Daniel Akaka

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, when I began my chairmanship of the Veterans' Affairs committee this January, I assured my colleagues that we would renew our focus on the need for cooperation and collaboration between the Department of Defense and the Department of Veterans Affairs. As we look at the way these two entities work together, it is important that we highlight the good work and progress being made. One example of progress and excellence in collaboration can be found at the Army Medical Department Center and School, located at Fort Sam Houston, which trains Army, Air Force, and VA nurses. This year, U.S. News and World Report ranked the Army Medical Department Center and School second in the Nation for their anesthesia nursing program. They missed first place by just a tenth of one point, and have improved their score from 3.8 out of 5.0 in 2003, to 4.0 out of 5.0 in 2007. This notable achievement brings added credibility to their already prestigious program. Since 2004, VA and DOD have partnered to train VA nurse anaesthetists to work in the VA health care system, the largest health care system in the country. The first class of VA nurse anesthetists recently graduated from the Army Medical Department Center and School. Their graduation represents what I hope will be a steady flow of highly qualified VA nurse anesthetists using their skills and knowledge to give veterans the high-quality health care they have earned through service. I realize that, with the private sector offering six-figure salaries for nurse anesthetists, those who chose to work within the military and VA do so not for personal gain. They stay to respond to the higher calling of caring for servicemembers and veterans in their times of need, and are to be commended for their dedication and their work. In that spirit, I say `e ho'omaika'i ia'oukou, or congratulations, to the graduates, students, faculty, staff, and others who have worked to make the Army Medical Department Center and School the success that it is today.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, today, I am reintroducing the Taxpayer Abuse Prevention Act. Earned income tax credit (EITC) benefits intended for working families are significantly reduced by the use of refund anticipation loans (RALs), which typically carry three or four digit interest rates. In 2005, EITC filers accounted for more than half of the refund anticipation loans issued despite being only 17 percent of the taxpayer population. EITC recipients lost an estimated $649 million in loan fees plus application or documentation fees in 2005. The EITC is intended to help working families meet their food, clothing, housing, transportation, and education needs. Working families cannot afford to lose a significant portion of their EITC funds by expensive, short-term, RALs. The interest rates and fees charged on RALs are not justified because of the short length of time that these loans are outstanding and the minimal risk they present. These loans carry little risk because of the Debt Indicator program. The Debt Indicator (DI) is a service provided by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) that informs the lender whether or not an applicant owes Federal or State taxes, child support, student loans, or other government obligations, which assists tax preparers in ascertaining the ability of applicants to obtain their full refund so that the RAL is repaid. The Department of the Treasury should not be facilitating these predatory loans that allow tax preparers to reap outrageous profits by exploiting working families. Unfortunately too many working families are susceptible to predatory lending because they are left out of the financial mainstream. Between 25 and 56 million adults are unbanked, or not using mainstream, insured financial institutions. The unbanked rely on alternative financial service providers to obtain cash from checks, pay bills, send remittances, utilize payday loans, and obtain credit. Many of the unbanked are low-and moderate-income families that can ill afford to have their earnings unnecessarily diminished by 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 legislation will protect consumers against predatory loans, reduce the involvement of the Department of the Treasury in facilitating the exploitation of taxpayers, and expand access to opportunities for saving and lending at mainstream financial services. My bill prohibits refund anticipation loans that utilize EITC benefits. Other Federal benefits, such as Social Security, have similar restrictions to ensure that the beneficiaries receive the intended benefit. My bill also limits several of the objectionable practices of RAL providers. It will prohibit lenders from using tax refunds to collect outstanding obligations for previous RALs. In addition, mandatory arbitration clauses for RALs that utilize federal tax refunds would be prohibited to ensure that consumers have the ability to take future legal action if necessary. It is troubling that the Department of the Treasury facilitates refund anticipation loans. In 1995, the use of the DI was suspended because of massive fraud in e-filed returns with RALs. The use of the DI was reinstated in 1999. Use of the Debt Indicator should once again be stopped. The DI is helping tax preparers make excessive profits from low- and moderate-income taxpayers who utilize RALs. The IRS should not aide unscrupulous preparers who take the earned benefit away from low- income families. My bill terminates the DI program. In addition, this bill removes the incentive to meet congressionally mandated electronic filing goals by facilitating the exploitation of taxpayers. My bill would exclude any electronically filed tax returns resulting in tax refunds distributed by refund anticipation loans from being counted towards the goal established by the IRS Restructuring and Reform Act of 1998, which is to have at least 80 percent of all returns filed electronically by 2007. My bill also expands access to mainstream financial services. Electronic Transfer Accounts (ETA) are low-cost accounts at banks and credit unions intended for recipients of certain federal benefit payments. Currently, ETAs are provided for recipients of other federal benefits such as Social Security payments. My bill expands the eligibility for ETAs to include EITC benefits. These accounts will allow taxpayers to receive direct deposit refunds into an account without the need for a refund anticipation loan. Furthermore, my bill would mandate that low- and moderate-income taxpayers be provided opportunities to open low-cost accounts at federally insured banks or credit unions via appropriate tax forms. Providing taxpayers with the option of opening a bank or credit union account through the use of tax forms provides an alternative to RALs and immediate access to financial opportunities found at banks and credit unions. I want to thank my colleagues, Senators Bingaman and Durbin for cosponsoring this legislation. I also appreciate the efforts of Representative Jan Schakowsky who will be reintroducing the companion legislation in the other body. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the Taxpayer Abuse Prevention Act be printed in the Record. I urge my colleagues to support this important legislation that will restrict predatory RALs and expand access to mainstream financial services.