Daniel Akaka

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President. As the ranking member of the Subcommittee on Financial Management, the Budget, and International Security, I am honored to work with my colleague Senator Fitzgerald, Chairman of the Subcommittee, to introduce the ``Department of Homeland Security Financial Accountability Act.'' Our bill would add the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to the Chief Financial Officers Act of 1990 (CFO Act), P.L. 101-576. It is a companion measure to bipartisan legislation, H.R. 2886, introduced in the House on July 24, 2003. Adding DHS would ensure that Congress will have timely and accurate financial information imperative for good governance of the resources of the Department entrusted to making our homeland safe. The CFO Act recognizes the responsibility of governmental agencies to be accountable to taxpayers. This bill would require the President to appoint, subject to Senate confirmation, a Chief Financial Officer for DHS, who would report directly to the Director of the Department regarding financial management matters. It also requires the DHS CFO to be a member of the CFO Council. This Council is charged with advising and coordinating the activities of its members' agencies on such matters as consolidation and modernization of financial systems, improved quality of financial information, financial data and information standards, internal controls, legislation affecting financial operations and organizations, and any other financial management matters. In addition, the bill would require the DHS CFO to prepare and provide for audit, annual financial statements that are submitted to Congress, which will aid in congressional oversight of the Department. Although the DHS bill adopted by the Govermental Affairs Committee last year, S. 2452, would have put the new Department under the CFO Act, the enacted version of the bill, P.L. 107-296, did not. All other Federal departments and major agencies are under the requirements of the Act. Since the passage of the CFO Act in 1990, tremendous improvements have been made in agency financial management. For example, all CFO Act agencies, except for the Department of Defense and the Agency for International Development, achieved clean opinions from their auditors on their financial statements in fiscal year 2003. Initially, none of the agencies were able to do so. Also, the General Accounting Office has reported that the number and severity of internal control problems reported for CFO Act agencies have been significantly reduced. We expect good corporate governance from the private sector; we should also expect good governance from federal agencies. Adding DHS to the CFO Act would also require that it meet the requirements of the Federal Financial Management Improvement Act of 1996 (FFMIA), P.L. 104-208, which mandates that all agencies subject to the CFO Act meet certain financial system conditions. The goal of FFMIA is for agencies to have systems that provide reliable financial information available for day-to-day management. It is our responsibility to ensure the Federal Government is accountable to the American taxpayers. I am pleased to join with the Chairman of our Subcommittee to ensure that DHS has the financial management systems and practices in place to provide meaningful and timely information needed for effective and efficient management decision-making.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that I be permitted to speak for up to 30 minutes in morning business.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I rise today to speak about S.J. Res. 16, the Compact of Free Association Amendments Act of 2003, which was introduced by myself, Senators Bingaman, Domenici, and Craig on July 14, 2003. S.J. Res. 16 is the Bush administration's legislative proposal codifying 3 years of negotiations on title II of the Compact of Free Association between the United States and the Republic of the Marshall Islands (RMI) and the Federated States of Micronesia, FSM. I have been monitoring this process very closely since negotiations began in 1999. When the Senate returns after Labor Day, we have a very short window to enact this legislation, which is critical to the success of the U.S. political relationship with these two Pacific Island nations. I want to take some time to share with my colleagues the amendments that I intend to offer to ensure that the negotiated provisions remain consistent with the intent of the Compact of Free Association since its enactment in 1986 and address specific issues as they relate to the costs borne by the State of Hawaii over the past 17 years. My interest in these islands first began when I was stationed there in World War II, as a soldier in the United States Army. The first island that I landed on was Enewetak, an atoll in what is now the RMI. I ended up on Saipan and Tinian where I watched the Enola Gay take off for Hiroshima. I then returned to the islands that are now the FSM and RMI as a first mate on a missionary ship and spent six months in the islands. After being elected to Congress, I continued to closely follow events in the Pacific islands and continued my relationships with many of the families in the RMI and FSM. As a member of the Senate, I have been privileged to serve on the Senate Energy Committee which has jurisdiction over insular areas. I have returned to the islands on trips, often with my friend and former colleague, the former Chairman of the Energy Committee, Governor Frank Murkowski, and I have continued to meet with Pacific island government leaders. I have been very interested in the negotiations which have been ongoing since 1999, not only because of the impact of the Compact of Free Association on the State of Hawaii, but because of my interest in ensuring that the United States preserves its commitment first under the U.N. Trusteeship agreement and then under the Compact to establish sovereign governments and to promote economic development and self- sufficiency. I commend the chairman and ranking member of the Energy Committee, Senator Domenici and Senator Bingaman, for their efforts to