, Bill Gates and Steve Jobs were unknown, Apple and Microsoft were little more than ideas, and neither laptops nor the Internet were part of the common American experience. The technological changes that have occurred since 1974, while bringing new opportunities, have also brought new challenges to the security of our privacy and safety of the personal information that is kept by the Federal Government. As technology changes, we need to continue to adapt the framework of Federal data security laws, as we began to do in 2002 with the E-Government Act. As chairman of the Senate Committee on Veterans' Affairs, I know the Department of Veterans Affairs still has a long way to go towards establishing and securing the personal information of veterans. VA and several other Departments received an ``F'' on this year's Federal Information Security Management Act--FISMA--report card. I do not doubt that VA recognizes this is a problem, and I am pleased by the Department's recent move to streamline its information technology management structure. Still, good intentions provide little comfort or security to a veteran whose identity is potentially placed at risk because VA failed to put adequate policies and procedures in place to protect personal information. I expect VA to rapidly take the steps necessary to achieve a passing FISMA grade, so that veterans can have confidence in the Department's ability to protect their personal information. Technology should serve its intended purpose of helping, not harming, those who rely on the efficiencies it provides. I also look forward to Congress taking action to create privacy laws which meet the demands of 21st century technology.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, we must override the President's veto of the Medicare Improvements for Patients and Providers Act of 2008. This bill will ensure that Medicare and TRICARE beneficiaries have continued access to health care. It will also enhance Medicare benefits. Finally, the legislation will provide much needed resources for Hawaii hospitals that care for the uninsured and Medicaid beneficiaries. This legislation will maintain Medicare physician payment rates for 2008 and provide a slight increase in 2009. If this veto override fails, doctors will be subject to a 10.6-percent cut in Medicare reimbursements for the rest of the year. This severe cut could also restrict access to health care for our troops and their families because TRICARE reimbursement rates are linked to Medicare reimbursement rates. Rising costs and difficulty in recruiting and retaining qualified health professionals make it essential that we improve reimbursements to ensure that Medicare and TRICARE beneficiaries have access to health care services. The act will make improvements in Medicare benefits. It increases coverage for preventive health care services and makes mental health care more affordable. The legislation will also help low-income seniors to obtain the health care services that they need. Finally, the legislation will provide vital assistance for Hawaii hospitals. The legislation extends Medicaid disproportionate share DSH, allotments for Hawaii until December 31, 2009. Hawaii hospitals are struggling to meet the increasing demands placed on them by a growing number of uninsured patients and rising costs. Hawaii and Tennessee are the only two States that do not have permanent DSH allotments. The Balanced Budget Act of 1997 created specific DSH allotments for each State based on their actual DSH expenditures for fiscal year 1995. In 1994, Hawaii implemented the QUEST demonstration program that was designed to reduce the number of uninsured and improve access to health care. The prior Medicaid DSH Program was incorporated into QUEST. As a result of the demonstration program, Hawaii did not have DSH expenditures in 1995 and was not provided a DSH allotment. The Medicare, Medicaid, and SCHIP Benefits Improvement and Protection Act of 2000 made further changes to the DSH Program, which included the establishment of a floor for DSH allotments. States without allotments were again left out. The Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003 made additional changes to the DSH Program. This included an increase in DSH allotments for low DSH states. Again, States lacking allotments were left out. In the Tax Relief and Health Care Act of 2006, DSH allotments were finally provided for Hawaii and Tennessee for 2007. The act included a $10 million Medicaid DSH allotment for Hawaii for 2007. The Medicare, Medicaid, and SCHIP Extension Act of 2007 extended the DSH allotments for Hawaii and Tennessee until June 30, 2008. This provided an additional $7.5 million for a Hawaii DSH allotment. This additional extension in the Medicare Improvements for Patients and Providers Act of 2008 authorizes the submission by the State of Hawaii of a State plan amendment covering a DSH payment methodology to hospitals which is consistent with the requirements of existing law relating to DSH payments. The purpose of providing a DSH allotment for Hawaii is to provide additional funding to the State of Hawaii to permit a greater contribution toward the uncompensated costs of hospitals that are providing indigent care. It is not meant to alter existing arrangements between the State of Hawaii and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, CMS, or to reduce in any way the level of Federal funding for Hawaii's QUEST Program. This act will provide $15 million for Hawaii DSH allotments through December 31, 2009. All States need to benefit from the DSH Program. This legislation will make sure that Hawaii and Tennessee continue to have Medicaid DSH assistance. I will continue to work with Chairman Baucus, Ranking Member Grassley, Senators Alexander, Corker, and Inouye to permanently restore allotments for Hawaii and Tennessee. However, we must override the veto to help our struggling hospitals. Many of our hospitals in Hawaii desperately need resources. Layoffs have been announced and reductions in services are possible. These DSH resources will strengthen the ability of our providers to meet the increasing health care needs of our communities. Mr. President, we must enact this legislation. It will protect access to health care for seniors, individuals with disabilities, and members of our armed services and their families. The bill will improve Medicare benefits and provide much needed financial assistance for hospitals in Hawaii that care fore the uninsured and Medicaid beneficiaries.