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, today, I am reintroducing the Taxpayer Abuse Prevention Act. Earned income tax credit (EITC) benefits intended for working families are significantly reduced by the use of refund anticipation loans (RALs), which typically carry three or four digit interest rates. In 2005, EITC filers accounted for more than half of the refund anticipation loans issued despite being only 17 percent of the taxpayer population. EITC recipients lost an estimated $649 million in loan fees plus application or documentation fees in 2005. The EITC is intended to help working families meet their food, clothing, housing, transportation, and education needs. Working families cannot afford to lose a significant portion of their EITC funds by expensive, short-term, RALs. The interest rates and fees charged on RALs are not justified because of the short length of time that these loans are outstanding and the minimal risk they present. These loans carry little risk because of the Debt Indicator program. The Debt Indicator (DI) is a service provided by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) that informs the lender whether or not an applicant owes Federal or State taxes, child support, student loans, or other government obligations, which assists tax preparers in ascertaining the ability of applicants to obtain their full refund so that the RAL is repaid. The Department of the Treasury should not be facilitating these predatory loans that allow tax preparers to reap outrageous profits by exploiting working families. Unfortunately too many working families are susceptible to predatory lending because they are left out of the financial mainstream. Between 25 and 56 million adults are unbanked, or not using mainstream, insured financial institutions. The unbanked rely on alternative financial service providers to obtain cash from checks, pay bills, send remittances, utilize payday loans, and obtain credit. Many of the unbanked are low-and moderate-income families that can ill afford to have their earnings unnecessarily diminished by 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 legislation will protect consumers against predatory loans, reduce the involvement of the Department of the Treasury in facilitating the exploitation of taxpayers, and expand access to opportunities for saving and lending at mainstream financial services. My bill prohibits refund anticipation loans that utilize EITC benefits. Other Federal benefits, such as Social Security, have similar restrictions to ensure that the beneficiaries receive the intended benefit. My bill also limits several of the objectionable practices of RAL providers. It will prohibit lenders from using tax refunds to collect outstanding obligations for previous RALs. In addition, mandatory arbitration clauses for RALs that utilize federal tax refunds would be prohibited to ensure that consumers have the ability to take future legal action if necessary. It is troubling that the Department of the Treasury facilitates refund anticipation loans. In 1995, the use of the DI was suspended because of massive fraud in e-filed returns with RALs. The use of the DI was reinstated in 1999. Use of the Debt Indicator should once again be stopped. The DI is helping tax preparers make excessive profits from low- and moderate-income taxpayers who utilize RALs. The IRS should not aide unscrupulous preparers who take the earned benefit away from low- income families. My bill terminates the DI program. In addition, this bill removes the incentive to meet congressionally mandated electronic filing goals by facilitating the exploitation of taxpayers. My bill would exclude any electronically filed tax returns resulting in tax refunds distributed by refund anticipation loans from being counted towards the goal established by the IRS Restructuring and Reform Act of 1998, which is to have at least 80 percent of all returns filed electronically by 2007. My bill also expands access to mainstream financial services. Electronic Transfer Accounts (ETA) are low-cost accounts at banks and credit unions intended for recipients of certain federal benefit payments. Currently, ETAs are provided for recipients of other federal benefits such as Social Security payments. My bill expands the eligibility for ETAs to include EITC benefits. These accounts will allow taxpayers to receive direct deposit refunds into an account without the need for a refund anticipation loan. Furthermore, my bill would mandate that low- and moderate-income taxpayers be provided opportunities to open low-cost accounts at federally insured banks or credit unions via appropriate tax forms. Providing taxpayers with the option of opening a bank or credit union account through the use of tax forms provides an alternative to RALs and immediate access to financial opportunities found at banks and credit unions. I want to thank my colleagues, Senators Bingaman and Durbin for cosponsoring this legislation. I also appreciate the efforts of Representative Jan Schakowsky who will be reintroducing the companion legislation in the other body. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the Taxpayer Abuse Prevention Act be printed in the Record. I urge my colleagues to support this important legislation that will restrict predatory RALs and expand access to mainstream financial services.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I am proud to be a cosponsor of S. 5, the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act. We must enact this legislation so that researchers are able to move forward on ethical, federally funded research projects that develop better treatments for those suffering from diseases. Human embryonic stem cells have such great potential because they have the unique ability in developing into almost any type of cell or tissue in the body. Stem cell research holds great promise to develop possible cures or improved treatments for a wide range of diseases and injuries, such as diabetes, cancer, Parkinson's disease, Alzheimer's, autism, heart disease, spinal cord injuries, and many other afflictions. We must not limit research that could improve the lives of so many suffering from diseases that we have limited ability to prevent, treat, or cure. In August 2001, the President implemented an unworkable, flawed policy that made a small number of human embryonic stem cell lines eligible. The President's restrictions on stem cell research prevent Federal funds from being used for research on newer, more promising stem cell lines. In addition, embryonic stem cell lines now eligible for Federal funding are not genetically diverse enough to realize the full therapeutic potential of this research. The President's stem cell policy prevents researchers from moving ahead in an area of research that is very promising. We must enact this legislation to help move research forward that could alleviate the pain and suffering of individuals. If we fail to enact S. 5, our researchers are likely to fall further behind the work being done in other countries. Australia, Canada, Finland, France, Japan, Singapore, Sweden, and the United Kingdom have provided substantial governmental support for stem cell research. Too many of my constituents suffer from Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, diabetes, and other diseases. S. 5 provides some hope for the development of improved treatments that could improve the lives of so many people.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, last week I was pleased to join Senator Hagel and 66 other Senators in introducing S. Res. 122, commemorating the 25th anniversary of the construction and dedication of the Vietnam Veterans Memorial. As the unanimous approval of this resolution suggests, showing respect for the memorial and those it honors is a unifying action. But I remember that it has not always been so. For a time, it was controversial to speak in support of the memorial that honors and recognizes the more than 58,000 servicemembers who gave their lives in Vietnam and the more than 3 million men and women who served there. In fact, for some time it was even controversial to support the war's veterans themselves. As our troops returned home from Vietnam, far too many returned to face the ridicule and contempt of their fellow Americans. When the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Fund was organized in 1979 for the purpose of establishing a memorial for those who served in the war, both living and dead, it faced an uphill battle. We can all be grateful that supporters persevered. In the 25 years since the Vietnam Veterans Memorial was dedicated, we have made much progress as a country and can now honor Vietnam veterans and the memorial that honors them without dissension. Known to many as ``the Wall,'' it has become the most popular memorial in our Nation's Capital, attracting an estimated 4.4 million visitors each year. Many of them leave behind offerings to the men and women lost in Vietnam, such as letters, medals, birthday cards and roses. These offerings, which now number more than 100,000, are preserved at the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Collection. People visit the Wall for many reasons: to honor, to heal, and to be reminded of the human costs of war. One veteran described the Memorial this way: ``It's a quiet place where I can stand and remember my friends. And that's all I would like to do.'' Like so many other Americans, I am grateful for the healing power of the Wall. May it continue to honor, heal, and remind us all of the consequences of war.