expedite consideration of this legislation in the Senate, and their appreciation of what needs to be done to fulfill our responsibilities to our allies in the Freely Associated States, or FAS. The Federated States of Micronesia is a group of 607 small islands in the Western Pacific about 2,500 miles southwest of Hawaii. While it has a total land area of about 270.8 square miles, the FSM occupies more than one million square miles of the Pacific Ocean. It is composed of four island states, formerly known as the Caroline Islands--Kosrae, Pohnpei, Chuuk, and Yap. Today, the FSM Constitution provides for three branches of government--the executive, judicial and legislative branches. The President is the head of state of the national government and there are elected Governors for each of the four states. The estimated population of the FSM is 105,500. The Republic of the Marshall Islands is located about 2,136 miles southwest of Hawaii and is made up of five islands and 29 atolls. While the RMI's total land area is only about 70 square miles, the RMI covers about 750,000 square miles of sea area. There are three branches of government in the RMI--the legislative, executive and judicial branches. The head of state is the President, who is elected by the legislature from its membership. The population of the RMI is approximately 56,000. The Compact of Free Association may be new to some of my colleagues, particularly those who were not in Congress in 1986. The United States has a very unique relationship with the FSM, RMI, and Palau, whose Compact is not being considered for negotiation. It is unfortunate that there is some misunderstanding about the purpose and intent of the Compact of Free Association. The compact established the RMI and FSM as sovereign states that conduct their own foreign policies. Both countries were admitted to the United Nations in 1991. However, the Freely Associated States remain dependent upon the United States for military protection and economic assistance. The compact provides that the United States has the prerogative to reject the strategic use of, or military access to, the FAS by other countries, which is often referred to as the ``right of strategic denial.'' The compact also provides that the U.S. may block FAS government policies that it deems inconsistent with its duty to defend the FAS, which is referred to as the ``defense veto.'' Under the compact, the United States also has the exclusive military base rights in the FAS. In exchange, the U.S. is required to support the FAS economically, with the goal of producing self-sufficiency and FAS citizens are allowed entry into the United States as nonimmigrants for the purposes of education, medical treatment and employment. As we consider S.J. Res. 16, I will be offering a number of amendments to address the sufficiency of the negotiated provisions to fulfill the U.S. commitment to assist the FSM and RMI with economic development opportunities, with the goal of self-sufficiency in 20 years. I am also working on amendments to address issues specific to the costs incurred by Hawaii during the first 17 years of the Compact of Free Association. I have a tiered approach to meet these objectives. My long-term intent is to improve the education and medical infrastructure in the RMI and FSM. Economic development and self- sufficiency cannot occur without the proper tools of education and health care. These improvements will take substantial investment over time. My short-term goal is to reimburse the State of Hawaii for the costs incurred by the compact. I will discuss those amendments in a few minutes. Title II of the compact, Economic Relations, expired on September 30, 2001. The compact provided, however, a two-year extension if negotiations were underway. Title II expires on September 30, 2003. Title II is critical to the success of the compact as it includes all of the Federal funding for the RMI and FSM. It is my understanding that the legislative proposal contains some unilateral changes that were made to the compact without the consent of the RMI and FSM governments--we will need to examine those provisions closely. In addition, I believe we need to examine some of the immigration provisions which are included in S.J. Res. 16 to ensure that they do not circumvent the purpose of the Compact of Free Association. I would now like to turn to the issue of disaster assistance. Under the current compact, the Federal Emergency Management Agency, FEMA, provided disaster relief to the communities in the FSM and RMI. In addition, FEMA provides essential services after natural disasters such as typhoons or tsunamis. Disaster assistance includes both individual grants and low-interest loans. Most, but not all, Federal assistance is in the form of low-interest loans to cover expenses not covered by State or local programs, or private insurance. Individuals who do not qualify for loans may be able to apply for a cash grant. Cash grants are also available for home repair, rental, and funeral services. The public assistance grants for community infrastructure allow territorial, local, or even village-level organizations to respond to disasters, to recover from their impact, and to mitigate impact from future disasters. While these grants are aimed at governments and organizations, their final goal is to help a community and all its citizens recover from devastating natural disasters. The grant assistance, provided on a matching basis, helps toward the repair, replacement, or restoration of disaster-damaged, publicly-owned facilities. FEMA assistance is critical. In 2002, Typhoon Cha'atan hit the FSM and caused 50 deaths, injured hundreds of people, and resulted in $6 million in property damage. S.J. Res. 16 removes FEMA's role in providing disaster relief, and replaces it with the U.S. Agency for International Development, Office of Foreign Disaster Assistance, OFDA. This doesn't make sense. OFDA assistance is for humanitarian relief of disasters in foreign nations, with direct provision of food and shelter, and assistance in protecting health and rebuilding water supplies. FEMA's disaster assistance, through its individual and public