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I support the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008. I appreciate the leadership of Chairman Dodd and Ranking Member Shelby in developing a comprehensive bill that will meaningfully address the housing crisis in our country. Working families are losing their homes. Credit access has been drastically reduced. Affordable housing options for our constituents are severely limited. Hawaii's foreclosure rate increased by more than 88 percent last year, for a total of 1,270 families who had their homes foreclosed. The results for the first part of 2008 are even more troubling, with a foreclosure rate in April representing a 218 percent increase over the same month in 2007. Comparatively, Hawaii has not suffered as much as other States. However, foreclosure statistics do not reflect pending delinquencies for those families struggling to make payments or those with resetting adjustable rate mortgages. Additionally, falling home prices can lead to homeowners having to sell at a significant loss due to an unexpected transfer or a loss of a job, especially under current economic conditions. This much needed bipartisan legislation will help protect homeowners across the country, prevent foreclosures, increase the supply of affordable housing, and assist our Nation's veterans. This legislation will modernize and improve the Federal Housing Administration, FHA, to provide homeowners with additional access to fixed rate mortgages. Additional resources will be provided by this bill for housing counseling to assist homeowners in finding solutions to their difficult situations. Mortgage disclosures will also be made more meaningful to consumers by this legislation. The bill creates a new affordable housing trust fund and a capital magnet fund to increase access to affordable housing. These efforts are so important because we have such a shortage of affordable housing in my home State of Hawaii. According to the National Low Income Housing Coalition's 2007-2008 Out of Reach report, Hawaii ranks as the most expensive housing jurisdiction in the country. We must act to provide additional resources to help build and preserve affordable housing units for working families. I also appreciate the inclusion of a provision that is derived from my legislation, S. 2768. This corrects an oversight in the Economic Stimulus Act of 2008 and extends the temporary home loan guaranty increase to veterans so that more of them can realize the dream of home ownership. The VA Home Loan Guaranty was part of the original GI bill in 1944. It provided veterans with a federally guaranteed home loan with no downpayment. This landmark legislation made the dream of home ownership a reality for millions of returning veterans. More than 25 million veterans and service members are now eligible for VA home loan guarantees. The amount of the home loan guaranty was last adjusted by the Veterans Benefits Improvement Act of 2004. The maximum guaranty amount was increased to 25 percent of the Freddie Mac conforming loan limit determined under Section 305(a)(2) of the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation Act for a single family residence, as adjusted for the year involved. Using that formula, because the Freddie Mac conforming loan limit for a single family residence in 2008 is $417,000, VA will guarantee a veteran's loan up to $104,250. This guaranty exempts homeowners from having to make a downpayment or secure private mortgage insurance. The newly enacted Economic Stimulus Act of 2008, however, temporarily reset the Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and FHA home loan guarantee limits to 125 percent of metropolitan-area median home prices, without reference to the VA home loan program. This had the effect of raising the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac limits to nearly $730,000, in the highest cost areas, while leaving the VA limit of $417,000 in place. This important group of Americans may benefit from an increased home loan guaranty in this time of economic uncertainty. This legislation would also increase benefits for specially adapted housing for disabled veterans. Increases in housing and home adaptation grants have been infrequent. Unless the amounts of the grants are adjusted, inflation erodes the value and effectiveness of these benefits, making it more difficult for beneficiaries to afford the accommodations they need. This provision would go a long way in making certain that specially adapted housing benefits meet the current needs of America's veterans. We must enact this essential legislation to help homeowners remain in their homes, ensure access to credit, create more affordable housing opportunities, and provide much needed improvements to veterans' housing benefits.