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I am delighted to reintroduce the Free Internet Filing Act as the tax filing deadline approaches. The bill requires the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to provide universal access to individual taxpayers filing their tax returns directly through the IRS Web site. I thank Senator Bingaman for cosponsoring this bill and working with me on taxpayer rights issues. It is frustrating that individual taxpayers completing their own returns are still not able to electronically file directly with the IRS. Taxpayers are dependent on commercial preparers to electronically file their taxes. If taxpayers take the time necessary to prepare their returns by themselves, they must be given the option of electronically filing directly with the IRS. My legislation would make this direct filing possible. The current system, the Free File Alliance, provides only a select group of taxpayers with the ability to file electronically for free using third party intermediaries. The current Free File Alliance agreement is a failure because it leaves out too many taxpayers. Taxpayers that make more than $52,000 are not eligible. Taxpayers should not have the additional worry associated with sharing their private financial information with a tax preparation company. In an era when there have been so many electronic breaches of financial information, taxpayers should not be forced to hand over their private information if they want to electronically file their return with the IRS. Taxpayers should not lose out on the benefits of electronic filing simply because they are worried about sending their data to third parties. IRS Commissioner Mark Everson has stated, ``E-file is the fastest, safest, and most accurate way to file a tax return. People will get their returns faster through E-file. E-file greatly reduces the chances for making an error compared to filing a paper 1040.'' I simply want to provide every individual taxpayer the ability to electronically file their taxes at no cost and without having to use a commercial tax preparer. My legislation will lead to an increase in the number of electronically filed returns. Approximately 45 million returns prepared using software are mailed in rather than electronically filed. With universal access to free e-file, this number could be substantially reduced. Electronic filing helps taxpayers receive their refunds faster than mailing in paper returns. My legislation would also reduce errors and IRS administrative costs. According to Mr. Bert Dumars, the Director of the IRS Electronic Tax Administration, it costs 55 to 75 cents to process an electronic return while it costs about two dollars to process a paper return. In addition, the error rate for electronic returns is one percent while the error rate for paper returns is 20 percent. We have an obligation to make free electronic filing available to all individual taxpayers. Electronic filing benefits both taxpayers and the IRS. I have appreciated the attention paid to this issue by Senator Baucus and Senator Grassley. I will continue to work with my colleagues to enact the Free Internet Filing Act. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record. I also ask unanimous consent that a letter of support from the Hawaii Alliance for Community-Based Economic Development be included in the Record. Finally, I ask unanimous consent that a letter of support from the National Consumer Law Center, Consumer Federation of America, U.S. Public Interest Research Group, California Reinvestment Coalition, Center for Economic Progress, Consumer Action, and the Neighborhood Economic Development Advocacy Project, be printed in the Record.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I also wish to honor the centennial celebration of the University of Hawaii's College of Tropical Agriculture and Human Resources. The College of Tropical Agriculture and Human Resources, CTAHR, is the founding college of the University of Hawall system and its flagship campus, the University of Hawaii at Manoa. In 1907, the Hawaii Territorial Legislature established the College of Agriculture and Mechanical Arts under the auspices of the Morrill Act as a land-grant college. The first year that classes were offered, in 1908, the college provided agriculture, household economics, science, and engineering classes, all of which remain part of CTAHR's academic programs to this day. From its humble beginnings in 1907 to today, CTAHR continues to provide an excellent education and career development opportunities for students. CTAHR has developed a solid foundation in research and educational programs that support tropical agricultural systems and in turn foster viable communities, a diversified economy, and a healthy environment. CTAHR's researchers, instructors, and extension personnel continue to research and develop new crops that will reduce our reliance on imported foods, improve food security, and diversify Hawaii's agriculture to explore alternative markets. In addition, the college has played an integral role in further enhancing our understanding of environmental science and advancing agricultural and resource management approaches that conserve and protect Hawaii's natural resources. CTAHR offers a diverse curriculum that continues to prepare an educated and experienced workforce to meet the State of Hawaii's environmental, agricultural, animal science, dietetic, engineering, and human resource industry needs. CTAHR empowers both students and the public to learn about and proactively engage in better managing the limited resources of our islands. Research conducted by its faculty and through its undergraduate, master, and doctoral programs contribute not only to our local knowledge but in many cases represent field breakthroughs and establishment of cutting edge technologies. CTAHR will continue to not only enhance the physical landscape of our islands and improve the quality of life for all in Hawaii and across the Nation. Again, I honor the University of Hawaii's College of Tropical Agriculture and Human Resources for 100 years of service to the people of Hawaii, the Pacific region, and the Nation in its dedication to the development of sustainable agriculture and human resources programs to meet the needs of our changing communities.