assistance grants, provides U.S. communities with the ability to rebuild and reinvest in their infrastructure. We have invested millions in FSM and RMI to build and protect infrastructure. These investments need to be protected to ensure that these Pacific island communities will be able to recover from natural disasters. We cannot terminate FEMA's disaster assistance. We must replace USAID's OFDA with FEMA's disaster assistance programs for the amended compact, maintaining the strong and reliable service that the islands need when peoples' lives are destroyed by natural disasters. I look forward to working with my colleagues to rectify this situation. As we continue assisting the FAS in building up physical infrastructure and achieving long-term self-sufficiency under a new funding mechanism, I cannot emphasize enough the urgent need to continue FAS eligibility for federal programs. It is important for us to maintain the view that such programs are complementary to the economic assistance under the compact and must continue to be open to FAS citizens if we are to succeed in allowing the FSM and RMI to fully develop. Federal programs in education have been a cornerstone for FAS communities, particularly in the later years of the original compact. This was when schooling evolved away from--as noted in 1994 by an Asian Development Bank study--its use as a tool to advance the interests and objectives of colonial powers. Rather, educational content has become more appropriate to traditional education and changed the lives of many FAS citizens for the better, strongly encouraging them to actually enroll in school. It is remarkable, for example, that the proportion of those who completed secondary education in the FSM almost doubled from 25 to 47 percent between 1980 and 1994. Today, the FSM Government reports that the literacy rate is quite high and all children are required to attend school at least through the eighth grade. In the RMI, elementary school enrollment increased from almost 7,400 in the late, seventies to more than 11,700 in 2000, while secondary school enrollment went from 1,430 to 2,586 in the same period. It is imperative that we help to educate young generations in the FAS because those ages 15 years or younger make up nearly half of the FSM and RIM populations and will eventually become parents, workers, and government, business, and community leaders. Education is the key to a strong future for these island communities and will ensure that the U.S. investments in these populations will reap positive returns. However, despite the great progress that has been made, the FAS clearly have a long way to go in improving their educational systems. This is evidenced by FAS citizens' continued migration to Hawaii and other parts of the U.S. for educational opportunity. Even so, the Micronesians and Marshallese have taken education into their own hands and are striving mightily to attune it to the needs of their people. In this vein, Federal programs such as Head Start, title I for disadvantaged populations, the Individuals with Disabilites Education Act, IDEA, and Pell Grants have tremendously helped by empowering the FAS and providing vital resources to help them create sound education systems that serve the needs of their people. Indeed, I have been assured that without Pell Grant assistance, higher education institutions such as the College of Micronesia would be unable to continue operating. Given the importance of such programs to the FAS, I am concerned about recent and ongoing efforts in the other body to limit or eliminate FAS eligibility for various education and other domestic Federal programs. I am not alone in this concern. I was pleased to join Senators Domenici, Bingaman, and Craig in writing on May 20 to the leaders on the HELP Committee, asking that they maintain support for the FAS through eligibility for various education programs. As we state in the letter, ``the loss of such funding could very well mean the end of education services at all age levels in the FAS.'' When we return in September, I intend to pursue this matter with my colleagues. I would now like to address some compact issues specific to the State of Hawaii. Section 104(e)(1) of the Compact (Public Law 99-239) states, ``it is not the intent of the Congress to cause any adverse consequences for the United States territories and commonwealths or the State of Hawaii.'' The compact further authorizes appropriations for such sums as may be necessary to cover the costs, if any, incurred by the State of Hawaii, the territories of Guam and American Samoa, and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, CNMI. As FAS citizens are allowed free entry into the United States as part of the compact, many FAS citizens reside in the State of Hawaii. Since 1997, when Hawaii began reporting its impact costs, the State has identified over $140 million in costs associated with FAS citizens. In 2002, the State of Hawaii expended over $32 million in assistance to FAS citizens, with the highest costs reported in education. The State of Hawaii has received a total of $6 million in compact impact aid, largely due to our efforts in the Senate and the leadership of the senior Senator from Hawaii, Mr. Dan Inouye. This modest amount of funding, however, does not adequately reimburse the State of Hawaii for its costs over the past 17 years. S.J. Res. 16 includes $15 million in mandatory funds to be distributed annually between the State of Hawaii, Guam and the CNMI for compact impact aid. While it is an improvement to have mandatory funding earmarked for compact impact aid, the amount is not based on the actual costs to the affected areas over the past 17 years. As I have just said, for 2002 alone, the State of Hawaii spent over $32 million on services for FAS citizens. I plan on offering an amendment to increase the amount of annual compact impact aid to the State of Hawaii and other affected areas. I am also drafting an amendment which would authorize reimbursement for the funds expended by the governments of the affected areas between 1986 and 2003. Hawaii's medical providers have also suffered because they are owed