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Madam President, we must enact the Medicare Improvements for Patients and Providers Act of 2008. This legislation is vital to ensuring that Medicare and TRICARE beneficiaries have continued access to health care. The bill will also enhance Medicare benefits. In addition, the legislation will provide additional support for Hawaii hospitals that care for the uninsured and Medicaid beneficiaries. I hope that my colleagues who previously opposed this legislation had an opportunity to meet with their physicians, beneficiaries, and military families during the recess. If so, I hope my colleagues now understand how tremendously important it is to seniors, individuals with disabilities, and members of our armed services and their families that this legislation be enacted to protect their access to health care. The act will maintain Medicare physician payment rates for 2008 and provide a slight increase in 2009. If this legislation again fails to pass, doctors will be subject to a 10.6 percent cut in Medicare reimbursements for the rest of the year. This dramatic cut could severely limit access to health care for our troops and their families because TRICARE reimbursement rates are linked to Medicare reimbursement rates. Rising costs and difficulty in recruiting and retaining qualified health professionals make it essential that we improve reimbursements to ensure that Medicare and TRICARE beneficiaries have access to health care services. The act will enhance Medicare benefits. It increases coverage for preventive health care services and makes mental health care more affordable. In addition, the act provides additional help for low- income seniors to obtain the health care services that they need. Finally, the legislation will provide much needed relief for Hawaii hospitals. The legislation will extend Medicaid Disproportionate Share, DSH, allotments for Hawaii until December 31, 2009. Hawaii hospitals are struggling to meet the increasing demands placed on them by a growing number of uninsured patients and rising costs. Hawaii and Tennessee are the only two States that do not have permanent DSH allotments. The Balanced Budget Act of 1997 created specific DSH allotments for each State based on their actual DSH expenditures for FY 1995. In 1994, Hawaii implemented the QUEST demonstration program that was designed to reduce the number of uninsured and improve access to health care. The prior Medicaid DSH program was incorporated into QUEST. As a result of the demonstration program, Hawaii did not have DSH expenditures in 1995 and was not provided a DSH allotment. The Medicare, Medicaid, and SCHIP Benefits Improvement and Protection Act of 2000 made further changes to the DSH program, which included the establishment of a floor for DSH allotments. States without allotments were again left out. The Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003 made additional changes to the DSH program. This included an increase in DSH allotments for low DSH States. Again, States lacking allotments were left out. In the Tax Relief and Health Care Act of 2006, DSH allotments were finally provided for Hawaii and Tennessee for 2007. The act included a $10 million Medicaid DSH allotment for Hawaii for 2007. The Medicare, Medicaid, and SCHIP Extension Act of 2007 extended the DSH allotments for Hawaii and Tennessee until June 30, 2008. This provided an additional $7.5 million for a Hawaii DSH allotment. This additional extension in the Medicare Improvements for Patients and Providers Act of 2008 authorizes the submission by the State of Hawaii of a State plan amendment covering a DSH payment methodology to hospitals which is consistent with the requirements of existing law relating to DSH payments. The purpose of providing a DSH allotment for Hawaii is to provide additional funding to the State of Hawaii to permit a greater contribution toward the uncompensated costs of hospitals that are providing indigent care. It is not meant to alter existing arrangements between the State of Hawaii and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, CMS, or to reduce in any way the level of Federal funding for Hawaii's QUEST program. This act will provide $15 million for Hawaii DSH allotments through December 31, 2009. These DSH resources will strengthen the ability of our providers to meet the increasing health care needs of our communities. All States need to benefit from the DSH program. This legislation will make sure that Hawaii and Tennessee continue to have Medicaid DSH assistance. I will continue to work with Chairman Baucus, Ranking Member Grassley, Senators Alexander, Corker and Inouye to permanently restore allotments for Hawaii and Tennessee. However, we need to enact this legislation to continue to help our struggling hospitals. We must enact this legislation. It will protect access to health care for seniors, individuals with disabilities, and members of our armed services and their families. The bill will improve Medicare benefits and provide much needed financial assistance for hospitals in Hawaii that care for the uninsured and Medicaid beneficiaries.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, today I wish to discuss the U.S. arms control and nonproliferation bureaucracy and its impact on our national security. Recently, I chaired two hearings of the Oversight of Government Management Subcommittee of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee concerning the national security bureaucracy for arms control and nonproliferation. I examined several options for improving our ability to control proliferation. They included: Reestablishing an independent arms control and nonproliferation agency, creating a semiautonomous arms control and nonproliferation agency within the State Department, and reestablishing an arms control bureau in the State Department. Other issues discussed were elevating the role of the head of the arms control and nonproliferation bureaucracy and ensuring that there are enough qualified arms control and nonproliferation experts to protect our national security and meet our international obligations. Witnesses for both hearings had decades of experience in managing our nation's arms control and nonproliferation issues. Ambassador Thomas Graham and Ambassador Norman Wulf, along with Dr. Andrew Semmel, who recently retired as Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Nuclear Nonproliferation Policy and Negotiations, provided perspective about the changes to this bureaucracy over the past decade and the need for reform. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed into the Record, following my remarks, a report submitted by Ambassador Wulf which represents consensus findings of a number of experts and former U.S. officials experienced in this field.