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I am delighted to reintroduce the Free Internet Filing Act as the tax filing deadline approaches. The bill requires the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to provide universal access to individual taxpayers filing their tax returns directly through the IRS Web site. I thank Senator Bingaman for cosponsoring this bill and working with me on taxpayer rights issues. It is frustrating that individual taxpayers completing their own returns are still not able to electronically file directly with the IRS. Taxpayers are dependent on commercial preparers to electronically file their taxes. If taxpayers take the time necessary to prepare their returns by themselves, they must be given the option of electronically filing directly with the IRS. My legislation would make this direct filing possible. The current system, the Free File Alliance, provides only a select group of taxpayers with the ability to file electronically for free using third party intermediaries. The current Free File Alliance agreement is a failure because it leaves out too many taxpayers. Taxpayers that make more than $52,000 are not eligible. Taxpayers should not have the additional worry associated with sharing their private financial information with a tax preparation company. In an era when there have been so many electronic breaches of financial information, taxpayers should not be forced to hand over their private information if they want to electronically file their return with the IRS. Taxpayers should not lose out on the benefits of electronic filing simply because they are worried about sending their data to third parties. IRS Commissioner Mark Everson has stated, ``E-file is the fastest, safest, and most accurate way to file a tax return. People will get their returns faster through E-file. E-file greatly reduces the chances for making an error compared to filing a paper 1040.'' I simply want to provide every individual taxpayer the ability to electronically file their taxes at no cost and without having to use a commercial tax preparer. My legislation will lead to an increase in the number of electronically filed returns. Approximately 45 million returns prepared using software are mailed in rather than electronically filed. With universal access to free e-file, this number could be substantially reduced. Electronic filing helps taxpayers receive their refunds faster than mailing in paper returns. My legislation would also reduce errors and IRS administrative costs. According to Mr. Bert Dumars, the Director of the IRS Electronic Tax Administration, it costs 55 to 75 cents to process an electronic return while it costs about two dollars to process a paper return. In addition, the error rate for electronic returns is one percent while the error rate for paper returns is 20 percent. We have an obligation to make free electronic filing available to all individual taxpayers. Electronic filing benefits both taxpayers and the IRS. I have appreciated the attention paid to this issue by Senator Baucus and Senator Grassley. I will continue to work with my colleagues to enact the Free Internet Filing Act. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record. I also ask unanimous consent that a letter of support from the Hawaii Alliance for Community-Based Economic Development be included in the Record. Finally, I ask unanimous consent that a letter of support from the National Consumer Law Center, Consumer Federation of America, U.S. Public Interest Research Group, California Reinvestment Coalition, Center for Economic Progress, Consumer Action, and the Neighborhood Economic Development Advocacy Project, be printed in the Record.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I too appreciate the willingness of the distinguished manager to consider our concerns, and his willingness to work with us during conference to find an acceptable solution. amendment no. 697

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I share the concerns of my colleagues. I have met with representatives of the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, CNMI, on this matter and understand the risks that their economy is currently facing. We in Hawaii are particularly concerned that an inflexible approach to minimum wage increases in the CNMI and American Samoa could seriously disrupt those economies, cause unnecessary hardship, including the need for residents to emigrate to Hawaii or the mainland to find new job opportunities.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, on January 17, 2007, Senator Inouye and I introduced S. 310, the Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act of 2007 to extend the Federal policy of self-governance and self- determination to Hawaii's indigenous people. This measure is of critical importance to the people of Hawaii. It would, at long last, clarify the existing legal and political relationship of Native Hawaiians with the United States, allowing for the formation of a government-to-government relationship.

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, the senior Senator from Hawaii is absolutely correct, and I appreciate both his comments and that of our majority leader about my efforts to date. I first introduced this bill, together with the members of Hawaii's Congressional Delegation, in 1999. And, I have introduced a similar bill every Congress. In each Congress, the bill has been favorably reported by the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs, and its companion measure has been favorably reported by the House Committee on Natural Resources. During the 109th Congress, Senator Inouye and I were successful in filing a cloture motion to proceed to the bill. This procedural action required 60 votes to bring the bill, S. 147, to the Senate floor for a full debate and vote. Falling four votes short of the required 60 votes, cloture was not invoked. As a result, the Senate has not yet voted on the substance and merits of this bill. In fact, the cloture vote demonstrated that if the measure was considered on an up-or-down vote, the votes are here to pass it by a simple majority. Senator Inouye and I are currently working to have S. 310 considered by the Senate Indian Affairs Committee in the near future, and brought to the Senate floor shortly thereafter. In the U.S. House of Representatives, the companion measure, H.R. 505, was scheduled for markup by the House Natural Resources Committee, but Hawaii Congressman Abercrombie was not able to be present. At Congressman Abercrombie's request, H.R. 505 is being rescheduled for committee consideration shortly.

Mr. AKAKA. I deeply appreciate the leader's commitment and support. Hawaii is the only homeland of the Native Hawaiian people, and I remain committed to empowering the people of Hawaii and our Nation to preserve a Hawaii that respects Native Hawaiians and the contributions made by those who have made Hawaii their home.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I am pleased I have submited a resolution designating April of this year as Financial Literacy Month. I thank my cosponsors, Senators Dodd, Clinton, Cochran, Durbin, Kohl, Kennedy, Menendez, Schumer, Inouye, Stabenow, Cardin, Levin, Crapo, DeMint, Feinstein, Baucus, Thomas, Lincoln, Allard, and Enzi. I am glad to work once again with my colleagues in a bipartisan manner to advance financial and economic literacy for all Americans. As we enter into the month of April, I wish to recognize those organizations that released information last April shedding light on financial literacy in our country. This includes Junior Achievement's annual poll of teenagers on issues of personal finance, the Jumpstart Coalition for Personal Financial Literacy's survey of the financial literacy of high school seniors, and the Employee Benefit Research Institute's Retirement Confidence Survey. These surveys present deeply troubling figures that underscore the need for increased financial literacy. For instance, while 84 percent of teens with credit cards reported paying off their balance in full each month, 16 percent admitted that they were just making the minimum payments according to the Junior Achievement poll. Further, the Jumpstart survey found that most high school seniors failed a test about credit cards, retirement funds, insurance, and other personal finance basics, and the Employee Benefit Research Institute found that despite modest savings, over two- thirds of Americans are confident in their retirement. In addition to these valuable surveys, I would like to acknowledge the biennial Survey of the States published by the National Council on Economic Education. It was last released in 2005 and provided a useful update on the status of financial and economic education nationwide. The resolution I have submitted today designates April 2007 as Financial Literacy Month, and highlights the need to promote financial literacy. To this extent, I would like to mention a few efforts that give a sense of the variety of approaches being taken to highlight financial and economic education. Here in Washington, the National Foundation for Credit Counseling will award a winner for its national poster contest later in the month. With a theme