thousands of dollars in unpaid medical bills. Some of the debt has been incurred by individuals, FAS citizens lacking financial resources--who present themselves to medical providers for treatment. Other debt, however, is a result of the medical referral program, and is to be paid by the FSM and RMI governments. The medical referral program allows FAS citizens to travel to Hawaii for medical treatment to be paid by the FSM or RMI because such treatment is not available in their country. During its consideration of the original compact, Congress recognized this problem and authorized funding for unpaid debts related to the medical referral program which were incurred prior to 1985. Unfortunately, the problem has continued. Hawaii's medical providers, who are already having difficulties meeting the health care needs of their communities, are unfairly penalized because of the inability of the island governments to pay the medical bills associated with the medical referral program. I will introduce an amendment that would extend the authorization for funding for the medical referral program debts to 2003. I also plan to offer amendments which would alleviate the compact's cost to the State of Hawaii by restoring and establishing the eligibility of FAS citizens for programs such as Medicaid, Food Stamps, and Temporary Assistance to Needy Families, TANF. It is imperative that we restore eligibility of FAS citizens for non- emergency Medicaid. FAS citizens lost many of their public benefits as a result of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity, PRWORA, Act of 1996, including Medicaid coverage. FAS citizens were previously eligible for Medicaid as aliens permanently residing under color of law in the United States. After the enactment of welfare reform, the State of Hawaii could no longer claim Federal matching funds for services rendered to FAS citizens. Since then, the State of Hawaii, Guam, American Samoa, and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands have continued to meet the health care needs of FAS citizens. The State of Hawaii has used state resources to provide Medicaid services to FAS citizens. In 2002 alone, the State spent approximately $6.75 million to provide Medicaid services without receiving any federal matching funds. There has been an increasing trend in the need for health care services among FAS citizens. During the current fiscal year, the number of individuals served in the State of Hawaii's Medicaid program has grown from 3,291 to 4,818 people based on the average monthly enrollment. This is an increase of 46 percent. For only the first half of the fiscal year, the State of Hawaii has spent $4.66 million for the Medicaid costs incurred for FAS citizens. These Medicaid costs do not reflect additional State expenditures on medical care contracts to care for the uninsured, community health care services, and for the activities of the Department of Health's Communicable Disease Branch. The Federal Government must provide appropriate resources to help states meet the healthcare needs of the FAS citizens--an obligation based on a federal commitment. It is unconscionable for a state or territory to shoulder the entire financial burden of providing necessary education, medical, and social services to individuals who are residing in that state or territory when the obligation is that of the Federal Government. For that reason, I am seeking to provide reimbursement of these costs. It is time for the Federal Government to take up some of the financial responsibility that until now has been carried by the State of Hawaii, CNMI, and Guam, by restoring public benefits to FAS citizens. Eligibility of FAS citizens for nonemergency Medicaid must be restored. In addition, the State of Hawaii, Guam, American Samoa, and the CNMI should be reimbursed for the Medicaid expenses of FAS citizens incurred since 1996. It is the right thing to do. Continuing along the lines of assisting FAS citizens towards long- term self-sufficiency, I would now like to turn to the issue of social services. The need for support provided by a safety net of social services becomes apparent when we take a look at the economic conditions FAS citizens face at home. In 2001, per capita income, as measured by purchasing power parity, was $1,600 in the RMI and $2,000 in the FSM. This amounts to almost $8,000 below the poverty threshold per capita in the U.S. for that same year. Furthermore, many FAS families are single-parent households and face many barriers to employment, including low or no-job skills, low levels of education, and disabilities. This is why it is important to provide Federal support through social service programs while continuing to develop new economic opportunities for FAS citizens. Otherwise, the impact of serving FAS citizens will continue to be felt outside of the FAS. For instance, in Hawaii, according to the state's Attorney General, financial assistance in the form of the Temporary Assistance to Other Needy Families, TAONF, program, a State program, provided $4.5 million to FAS citizens in State Fiscal year 2002. This amount is secondary only to the amount spent to provide educational services to the FAS. Of this total, $390,000 went to the General Assistance program, which supports individuals and couples with little or no income and who have a temporary, incapacitating medical condition; $532,000 supported aged, blind, and disabled FAS citizens with little or no income who are not eligible for federally-funded Supplemental Security Income SSI; and $3.6 million went to the State's TAONF program that assists other needy families who are not eligible for federal- funding under the Temporary Assistance to Needy Families, TANF, program. The number of FAS citizens served by the Hawaii Department of Human Services has increased by almost 20 percent in the span of one year alone. The financial assistance that the State of Hawaii provides to FAS citizens in the form of TAONF is a great support to those families attempting to achieve economic stability. I am also planning on offering an amendment to make FAS citizens eligible for the Food Stamp Program. The Food Stamp Program