Mr. AKAKA. The second hearing featured Ms. Patricia McNerney, the Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for International Security and Nonproliferation, and Ms. Linda Taglialatela, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Human Resources. They gave greater insight into the controversial, and damaging, arms control and nonproliferation bureaucracy reorganization at the State Department in 2005 and the ongoing human capital changes the bureaus involved continue to face today. The State Department's use of short-term, Band- Aid fixes to cover a loss of qualified civil servants and a lack of commitment by senior leaders to address the Department's cultural tensions, primarily between regional and functional issues, troubled me since these problems affect both human capital and organizational capacity to confront the evolving threat of weapons of mass destruction. In 1961, when President John F. Kennedy entered office, the United States faced a perceived missile gap against its foe, the Soviet Union. The Kennedy administration, confronting the critical challenges of the day, advocated a new government ``agency of peace'' which would work toward ``ultimate world disarmament.'' This agency, the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency, ACDA, helped craft and implement the policy decisions that would reduce the nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons threat to Americans through multiple, lasting, and verifiable treaties. The world was at a nuclear tipping point, where a small change could make a significant difference. The Kennedy administration challenged the conventional wisdom that argued for only an increase in nuclear weapons. It instead focused on controlling and limiting the spread of nuclear weapons by creating the small, but agile, Arms Control and Disarmament Agency that gradually began to increase international security. The world appears to be at another nuclear tipping point. Today international security does not hinge on an arms race between two mighty superpowers. Rather, international security is increasingly threatened by the wide proliferation of nuclear programs, material, and knowledge. Countries such as India, Pakistan, North Korea, and Iran have either achieved a nuclear weapons program or have aspirations to create one. Others soon may follow. Along with these headline-grabbing nuclear proliferation concerns, many countries are seeking nuclear power and assured access to uranium to satisfy their growing energy demands. The peaceful application of civilian nuclear programs heightens the risk of diversion or the proliferation of plutonium and enriched uranium. Both presidential candidates have expressed their commitment to addressing proliferation and working with other nations to reduce the threat of nuclear conflict. The next administration must confront this tipping point head on and solve the problem of our troubled arms control and nonproliferation bureaucracy. Along with its organizational structure, fundamental human capital issues must be resolved. They include: Addressing what is considered by some a cumbersome hiring process; recruiting, developing, and retaining a diverse and highly qualified workforce; involving key stakeholders during organizational changes; and making it desirable for Foreign Service Officers to serve in the fields of arms control and nonproliferation. We need to consider the gravity of this issue now. I urge my colleagues to advocate an arms control and nonproliferation workforce and organization that will support effectively the policies of the next administration and prepare us for the nuclear threats developing throughout the world. Exhibit 1 Foreword This report was prepared by a volunteer task force. The task force solicited views from participants through two general meetings and from contributors via written comments. These two groups included many former U.S. officials most with decades of experience in nonproliferation or arms control who graciously gave of their time to this project. They are named below--a short biography of each appears in the annex. This report contains a general consensus that the Administration taking office in January 2009 should strengthen the organizational capacity of the State Department to meet critical nonproliferation and arms control challenges. Participants and contributors endorse the general thrust of this report though not necessarily every finding and suggestion. Christopher Mitchell of the Institute for Conflict Analysis and Resolution (ICAR) of George Mason University served as convener of the two meetings that were held. Norman Wulf led those discussions and along with Dean Rust and Barclay Ward drafted the discussion papers and this report. The task force also included Linda Gallini, Fred McGoldrick, and Sharon Squassoni. Participants in at least one of the two meetings included members of the task force and Vic Alessi, Kevin Avruch, Joseph M. DeThomas, James E. Goodby, Allan Krass, Frances Omori, Randy Rydell and Andy Semmel. Among those commenting upon various drafts of the paper were William Burns, Ralph Earle II, Mark Fitzpatrick, Bob Gallucci, John Holum, Edward Ifft and John Rhinelander. No funds were made available to the task force other than by ICAR for use of their new retreat and conference center located on Mason Neck in Northern Virginia and for refreshments at the two meetings. Special appreciation is expressed to Gina Cerasani and Aneela Shamshad, and Saira Yamin, graduate students at ICAR, who served as volunteer note-takers at the two meetings. Executive Summary All three major presidential candidates have endorsed (i.) maintaining and strengthening the nuclear nonproliferation regime and (ii.) pursuing nuclear arms control measures with Russia and others. Regrettably, the State Department, which will bear the brunt of the work on nonproliferation and arms control, has lost significant capability--critical personnel have left, the arms control bureau has been abolished, and the bureau whose mandate includes nonproliferation is burdened with tasks outside its traditional purview that dilute its mission. Moreover, the State Department is simply not organized to ensure continued access and accountability to the Secretary of State and President on these critical issues. Following the election, the President-elect should appoint a high-caliber individual to head up a task force charged with laying out detailed priorities in nonproliferation and arms control and recommending structural changes needed within the executive branch to achieve those priorities. The White House and National Security Council will need to be well-organized to serve the President, but the task force should direct its primary attention to the Department of State. Restoring focus at State will require creating a bureau focused on arms control, removing non-core tasks from the bureau whose responsibilities include nonproliferation, and limiting the activities of the