of ``Plant the Seed of Saving to Grow Your Future,'' the contest encourages first through twelfth grade students to start thinking about how to best manage their finances. On public television, a new show, called ``What's up in Finance?,'' created by station WNET in New York City, will premiere this April. It will help to make financial and economic education more accessible to young adults and introduce them to the range of job opportunities in finance and economics. In Santa Barbara, California, the Money Camp, in coordination with Junior Achievement and BizWorld, will host a Financial Literacy Training Intensive program. The event is intended to be the first of an annual event to provide advanced training to professionals in the area of financial education. In New Jersey, the state departments of Education and of Banking and Insurance are coordinating with banks and credit unions to bring staff from government and financial institutions who will make presentations on budgeting, saving, and credit at high schools in the State. I applaud these and other efforts taking place in April to address the need for greater financial literacy among Americans. Increased financial and economic literacy can help people navigate around the countless pitfalls found in the marketplace. Consumers with a variety of credit histories can easily find credit in many different forms. Lenders' aggressive marketing campaigns encourage families to take on substantial debt for indulgences and luxuries, which may be harmful if families are already saddled with debt and not saving toward an education or retirement nest egg. Taking on substantial or additional debt that they cannot effectively pay back is irrational, but abusive marketing efforts have resulted in unprecedented levels of borrowing. Although the availability of credit has grown dramatically, the understanding of financial matters has not. Consequently, we are presented with a number of worrisome statistics. During the last 2 years, Americans have on average spent more money than they make. The last year this occurred was in 1933 at the end of the Great Depression. Moreover, the household debt service ratio, which gives a sense of the proportion of disposable income people are using to pay off their debt, increased to record levels again in 2006. These findings suggest a serious problem exacerbated by the fact that most workers have not calculated how much they need to save for retirement, even if they believe they are behind schedule in their retirement. As policymakers, we need to focus on these issues year round. However, focusing on Financial Literacy Month in April means that we have a designated part of the year when we can reassess our efforts to highlight those that worked and improve on those that have not. I urge my colleagues to support this resolution.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I rise today to reintroduce the Federal Supervisor Training Act to enhance Federal employee and manager performance, and, in turn, agency performance. Our Nation's public servants administer a vast array of programs designed to meet the needs of the citizens of this country, and indeed the world. These employees deserve the support and guidance of trained managers who empower them to perform effectively. Furthermore, employees must have a clear understanding of their roles and responsibilities. Training programs help managers and supervisors improve their communication skills and promote stronger manager- employee relationships. While the Federal Government encourages management and supervisory training, the development and implementation of training programs is left to the discretion of individual agencies. This leads to inconsistent guidance on training and sometimes inadequate training due to an agency's other priorities and limited resources. Meaningful training matters. Training should not be discretionary for agencies. Given the growing number of Federal managers who are eligible to retire, and the need to attract a robust, well-skilled workforce, it is important that employees, who are expected to manage and supervise, have the tools to do so effectively. In January 2007, the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) released the 2006 Federal Human Capital Survey, which showed that the federal government's employees and senior managers and leaders still face communication problems. For example, according to the survey: only 49 percent of Federal employees have a high level of respect for senior leaders in their agencies, only 41 percent say they are satisfied with their leaders' policies and practices, and only 47 percent of Federal employees said they were satisfied with the information they get from management. Upon the release of the survey, OPM Director Linda Springer wrote, ``As many senior leaders retire, the Federal Government also faces a challenge--and opportunity--to improve the effectiveness of the leadership corps across Government. We must develop the kinds of leaders who can ensure a talented and committed Federal workforce now and in the future. Our leaders will need to adapt the workplaces and opportunities they offer to attract the best and the brightest from diverse talent pools.'' Good leadership begins with strong management training. It is time to ensure that Federal managers receive appropriate training to supervise federal employees. I believe the Federal Supervisor Training Act will help us reach that goal. My bill will bridge the training gap that exists now and help ensure that Federal managers have the necessary skills to communicate with and manage Federal employees. The Federal Supervisor Training Act has three major training components. First, the bill will require that new supervisors receive training in the initial 12 months on the job, with mandatory retraining every three years on how to work with employees to develop performance expectations and evaluate employees. Current managers will have three years to obtain their initial training. Second, the bill requires mentoring for new supervisors and training on how to mentor employees. Third, the measure requires training on the laws governing and the procedures for enforcing whistleblower and anti-discrimination rights. In addition, my bill will: set standards that supervisors should meet in order to manage employees effectively, assess a manager's ability to meet these standards, and provide training to improve areas identified in personnel assessments. I am delighted by the support my bill has received from the Government Managers Coalition, which represents members of the Senior Executives Association, the Federal Managers Association, the Professional Managers Association, the Federal Aviation Administration Managers Association, and the National Council of Social Security Management Associations; the American Federation of Government Employees; the National Treasury Employees Union; the International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers; the AFL-CIO, Metal Trades Department, as well as the Partnership for Public Service. I believe this broad support, from employee unions to management associations to outside good government groups demonstrates the need of mandatory training programs and passage of this bill. I urge my colleagues to support this important legislation. I ask unanimous consent that the text of this bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I rise today to reintroduce the Federal Supervisor Training Act to enhance Federal employee and manager performance, and, in turn, agency performance. Our Nation's public servants administer a vast array of programs designed to meet the needs of the citizens of this country, and indeed the world. These employees deserve the support and guidance of trained managers who empower them to perform effectively. Furthermore, employees must have a clear understanding of their roles and responsibilities. Training programs help managers and supervisors improve their communication skills and promote stronger manager- employee relationships. While the Federal Government encourages management and supervisory training, the development