serves as the first line of defense against hunger. It is the cornerstone of the federal food assistance program and provides crucial support to needy households and those making the transition from welfare to work. We have partially addressed the complicated issue of alien eligibility for public benefits such as Food Stamps, but again, I must say it is just partial. Not only should all legal immigrants receive these benefits, but so too citizens of the FAS. Exclusion of FAS citizens from federal, state, or local public benefits or programs is an unintended and misguided consequence of the welfare reform law. We allow certain legal immigrants eligibility in the program. Yet FAS citizens, who are not considered immigrants, but who are required to sign up for the Selective Service if they are residing in the United States, are ineligible to receive food stamps. We must correct this inequity. I will work on clarifying current law regarding FAS citizens' eligibility for various federal assistance programs, including TANF and Food Stamps. In addition, I ask my colleagues to support efforts to extend current TANF state waivers and reinstate recently expired state waivers. Hawaii has been operating under a waiver approved by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services since 1996. To date, Hawaii has met all of its employment goals, despite experiencing difficult economic times in the 90s and into the current decade. This waiver maintains protections for disabled individuals, including FAS citizens, which were reported in the State Fiscal Year 2002 as numbering over 200. I am concerned that proposals that would limit various support services to this disabled population to three months would guarantee failure for many Hawaii families, including FAS citizens, should Hawaii's waiver be allowed to expire. I look forward to working with my colleagues on the Finance Committee on this separate TANF reauthorization issue. I cannot stress the importance of the Compact of Free Association to the Pacific islands, the State of Hawaii, Guam, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, and American Samoa. The United States made a commitment to help these countries attain self-sufficiency through economic development and Federal programs based on a political relationship unique to this situation. We must honor this commitment by ensuring adequate resources to meet our obligations. We cannot treat the FSM and RMI as mere allies and foreign nations--the political relationship of free association calls for more than that. We must provide Federal benefits such as Food Stamps, TANF, and Medicaid to FAS citizens residing in the U.S. We must ensure that the trust funds for each country have sufficient funding to ensure that in 20 years, the RMI and FSM will be able to function as economically independent nations. We must improve the infrastructure of the education and medical systems in the RMI and FSM to alleviate the long-term impact of the Compact on the State of Hawaii and Pacific territories. We must continue eligibility in federal education programs such as Head Start, the Individuals with Disabilities Act, Pell Grants, title I, and the No Child Left Behind Act to ensure that we equip future generations of Micronesians and Marshallese with the educational tools necessary to succeed in the 21st century. We must do all of this in a culturally sensitive manner. We have a big challenge ahead of us, to keep the commitment we made in 1986. I look forward to working with all of my colleagues on this important endeavor.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I rise to submit a sense of the Senate resolution that the Senate supports improving American defenses against the spread of infectious diseases from abroad. The United States and other nations have a serious global problem in confronting the natural outbreak or deliberate spread of infectious diseases. The Central Intelligence Agency's January 2000 National Intelligence Estimate, NIE, The Global Infectious Disease Threat and Its Implications for the United States found that infectious diseases are a leading cause of death worldwide and that ``New and reemerging infectious diseases will pose a rising global health threat and will complicate U.S. and global security over the next 20 years.'' I have been concerned about the bioterrorist threat to this country for some time. In 2001, as chairman of the Senate Governmental Affairs Subcommittee on International Security, Proliferation, and Federal Services, I chaired hearings that addressed the Nation's preparedness to respond to a bioterrorist attack. Sadly, the SARS outbreak demonstrated that naturally occurring diseases can be spread extraordinarily quickly through international air travel. This raises questions over our Nation's ability to counter a bioterrorist attack and protect our public health in general. Preparations that organize our health care network against a naturally occurring disease outbreak can also help guard Americans against a bioterrorist attack. Our first line of defense must be pushed beyond the borders of the United States to countries overseas. We should help stop the spread of a disease at its source before tens or hundreds of air-travelers inadvertently spread it around the globe. The World Health Organization, WHO, World Health Report 2002 estimates that infectious diseases accounted for more than 11 million deaths in 2001. Most of these infectious disease deaths occurred in the developing world, where they imposed a terrible burden on societies whose public health systems were already stretched beyond their limits. Infectious diseases, however, pose a threat to people in all parts of the world. Diseases easily spread beyond national borders. The NIE noted that many infectious diseases come from outside U.S. borders and are introduced by international travelers, immigrants, returning U.S. military personnel, or imported animals or foodstuffs. The report states the increase in international air travel and trade will ``dramatically increase the prospects,'' that infectious diseases will ``spread quickly around the globe, often in less time than the