verification and compliance bureau to those required by law. If there are substantial obstacles to near-term creation of an arms control-focused bureau, then those functions should be consolidated in the verification and compliance bureau effectively making it the arms control and verification bureau while seeking a long-term structure. Aggressive steps must be taken to redress the loss of expert staff. For the civil service, this means rehiring, recruiting, and strengthening career paths for personnel, including physical scientists, with expertise in nonproliferation and arms control. For the foreign service, this means providing training in these topics and career paths that reward those working on these functional issues. Particular attention should be focused on ensuring that nonproliferation and arms control views get to the Secretary of State and the President. Both not only need advice but someone accountable in these areas. Existing law makes provision for such advice but it has proven difficult to implement those provisions effectively. Relying on personal relationships can work up to a point, but as personalities change, other priorities intrude, and administrations change, a more enduring channel and focus not dependent upon personal relationships is needed. Decisions on these structural issues are critical in the transition period so the new administration can hit the ground running. Iran and North Korea, among others, will not delay their proliferation progress while a new administration organizes itself. Delaying decisions until after the inauguration risks subordinating structural questions to the crisis of the day or decisions being thwarted by ``turf'' issues as political appointees are put into place. A variety of alternatives should be considered ranging from creating a special office attached to the Secretary, or creating a separate agency within the State Department or an independent agency. Ensuring the U.S. Government Has the Capacity To Meet Critical Nonproliferation and Arms Control Challenges This short Report which is the result of meetings and discussions between a number of experts focuses on improving the Nation's capacity for dealing with the increasingly complex issues associated with nonproliferation and arms control. It lays out a number of alternative strategies for improving the Government's currently attenuated capacities for effective nonproliferation and arms control action. I. Introduction All three major presidential candidates have endorsed the following objectives: (i.) maintaining and strengthening the nuclear nonproliferation regime and (ii.) pursuing nuclear arms control measures with Russia and others. Regrettably, what the next President will find is a diminished capability within the Executive Branch to achieve either objective. The historical leadership role of the United States in nonproliferation and arms control has been severely downgraded and the nonproliferation regime significantly weakened. Along with this overall decline, there has been a loss of valuable expertise and bureaucratic structure diminishing the capacity of the United States to pursue nonproliferation and arms control measures. Restoring U.S. leadership in these areas will require a personal commitment by the new President. Within the Executive Branch, there will need to be a strong organization to execute policies and be accountable to the White House. This paper looks at key organizational issues that must be met, particularly in the State Department, if the new administration is to meet its nonproliferation and arms control objectives. II. Critical Proliferation Challenges The 1968 Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) is the foundation for global cooperation in this area. Its primary goal is to decrease the risk of nuclear war by preventing the spread of nuclear weapons. It also obligates the five states which the NPT recognizes as possessing nuclear weapons--U.S., Russia, UK, France and China--to work toward nuclear disarmament The urgency of dealing with the threat posed by nuclear weapons has been highlighted recently by former senior officials of both political parties--Secretaries of State Kissinger and Shultz, Secretary of Defense Perry, and Senator Nunn--who have called for renewed efforts to work towards a nuclear weapon free world, arguing that ``the world is now on a precipice of a new and dangerous nuclear era.'' Their agenda, known as the Hoover plan after the Stanford institute where the group meets, is built around the NPT and focuses on U.S.-Russian nuclear arms control as well as on specific nonproliferation measures. No vision of a nuclear weapon free world or major progress toward that goal can be achieved without an intensive focus on both nonproliferation and arms control. The three major candidates for the Presidency have called for strengthening the NPT and other elements of the nonproliferation regime and for reducing the nuclear arsenals of the United States and other nuclear powers; two have endorsed specific portions of the Hoover plan. Any new administration will likely focus on a wide variety of other nuclear-related challenges as well, e.g., Iran and North Korea; protecting against the theft or diversion of nuclear material; strengthening export control and interdiction activities; and developing nuclear fuel cycle strategies to reduce the spread of sensitive nuclear facilities. It may reconsider the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, which the Senate failed to endorse in 1999, and give higher priority to U.S-Russian cooperation on strategic nuclear and missile defense issues and to a fissile material cutoff treaty. The new administration will have to continue specific measures to prevent terrorists from acquiring nuclear, radiological, chemical and biological weapons. III. Structural Factors The first year of a new administration offers a unique opportunity for progress. Grasping that opportunity requires diligent preparations during the transition period. To prepare, the President-elect should establish a task force to identify key substantive goals and devise a plan for the creation of nonproliferation and arms control structures to achieve those goals. The task force should be led by an individual of stature who is directly accountable to the President-elect and well-known to the Congress. The task force could continue beyond the inauguration but should not be permanent. After the inauguration, the task force leader might be directly attached to the White House with the assignment of ensuring that substantive and structural goals are achieved. As cabinet departments with equities in nonproliferation and arms control have appointees put into place, a senior official in each department should be identified to work with the relevant White House and NSC officials. The NSC structure must include interagency groups responsible for integrating the activities and resources of each department, promoting transparency