and implementation of training programs is left to the discretion of individual agencies. This leads to inconsistent guidance on training and sometimes inadequate training due to an agency's other priorities and limited resources. Meaningful training matters. Training should not be discretionary for agencies. Given the growing number of Federal managers who are eligible to retire, and the need to attract a robust, well-skilled workforce, it is important that employees, who are expected to manage and supervise, have the tools to do so effectively. In January 2007, the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) released the 2006 Federal Human Capital Survey, which showed that the federal government's employees and senior managers and leaders still face communication problems. For example, according to the survey: only 49 percent of Federal employees have a high level of respect for senior leaders in their agencies, only 41 percent say they are satisfied with their leaders' policies and practices, and only 47 percent of Federal employees said they were satisfied with the information they get from management. Upon the release of the survey, OPM Director Linda Springer wrote, ``As many senior leaders retire, the Federal Government also faces a challenge--and opportunity--to improve the effectiveness of the leadership corps across Government. We must develop the kinds of leaders who can ensure a talented and committed Federal workforce now and in the future. Our leaders will need to adapt the workplaces and opportunities they offer to attract the best and the brightest from diverse talent pools.'' Good leadership begins with strong management training. It is time to ensure that Federal managers receive appropriate training to supervise federal employees. I believe the Federal Supervisor Training Act will help us reach that goal. My bill will bridge the training gap that exists now and help ensure that Federal managers have the necessary skills to communicate with and manage Federal employees. The Federal Supervisor Training Act has three major training components. First, the bill will require that new supervisors receive training in the initial 12 months on the job, with mandatory retraining every three years on how to work with employees to develop performance expectations and evaluate employees. Current managers will have three years to obtain their initial training. Second, the bill requires mentoring for new supervisors and training on how to mentor employees. Third, the measure requires training on the laws governing and the procedures for enforcing whistleblower and anti-discrimination rights. In addition, my bill will: set standards that supervisors should meet in order to manage employees effectively, assess a manager's ability to meet these standards, and provide training to improve areas identified in personnel assessments. I am delighted by the support my bill has received from the Government Managers Coalition, which represents members of the Senior Executives Association, the Federal Managers Association, the Professional Managers Association, the Federal Aviation Administration Managers Association, and the National Council of Social Security Management Associations; the American Federation of Government Employees; the National Treasury Employees Union; the International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers; the AFL-CIO, Metal Trades Department, as well as the Partnership for Public Service. I believe this broad support, from employee unions to management associations to outside good government groups demonstrates the need of mandatory training programs and passage of this bill. I urge my colleagues to support this important legislation. I ask unanimous consent that the text of this bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, before I address the proposed funding for VA in the budget resolution for fiscal year 2008, I applaud Chairman Conrad and his colleagues on the Budget Committee for their hard work on this resolution. The measure before us today clearly reflects the right priorities and directions for our Nation. For a number of years, I have made the case for the President to include funds for VA health care as part of the war supplemental packages he has submitted to Congress, and every year, my colleagues and I fought to get those funds included in the budget resolution to no avail. The pending budget resolution finally recognizes that caring for returning service members and veterans is part of the cost of war and in turn proposes to fund VA health care appropriately for this effort. Right now, a great deal of attention is being paid to the needs of our men and women in uniform--attention that Chairman Conrad, myself, and other Members of this Chamber have been talking about for quite some time. I am proud to stand with Chairman Conrad in support of our service members and veterans. One of the harshest realities of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan is the number of service members who have sustained complex and multiple injuries in combat. In stark contrast to past conflicts, significant improvements in battlefield medicine have enabled very seriously wounded service members to survive their injuries. Subsequently, these men and women are coming home with extraordinarily complex health care needs. We know that right now, there have been 1,882 identified and registered cases of service members who have suffered from traumatic brain injuries, or TBI, alone. This does not include those who have suffered from a milder form of this injury and may not even be aware of it. While TBI is becoming the signature wound of the current conflicts, many of these soldiers also have been rendered blind or lost a limb as a result of their injuries and the numbers of those who are coming back with serious and multiple wounds continues to grow. In recognition of the emerging medical and rehabilitative needs of veterans with traumatic brain and other injuries, Congress directed VA to establish specialized centers for rehabilitative care. VA's four lead Polytrauma Rehabilitation Centers are essential to meeting the needs of the most severely injured veterans and their families. In the budget before us today, Chairman Conrad and his colleagues have provided over $300 million specifically for meeting the needs of these veterans and service members who are in need of the comprehensive health care and rehabilitative services VA delivers through their Polytrauma Centers. This level of funding will enable VA to conduct assessments and screenings of troops for traumatic brain injury, provide veterans with intensive comprehensive TBI/polytrauma rehabilitation, and most importantly, support intensive case management for veterans with TBI and other injuries when they return to their communities and continue the rehabilitation process. Recent reports by the VA inspector general and others have illustrated that case management is a key element in the process of assisting these veterans achieve the fullest possible recoveries. Funding VA so that it can provide the continuum of care needed by the most severely injured service members is imperative if we are to truly fulfill our obligation to take care of our troops and veterans. I am also very pleased that the budget resolution before us is making a long-overdue investment in mental health care. Studies published in some of the most prestigious journals have found that a third of those seeking VA care are coming for mental health concerns, including PTSD, anxiety, depression, and substance abuse. We do not know the full magnitude of this need, as many returning service members have yet to seek care from VA. As chairman of the Veterans' Affairs Committee, my goal is to make sure that VA is doing everything possible to guarantee that each and every veteran who needs mental health care--whether in North Dakota, Vermont, or Hawaii--can receive that care. I remind my colleagues that so much of the time, battle wounds manifest themselves as invisible wounds--wounds which cannot be seen but are every bit as devastating as physical wounds. PTSD affects not only a