incubation period of most diseases.'' Diseases that originated overseas, such as HIV/AIDS, have had a serious impact on the health and welfare of U.S. population. For example, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, CDC, since the beginning of the HIV/AIDS epidemic, there have been almost 450,000 deaths. There are an estimated 800,000 to 900,000 people currently living with human immunodeficiency virus in the United States with approximately 40,000 new human immunodeficiency virus infections occurring in the U.S. every year. SARS and the West Nile virus have also had an impact in the United States. The danger of an outbreak of a deadly disease overseas affecting the United States is increasing. The NIE found that war, natural disasters, economic collapse, and human complacency around the world are causing a breakdown in health care delivery and helping the emergence or reemergence of infectious diseases. To be forewarned is to be forearmed. The early warning of a disease outbreak is key to its identification; the quick application of countermeasures; and the development of cures. The General Accounting Office, GAO, noted in its August 2001 report, Global Health: Challenges in Improving Infectious Disease Surveillance Systems, that ``disease surveillance provides national and international public health authorities with information they need to plan and manage to control these diseases.'' The next disease to strike the United States, like SARS, may be an unrecognized pathogen. As of July 2003, the SARS virus has sickened more than 8,000 people, including over 35 in the United States. The disease has killed more than 800 since the outbreak began in southern China, and has had severe economic repercussions in the countries beset by the outbreak. Although the disease appears to be under control for the moment, many fear there will be resurgence of SARS in the fall when the general flu and cold season begins. We have to do a better job next time, and by helping others we will help ourselves to do so. We need to strengthen our ability to detect foreign diseases before they cross our borders. The CDC has played a significant role in foreign disease surveillance for many years. Its Field Epidemiology Training Programs is an important program that strengthens global disease surveillance by training foreign specialists in modern epidemiology. FETPs have existed for almost 20 years and involve working with ministries of health around the world and the World Health Organization. Currently FETPs are in 30 countries throughout the world, supporting disease detection efforts and providing an essential link in global surveillance. The work of the FETPs is critical to establishing a first line of defense overseas to protect the health of local populations and of American citizens from the spread of deadly infectious diseases. This work is more timely and necessary than ever. As Dr. James Hughes, Director of the National Center for Infectious Diseases at the CDC told the Governmental Affairs Committee's Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations on July 30th, the lessons learned from the SARS outbreak show, ``The SARS experience reinforces the importance of global surveillance,'' as well as having prompt reporting and a strong laboratory capability. We need to ensure that the CDC work in this area, which is at times heroic, is given the funding it requires. We also need to keep this question prominently on our national agenda. We need attention focused on infectious diseases on an annual basis. We need to understand better the political and economic implications of the spread of infectious diseases for foreign countries and the United States, and we need to know what are likely future trends depending on the level of intervention to address this problem. I suggest that a NIE on infectious diseases should be produced each year so that we have a comprehensive analysis of worldwide infectious disease and health developments. The G-8 group of leading industrialized nations is playing a role on global health issues. At the 2003 Evian summit, the G-8 made a commitment to fight against the so-called big three diseases of AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria. But the G-8 recognized the spread of SARS demonstrated ``the importance of global collaboration, including global disease surveillance.'' These words need to be backed by vigorous, coordinated actions. I urge the President to work with the G-8 to create regional FETP programs so that every part of the world can be covered by a strong public health disease surveillance system. Moreover, we should support the World Health Organization, whose work provides a critical underpinning to the efforts of the global public health community. The World Health Organization's regular budget has been more or less flat since the mid-1990s in nominal terms, around $420 million a year. In real terms, some estimate this means it has been reduced by 25 percent or more. WHO receives additional extra budgetary funding of several hundred million dollars a year. But most of this is project specific and does not directly support the basic public health activities of WHO and is not a substitute for funding core WHO activities. WHO global surveillance activities have been built with very modest extra budgetary contributions on top of a modest amount of core resources. But WHO's global disease surveillance work is underfunded and is being conducted in an overall context of declining real WHO core funding. The rapid and easy transport of diseases to and throughout the United States underscores that Americans are now part of a global public health system. I have been impressed by the commendable effort that the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation has made to improve health in the developing world. The foundation has spent over $3 billion for this goal. Such visionary leadership should not only exist in the world of philanthropy. This country should take a stronger lead in improving public health and disease surveillance systems overseas.