and information flow among agencies, and ensuring the input of the intelligence community. The appointment of a Deputy National Security Adviser for Nonproliferation and Arms Control would demonstrate the priority attached to these issues and allow for greater coordination of interagency activities. The task force must pay special attention to the organizational structure under the Secretary of State, as State will bear the brunt of the work. State must be capable of performing a wide range of daily activities such as monitoring information, crafting and implementing policy initiatives, anticipating problems, advising high-level political officials, coordinating with other agencies, consulting with Congress, informing the public, and most importantly engaging in extensive diplomacy to maintain and strengthen the nonproliferation regime. Effective nonproliferation can only be achieved if the U.S. works closely with others. A good organizational structure will help to set priorities, allocate resources, maintain the quality and morale of staff, and get issues to decision-makers in a timely manner. Among the key determinants of an effective structure are: (i) enough senior policy officials and supporting bureaus to focus attention on the full range of issues; (ii) an experienced multi-disciplinary career staff with a high percentage of civil servants including physical science officers; and (iii) high-level channels for getting views to the Secretary of State and President. As shown below in Section IV, the current structure, which reflects the priorities and approach of this Administration, is entirely inadequate for pursuit of a more comprehensive approach by the new administration. The suggestions offered in Section IV do not require legislation but should lead to near-term improvements in State's capacity. Even though not required, the administration and Congress may decide that it would be beneficial to codify some of these Section IV changes to ensure that the United States maintains over the long term a high level of capability in these critical areas. Section V looks at other possible legislative approaches that would create either a semi-autonomous agency within the State Department or a separate agency for nonproliferation and arms control with an independence similar to that possessed by the former Arms Control and Disarmament Agency (ACDA), which was merged with the State Department in 1999. If not already decided by campaign commitments, the President-elect should decide during the transition whether to pursue a separate agency or limit structural reforms to near-term changes that do not require legislation. Even if the President decides on a separate agency, some improvements in the State structure will still be desirable while awaiting the necessary legislative action. Thorough consultations with the Congress should occur regardless of which direction is chosen. IV. Suggested Changes to the Current State Department Organizational Structure A. Bureaus and Special Representatives At the outset of this Administration, three separate bureaus in State dealt with nonproliferation, arms control, and verification and compliance. The arms control bureau was abolished in 2005. Some of the arms control functions, e.g., START, were taken over by the verification and compliance bureau but that bureau's duties remain largely verification and compliance as prescribed by law. Other arms control duties were transferred to the former nonproliferation bureau, now renamed International Security and Nonproliferation. A quick inventory of this bureau's jurisdiction includes: six treaties, five export control regimes, three international organizations that specialize in nonproliferation or arms control topics, conventional arms proliferation, missile proliferation, missile defense, the Proliferation Security Initiative, implementation of several U.N. Security Council resolutions and negotiation of resolutions in the U.N. General Assembly, combating nuclear terrorism, country strategies, cooperative threat reduction in the former U.S.S.R., and securing and disposing of fissile material. Diluting the focus of the bureau charged with nonproliferation by adding such areas as missile defense and General Assembly resolutions makes it much more difficult to achieve priority nonproliferation objectives. Abolishing the arms control focus and scattering its remains renders it unlikely that a renewed arms control agenda as proposed in the Hoover plan can be successfully pursued. Finally, while verification and compliance remain important, the need for U.S. global engagement on nonproliferation and arms control measures should have higher priority and greater focus. Suggestions 1. Establish a bureau focused solely on nonproliferation by shifting all non-core duties, such as missile defense and General Assembly resolutions, to a bureau with an arms control focus. 2. Revitalize the organizational structure for arms control by bringing back a bureau solely focused on arms control. Given the difference in priorities in 2005 and what will exist in 2009, new priorities can best be met by creating such a single-focus bureau. 3. Through administrative action, limit the activities of the verification and compliance bureau to the minimum necessary to fulfill its statutory duties. The goal should be to eliminate bureaucratic infighting and free up staff from this bureau for high priority nonproliferation and arms control activities. 4. If there are substantial obstacles to near-term creation of an arms control focused bureau, then consolidate those functions in the verification and compliance bureau effectively making it the arms control and verification bureau while seeking a long-term structure. This approach should include clearly defining the verification role as suggested above. 5. Utilize existing statutory authority to appoint ``Special Representatives of the President'' at the ambassadorial level, with at least one dedicated to nonproliferation treaties and related activities; and another to the reemerging arms control agenda. They would work with the assistant secretaries for nonproliferation and arms control and be responsible for negotiations, conferences, and consulting with other governments. B. Staffing The State Department should have skills and experience relevant to bilateral and multilateral diplomacy and negotiations; the development, testing and manufacture of nuclear, chemical, biological weapons and their delivery systems; the civil nuclear fuel cycle; and to the implementation of interdiction measures, export controls, treaties and international organizations. An interdisciplinary group of civil servants from the physical and social sciences is needed along with foreign service officers (FSOs) and detailees from the military services. This mix has worked well in the past. Unfortunately, there has been a significant loss of civil servants from the State Department in recent years, and recruiting physical scientists