veteran's mental status, it affects his or her physical well- being as well. It impacts the veteran's relationships, his or her ability to work, and to interact in society. VA must catch readjustment issues early before they turn into full-blown PTSD, and this budget resolution would enable VA to take a serious approach towards making this happen. When we talk about the mental health needs of veterans, we cannot deny the reality that substance abuse is prevalent among many veterans. We know that many veterans with PTSD turn to drugs or alcohol in order to self-medicate. Yet the administration does not seem to want to be in the business of helping veterans with substance abuse problems. VA used to provide an intensive month-long program to treat substance abuse. Today, most VA substance abuse programs run for 2 weeks--not nearly enough time to put a veteran truly on the road to recovery. Again, this budget resolution provides funds for comprehensive inpatient substance abuse care. This is a very real investment in VA mental health care. On the benefits side, the current claims inventory and the time it takes to process a claim is unacceptable. Veterans deserve a timely and accurate response to their claims. It is obvious that Chairman Conrad agrees, as this budget resolution takes a major step toward responding to this very real problem by providing appropriate funding for VA to use to employ additional claims adjudicators. There are 30,000 more claims pending right now than last year this time. This constitutes an 8 percent increase. As the veterans population continues to age and new veterans come home from Iraq and Afghanistan, this trend of increased claims will continue. Given that it takes nearly 2 years for a new VA employee to start fully contributing to the bottom line, now is the time for new staff to be hired and trained to help reduce this caseload. Just 2 weeks ago, the Committee on Veterans' Affairs held a hearing on the VA claims adjudication process. During the hearing, VA witnesses testified to the nearly 400,000 ratings claims inventory and the 175 days it takes to process a claim for benefits. We must insist that VA have no more than 250,000 claims in the pipeline at once, and that it take not more than 125 days to adjudicate a claim. VA clearly needs additional resources to hire the employees needed to adjudicate claims in a timely manner, which this budget resolution certainly provides. Mr. President, I am very pleased with the investment in veterans programs that is made in this budget resolution. I again commend Chairman Conrad and the Budget Committee for sending the right message to our Nation's veterans--that we are honoring our commitment to them by making a real investment into their care. I urge my colleagues to support swift passage of the resolution before us today.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, as we mark our fourth anniversary of our involvement in Iraq, I wish to highlight an important chapter in our military history. With foresight that proved to be a significant factor in America's victory in World War II, the U.S. Army established a Japanese language school a few months before the attack on Pearl Harbor, and recruited students, second-generation Americans of Japanese ancestry, or Nisei, who would become interpreters and translators in the Military Intelligence Service. Their ability to infiltrate the psyche of our enemy through their knowledge of Japanese culture and language is credited with bringing the war in the Pacific to a quicker conclusion and later, helping turn bitter foes into strong allies. In 1994, I was among a number of Members of Congress, including my colleague and fellow World War II veteran, the senior Senator from Hawaii, Dan Inouye, who asked the Secretary of the Army to publish an official history of the Military Intelligence Service. Today, I am honored to announce the publication of Nisei Linguists, Japanese Americans in the Military Intelligence Service During World War II, by Dr. James McNaughton, Command Historian, U.S. European Command. Nisei Linguists chronicles the history of the Japanese in America, the events leading to the War, the creation of the MIS, and the Nisei involvement in the War. For the soldiers of the Military Intelligence Service, and their brethren in the 100th Infantry Battalion and the 442nd Regimental Combat Team, their service was much more than an obligation to the land of their birth; it was an opportunity to prove themselves as loyal American citizens. As many friends, neighbors, and relatives were transported to concentration camps in various locations around the United States, Nisei soldiers enlisted and served with great distinction. According to Chief of Military History Dr. Jeffrey Clarke, Nisei Linguists also reminds us that: the entire experience provides valuable lessons to U.S. Army officers both present and future. In fact, the Global War on Terrorism underlines the need for similar capabilities and programs as the Army girds itself for the sustained struggle ahead. As chairman of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs, I am privileged to co-host an event marking the publication of Nisei Linguists on Tuesday, March 20th. Among those in attendance will be Dr. McNaughton, Dr. Clarke, and a number of World War II Nisei veterans, including those who served in the MIS. 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 I may speak as in morning business.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I wish today to honor Gilad Janklowicz from the great State of Hawaii in recognition of his induction into the National Fitness Hall of Fame in Chicago on Saturday, March 17, 2007. Gilad, a longtime resident of our beautiful State, is a pioneer in the fitness industry and one of the world's most popular fitness personalities. For over 23 years, he has helped over 38 million viewers stay healthy through his award winning instructional home fitness videos and popular television programs, ``Bodies in Motion,'' ``Basic Training the Workout,'' and ``Total Body Sculpt with Gilad.'' ``Bodies in Motion,'' which is filmed on location in the Hawaiian islands, is the longest running fitness show in the United States and was chosen as the No. 1 TV fitness program in the world by Self magazine. Since his years as a high school athlete where he excelled in track and field, Gilad has devoted his life to fitness and become a leading proponent of the fitness movement. His efforts to raise awareness of the importance of maintaining a regular fitness program along with a nutritional diet and proper medical care have helped millions around the world. Let me be the first to extend my warmest congratulations to Gilad Janklowicz for his well-deserved induction into the Fitness Hall of Fame. His life and work truly embody the aloha spirit of our State and serve as an example to us all. Mahalo.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I offer my congratulations to Maui Economic Opportunity, Inc. for 42 years of outstanding community service. A private, non-profit organization dedicated to helping individuals and families in need, MEO was chartered as a community action agency on March 22, 1965, by Federal mandate under the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964. For more than four decades, MEO has served the people of Maui, Moloka'i and Lana'i through a number of poverty fighting initiatives. By providing employment training and placement, business education for low income entrepreneurs, and micro-enterprise loans, MEO has helped countless citizens get back on the path to financial independence. Moreover, MEO has helped citizens lead fuller, richer lives by providing housekeeping for seniors, allowing them to remain in their homes, and providing specialized transportation for seniors, persons with disabilities and children to doctor's offices, grocery stores, and schools. In addition, they have helped former inmates reintegrate and become productive members of the community. The hard work and dedication of Maui Economic Opportunity's staff and volunteers have earned national recognition by receiving the prestigious Excellence in Community Action award from the Community Action Partnership. To this I would like to add my sincere appreciation for the tireless efforts of these men and women for their continued advocacy on behalf of those in need of a helping hand.