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, the national unemployment rate hit a 9-year high of 6.4 percent in June. We have lost more than 3.1 million private sector jobs since 2001, which is adversely impacting many of our recent college graduates who are finding it difficult to secure employment in a market that is not producing enough jobs. The Bureau of Labor Statistics has released findings that show for this same period that the unemployment rate for 20 to 24 year olds has risen from 7.2 percent to 10.7 percent. The National Association of Colleges and Employers, which is a nonprofit association that provides resources to help career services and recruitment professionals, conducted a survey this past spring that found ``corporate hiring has fallen by 36 percent since 2001; 42 percent of employers say they are cutting the number of college graduates they hire; and nearly 71 percent of Government/nonprofit employers say they expect to hire fewer new college graduates this year.'' This information is very troubling to me because the state of our economy has restricted unemployment opportunities and exacerbated personal debt for young men and women graduating from college. As our college graduates look to their future, many of them will already have accrued an excessive amount of debt ranging from student loans to credit cards. I have been working to shed light on this problem which is only getting worse, the problem of economic and personal financial illiteracy among our youth. Accumulation of credit card debt by college students has become an issue nationwide. Credit cards are easy to get; many students are able to obtain a credit card by simply submitting a copy of their school identification card. They are acquiring and using credit cards at a greater rate than ever before, without completely understanding the credit system and accrued interest. Many of these students are not adequately educated about using and paying off a credit card. Rather, many are being enticed by gimmicks to apply for a credit car. A quick Internet search can reveal dozens of sites that provide myriad of opportunities for students to obtain a credit card. Some of these sites offer credit card limits of up to $5,000. Others suggest that one could use the card to purchase books, pizza and tuition, and also earn bonus points for free music CDs. Other inducements are offered, such as a free movie ticket for those who have good credit. With college students finding it harder to seek gainful employment upon graduating, one would hope that they would at least have a greater understanding of how to best manage their personal finances. It would have been beneficial for these graduates to have learned the essentials of money management and personal finance before leaving college, and even before leaving high school. However, we still have much to do in this area. Accordining to the 2002 National Jump$tart Survey, economic and financial literacy scores have declined since the Jump$tart Coalition for Personal Financial Literacy conducted its first survey of seniors in high school back in 1997. Of the high seniors who took the survey, 68.1 percent them failed, demonstrating a clear lack of understanding of the basic fundamentals of economics and personal financial management. We have also seen an increase in personal bankruptcy filings and, if one were to couple that with the lack of jobs available for graduating students, we see that many of our students are well on the road to financial crisis, if they are not already there. Although the Department of Education has found that the default rate on student loans has decreased substantially, it has found the dollars in default remain high. This means that students defaulting on their loans have a larger debt load, which may cause them to file for bankruptcy before they even begin a career. In the 2002-2003 fiscal year, American lenders made about $31 billion in consolidated student loans, averaging about $27,000 each. Furthermore, 45 percent of college students are in credit card debt, with the average debt being $3,066. Our students are accruing large amounts of debt without a clear understanding of how to manage their finances. As unemployment continues to rise and the job market remains bleak, we must empower our students with a greater understanding of economic and personal finance. Although improved financial literacy is not the complete solution to their problems, it can help them to alleviate or prevent some of the financial difficulties they may encounter. As we continue to work towards economic recovery and job creation, it is imperative to also educate our children so that they may understand and excel in economic and personal finance.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President. I rose today to address the continued need to secure our Nation's shipping containers. The U.S. economy is heavily dependent on the normal flow of commerce and the security of our Nation's ports. Over the past 6 years, commercial cargo entering America's ports has nearly doubled. About 7 million shipping containers arrive in U.S. seaports each year. The Department of Homeland Security recently proposed new regulations to improve shipping container security by requiring advance information in electronic format for cargo entering and exiting the United States. In my view, the Department needs to do more. To improve container security we must ensure that shipping container security programs are effective by having the right personnel and the right management strategies in place. Currently the Customs Service administers two container security programs within the Department of Homeland Security: the container security initiative, known as CSI, and the customs-trade partnership against terrorism, or C-TPAT. By 2004, the Department plans to increase the funding for CSI fourteenfold and for C-TPAT by 50 percent. A July 2003 General Accounting Office, GAO, review on container security programs raises concerns that the Customs Service has not taken the steps required to ensure the long-term success and accountability of CSI and C-TPAT. According to the GAO report, Customs has reached a critical point in the management of CSI and C-TPAT and must develop