in particular faces strong competitive pressures outside the government. Moreover, with the elimination of ACDA, it has become more difficult to sustain civil service career patterns up through the office director position. Within the relevant bureaus, the State Department has reduced the number of senior executive service positions (SES) for civil servants and several office director positions have gone to FSOs. Such officers have much to offer, including in some cases as office directors or other senior positions. But FSOs must meet the qualifications of the positions, and in most leadership positions, including office directors; the qualifications require a high level of expertise in the field. Regrettably, the foreign service creates few incentives for FSOs to obtain the requisite knowledge for leadership positions in nonproliferation and arms control. Suggestions 1. Halt any further ``bleeding'' of the career nonproliferation and arms control staff. Encourage those who transferred out of these jobs in recent years to return. Promote a civil service career path leading to office director positions, including at the SES level. Launch a recruiting program to hire the next generation of civil service specialists, including in relevant scientific and technical fields. Seek special hiring authority, if necessary, to recruit individuals with technical competence and to tap the skills of those officers who have retired from State. 2. Develop the technical competence of FSOs by creating a career path for nonproliferation and arms control with a protocol of training and assignments in these areas. For all FSOs, regardless of their career path, at least one assignment in nonproliferation and arms control or other functional bureaus should be a factor in promotion decisions to mid or senior level FSO positions. Such assignments could reduce some cultural barriers that exist between the regional and functional areas. C. Advising the Secretary of State and the President Competing interests are a fact of life at the highest political levels and it is important that those advocating on behalf of controlling nuclear weapons be heard. The Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security (``the Under Secretary'') is the most senior State official with clearly defined responsibilities for nonproliferation and arms control, although that position's mandate covers other issues including security assistance and conventional arms. This official is subordinate to the Deputy Secretary of State, is one of six under secretaries and ranks below the Under Secretary for Political Affairs who oversees the powerful regional bureaus. This senior level structure is further complicated by policy officials attached directly to the Office of the Secretary of State for diverse areas, such as reconstruction and stabilization, foreign assistance, development aid, counter-terrorism, and global AIDS programs. Seeking to ensure that nonproliferation and arms control were not lost among the competing interests, the legislation merging ACDA into State authorized the Under Secretary to assume the former ACDA Director's role of senior adviser to the Secretary and the President on arms control and nonproliferation and to attend NSC meetings at the President's direction (22 U.S.C. Sec. 2651 a. (b) (2)) (emphasis added). Use of this authority, however, was not embraced by the current Administration. It has long been clear that the State Department structure tends to favor regional interests. This tendency is reflected in the fact that the under secretary to whom the regional bureaus report is the third ranking official in the department. This does not mean that functional interests must give way to regional interests but it does mean that a Secretary of State or a President must ensure that functional priorities are clearly understood and always given appropriate weight. For that to happen, a mechanism must be found to ensure that nonproliferation and arms control equities are represented. Different approaches--with varying degrees of success--have been taken by different administrations. Some administrations have relied upon the personal relationships among the relevant assistant secretaries, under secretaries, the Deputy Secretary and the Secretary to ensure that nonproliferation and arms control are accorded adequate priority. Others have created various additional mechanisms such as an ambassador- at-large to obtain this result. Of course, up to 1999, the ACDA Director had the rank of Deputy Secretary of State and the authority to advise the Secretary and the President. Relying solely on personal relationships places at risk over time the capability to sustain the attention of the Secretary of State as personalities change and the inevitable crush of foreign policy issues competes for the Secretary's attention. Continuity of attention to these critical issues could be enhanced by having a structure not dependent upon personalities. Set forth in the suggestions immediately below, which would not require new legislation, and in Section V, which would require new legislation, are various alternatives that should be considered. They could supplement any NSC or White House structural components set up to advise the President. As noted earlier, decisions with respect to these issues should be taken during the transition--delaying those decisions until after the inauguration risks critical substantive issues crowding out attention to structural questions and ``turf'' mentalities developing that hamper organizational change. Suggestions 1. Establish procedures to implement the Under Secretary's already existing statutory role as senior adviser to the Secretary and the President on nonproliferation and arms control matters. This would allow the Under Secretary to weigh in on major policy questions, including with the President. It would elevate this position in relation to the other under secretaries. Implementing such an approach would work only if understood and accepted up front by all involved, including the President. Actual use of this authority by the Under Secretary with the President is likely to be rare, in any event, given this person's subordinate position to the Secretary. 