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I rise today in support of the grant funding formula in the underlying bill, S .4, as well as Senator Reid's amendment in the nature of a substitute. I also wish to underscore the comments made previously by the chairman and ranking member of the Homeland Security Committee on which I serve. As Senators Lieberman and Collins have articulated so well, I do not question the need for heavily populated States such as New Jersey and Texas to receive appropriate sums of homeland security grant funding to address their homeland security needs, nor do I question the need to protect chemical plants or to protect nuclear power plants. All of this is beyond question. The point of this debate is protecting America against many risks, both natural and manmade. The State of Hawaii is subject to many natural disasters including hurricanes, floods, earthquakes, volcanoes, tsunamis, wildfires, droughts, and tropical storms. In addition, Hawaii is unique in that it is 2500 miles from the U.S. mainland. If disaster strikes Hawaii, natural or otherwise, it does not have neighboring States to rely on for assistance. It therefore must have numerous safety and security systems in place and be relatively self-reliant. Hawaii is also the gateway to the Pacific and, as such, provides support to American Samoa, Guam, and the Northern Mariana Islands through the U.S. Pacific Command, PACOM, in the event of a disaster. Hawaii also provided assistance and support to Thailand in the aftermath of the December 26, 2004, tsunami. It is critical to remember that, although the Federal Emergency Management Agency, FEMA, was folded into the Department of Homeland Security, DHS, its mandate as the principal Federal agency charged with addressing preparation, mitigation, and response to all disasters, both natural and manmade, remains. On January 18, 2007, DHS Secretary Chertoff announced his plan to reorganize DHS. That plan calls for FEMA to assume control of the Grants and Training program, including the State Homeland Security Grant Program, SHSGP, and other grant programs--grant programs that fund not only activities to prepare for, mitigate, and respond to terrorist attacks but also activities to prepare for, mitigate, and respond to natural disasters. Securing our homeland does not only mean protecting it from terrorists but also from the effects of mother nature, a force capable of directing a Katrina-sized hurricane to our soil. In his recently released book, ``The Edge of Disaster,'' Dr. Stephen Flynn, a senior fellow with the National Security Studies Program at the Council on Foreign Relations, argues that 90 percent of Americans reside in an area that will experience a moderate to major natural disaster at any given time. This is not just about urban areas; this is about nearly every American being faced with a significant natural disaster with a far higher likelihood than any terrorist attack. As Dr. Flynn observes, we need ``an all-hazards approach'' in ``constructing safer communities and reducing the overall fragility of the nation.'' Hurricane Katrina illustrated that the United States has limited surge capacity at the State and local levels to respond to a large- scale natural or manmade event. Aging infrastructure, including faulty power grids, shortages in medical personnel and supplies make the United States vulnerable and exacerbate the impact of any attack or natural disaster. If we have a weak infrastructure, faulty and eroding levees, hopelessly outdated communications systems, then we are vulnerable and no amount of radiation portal monitors, RPMs, will protect us from the catastrophic impact of a terrorist attack or natural disaster. I strongly support the homeland security grant formula contained in S .4 and Senator Reid's amendment in the nature of a substitute. I oppose any efforts to lower guaranteed funding levels for all States. I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. AKAKA. No objection.

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I will not object, but I would like to receive the President's assurance that this matter will continue to be debated tomorrow.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I rise today to speak in opposition to the amendment offered by Senator DeMint that would continue to deny basic employee rights and protections to transportation security officers, TSOs, at the Transportation Security Administration, TSA. Yesterday, I chaired a hearing of the Senate Oversight of Government Management Subcommittee to review TSA's personnel system. Very quickly, the discussion turned to collective bargaining. Despite claims that collective bargaining would be a threat to national security, TSA Administrator Kip Hawley said that the San Francisco International Airport, which uses private sector screeners who engage in collective bargaining, is safe. In addition, Mr. Hawley cited the London bombing plot and how TSA needed the flexibility to move TSOs to respond to that situation. When asked, he also admitted that the airports in the United Kingdom, which have screeners who engage in collective bargaining, are also safe. I, along with every other American, want TSA to have the flexibility to move staff and resources as necessary to keep air travel safe. However, I do not believe that this flexibility precludes workers from having basic rights and protections. In 2002, when Congress created the Department of Homeland Security, we debated this very issue. The President argued that he needed flexibility in the areas of pay, classification, labor relations, and appeals in order to prevent and respond to terrorist attacks. While the Homeland Security Act gave the President that flexibility, it also explicitly provided for full whistleblower protections, collective bargaining, and a fair appeals process. I fail to see why TSA employees should be denied these same protections. Since 2001, TSA has faced high attrition rates, high numbers of workers compensation claims, and low employee morale which, in my opinion, are a direct result of a lack of employee rights and protections. Without collective bargaining, employees have no voice in their working conditions, which could drastically reduce attrition rates. Moreover, without a fair process to bring whistleblower complaints, employees are constrained in coming forward to disclose vulnerabilities to national security. At our hearing yesterday, Mr. Hawley said that he knew of only one TSO whistleblower case that was investigated by the Office of Special Counsel, OSC, in the past 2 years. For non-TSOs, the number of whistleblower cases is 12. However, OSC informs me that it has received 124 whistleblower complaints since OSC began investigating TSO whistleblower cases. This demonstrates to me that even without full rights and protections, employees are trying to come forward and disclose wrongdoing and threats to public health and safety. However, a lack of protections may keep others from coming forward when only one TSO has seen a positive resolution to their case. Granted, TSA has made improvements in managing the screening workforce, but we must build upon these efforts and give employees a real place at the table. Protecting employees from retaliatory action complements efforts to secure our nation. Strong employee rights and protections ensures that we have a screener workforce focused on their mission and not preoccupied by fear of retaliatory treatment by management. As such, I urge my colleagues to ensure that TSOs, who work to provide safe air transportation for all Americans, receive basic worker rights and protections. I have a letter from the Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association which opposes the premise that collective bargaining could adversely affect national security. I ask unanimous consent that the letter be printed in the Record.