2. Establish a position in the Secretary's office such as Coordinator, Ambassador-at-Large, or Special Adviser to the Secretary of State and President, that would focus on nuclear policy or nonproliferation. The mandate could be limited to a few critical topics, e.g. Iran, North Korea, anti-nuclear terrorism, and/or elements of the Hoover plan, or could be broad enough to focus on all aspects of nuclear proliferation. This would elevate nuclear issues to the highest level in State and permit more focus than the Under Secretary, whose mandate is far broader. This sort of arrangement was used with varying degrees of success during the Carter, Reagan and Bush I administrations. It would require a high degree of coordination between the Under Secretary and the new position, as well as with the relevant assistant secretaries. It would not create any clearer path to the President for views that are contrary to the Secretary's. V. Separate Agency State and ACDA working in tandem over nearly three decades were able to sustain a high level of U.S. global leadership in nonproliferation and arms control. This was in large part due to ACDA's exclusive focus on the mission, its status as an independent sub-cabinet agency with statutory authority to advise the Secretary of State and the President, and a strong cadre of civil service experts. The ten years since ACDA's demise have seen a decline in U.S. diplomacy in this area. That said, there seems little doubt that ACDA-like resources and strengths will be needed for the foreseeable future. The question is will a strengthened State structure as suggested above in Section IV be adequate to the task over the long run or should the new Administration seek legislation to transfer the nonproliferation and arms control functions to a separate agency? Two different approaches to a separate agency are set forth below. A. Separate Agency, But Part of State A semi-autonomous agency within State would be similar to the concept of the National Nuclear Security Administration within the Department of Energy. The agency's Director would be the nonproliferation and arms control adviser to the Secretary, and have a rank equivalent to the Deputy Secretary of State. The Director would also have the right to communicate directly with the President. The agency would work closely with State regional bureaus and related functional bureaus, but there would be no need for additional nonproliferation and arms control offices elsewhere in State since this agency would represent the coordinated view of the State Department on these issues. This approach would ensure optimal access to the Secretary. The agency's unique identity and mission should improve the recruitment and retention of the diverse professional staff needed, including scientists and other technical experts. The elevation of nonproliferation and arms control within State will make clear to other governments the importance placed on these topics by the United States and lead to regular consultations with friends and allies. A separate agency is the best way to promote an enduring focus on nonproliferation and arms control policy, in contrast to embedding it in the Department's traditional structure with the vast array of competing interests and predominant focus on country and regional factors. On the other hand, establishing a separate agency would require legislation and presently Congress is focusing on structural issues relevant to post-conflict stabilization and reconstruction, development aid, and foreign assistance. Some argue that a separate agency is not needed; and that State can be structured so that these issues get the attention they deserve and the Secretary gets the necessary advice. B. Independent Agency The principal difference from alternative A would be the agency's independence from State. The agency's director would have a seat at NSC meetings dealing with relevant issues, and the agency would participate as a separate entity in interagency deliberations. The agency would have a status similar to that of the former ACDA, which would imply a return to a pre-1999 situation where State had its own nonproliferation and arms control offices. The duties and structure of the new agency, however, would have to reflect the priorities and threats of today. Many of the arguments in alternative A are also applicable here. In addition, this approach is the only one guaranteed to ensure that the President could hear the nonproliferation and arms control perspective even when the Secretary of State has a different view. Equally important, having an independent agency would make certain that unfiltered nonproliferation and arms control views are considered at all levels of interagency policy formulation, a situation that gave ACDA influence. On the other hand, as experience with ACDA demonstrated, the option of going to the President in opposition to the Secretary of State can be more theoretical than real, and might rarely be exercised. An independent agency would result in State creating its own nonproliferation and arms control officials and they would have more influence on the Secretary on a day-to-day basis than would a separate agency. Some in Congress would also not be receptive to creating a new agency, believing that more than a decade is needed to determine whether State can effectively do the job on its own. VI. Conclusion The above suggestions are, we feel, both practical and necessary although which approach to advising the Secretary of State and the President is actually taken up by a new administration remains a topic for debate and discussion, which we hope will occur over the coming months. These suggestions are offered not as firm conclusions but as alternative ways of improving the country's capacities for planning and implementing a coordinated and flexible, but above all effective, strategy for dealing with nonproliferation and arms control issues.

Mr. AKAKA

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

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, next week Friday will be Fourth of July, 2008. In 1776, our forefathers forged our country's independence, marking the Fourth of July as our Nation's birthday. Today, 232 years later, we commemorate the democratic freedoms set forth by the signing of the Declaration of Independence. Historically, many before me have taken this moment to reflect upon and celebrate the accomplishments of years passed and the promise of years to come. And while there is much to reflect upon and celebrate, I would like to take this moment to recognize all Americans who, in their own way, work to preserve our liberties and promote democracy. Today, while we remember the day that 56 individuals gathered in Pennsylvania at Independence Hall--we are reminded of a critical moment in time when our forefathers shaped a new union, one that broke from the traditional. Our Nation was built on the fundamental principle: ``That all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.'' As our forefathers endured a life of struggle, but envisioned a life of freedom, we as a Nation must keep in mind the sacrifices that they and others made and the hardships that preserve them. As we honor individuals who contribute to upholding our civil liberties, we must also take this opportunity to appreciate them for the courage they have displayed to preserve our independence and our freedom. From our armed servicemembers who stand ready to defend our Nation, to 18-year-olds perpetuating our democracy by registering to vote, and to people of all backgrounds around the Nation reaffirming the principle of our union on a daily basis--to all, I pay tribute. Their individual contribution allows us to celebrate our independence every day.