plans to address workforce needs to ensure the long-term success of these programs. As a Senator from a State reliant on shipped products, I understand the importance of container security. My State is uniquely vulnerable to disruptions in the normal flow of commerce. In fact, 98 percent of the goods imported into Hawaii are transported by sea. Honolulu Harbor received more than 1 million tons of food and farm products and over 2 million tons of manufactured goods per year. In 2002, Honolulu received 1,300 foreign ships and about 300,000 containers. Over 8 million tons of these goods arrive at Honolulu Harbor, which receives one-half of all cargo brought into the State. This is why I support GAO's recommendation that Customs develop strategic plans that clearly identify the objectives the programs are intended to achieve and to enhance performance measures. I urge the Department of Homeland Security to implement GAO's recommendation by developing workforce plans and strategies to strengthen container security and to attract, train, and retain workers within CSI and C-TPAT. This is no small challenge. By the end of 2004, Customs expects to hire 120 staff for CSI and increase staffing levels in C-TPAT by fifteenfold. Moreover, it is estimated that 46 percent of the Customs workforce will be eligible to retire by 2008. Now more than ever, agencies must have the plans and strategies in place to recruit personnel with the skills necessary to protect our country. As the U.S. Commission on National Security/21st Century concluded in 2001: . . . [T]he maintenance of American power in the world depends upon the quality of U.S. government personnel, civil and military, at all levels . . . The U.S. faces a broader range of national security challenges today, requiring policy analysts and intelligence personnel with expertise in more countries, regions, and issues. To meet these national security challenges, workforce and strategic planning for CSI and C-TPAT deserve the full attention of the Department of Homeland Security. Such attention is critical for a State like Hawaii that is uniquely dependent on shipping of goods. The potential consequences of a terrorist incident using a shipping container are, in the words of Customs Service Commissioner Bonner,'' . . . profound . . . no ships would be allowed to unload at U.S. ports after such an event.'' I look forward to working with the Department to ensure that the foundation is in place for CSI and C-TPAT to secure shipping containers over the longterm.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I rise today to commend the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence and the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence for their outstanding work in reviewing the intelligence community's activities related to the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001. The report, which was issued jointly last week by two committees, is the culmination of the hard work of the committees and their staff to inform the American people of the weaknesses in our intelligence community that need to be strengthened to prevent this type of event from occurring again. One issue that I find particularly interesting is the focus of the Intelligence Committees' report on how the lack of employees with foreign language skills hampered the intelligence community's efforts to meet its mission. Finding Six of the report states: Prior to September 11, the Intelligence Community was not prepared to handle the challenge it faced in translating the volumes of foreign language counterterrorism intelligence it collected. Agencies within the Intelligence Community experienced backlogs in material awaiting translation, a shortage of language specialists and language-qualified field officers, and a readiness level of only 30 percent in the most critical terrorism-related languages used by terrorists. This finding is not surprising. Shortly after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, FBI Director Robert Mueller made a public plea for speakers of Arabic and Farsi to help the FBI and national security agencies translate documents that were in U.S. possession but which were left untranslated due to a shortage of employees with proficiency in those languages. The committees' report states that prior to September 11, the Bureau's Arabic translators could not keep up with the workload. As a result, 35 percent of Arabic language materials derived from Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, FISA, collection was not reviewed or translated. If the number of Arabic speakers employed by the Bureau remained at the same level, the projected backlog would rise to 41 percent this year. Unfortunately, the U.S. faces a critical shortage of language proficient professionals throughout Federal agencies. As the General Accounting Office reports, Federal agencies have shortages in translators and interpreters and an overall shortfall in the language proficiency levels needed to carry out agency missions. Further, Director of the CIA Language School has testified before the Intelligence Committees that, given the CIA's language requirements, the CIA Directorate of Operations is not fully prepared to fight a world-wide war on terrorism and at the same time carry out its traditional agent recruitment and intelligence collection mission. The Director also added that there is no strategic plan in place with regard to linguistic skills at the Agency. The inability of law enforcement officers, intelligence officers, scientists, military personnel, and other Federal employees to decipher and interpret information from foreign sources, as well as interact with foreign nations, presents a threat to their mission and to the well-being of our Nation. It is crucial that we work to strengthen the language capabilities and in turn the security, of the United States. Both the GAO review and the Intelligence Committees' report demonstrate that action is needed to help Federal agencies more effectively recruit and retain highly skilled individuals for national security positions. Congress has long been aware of the Federal Government's lack of skilled personnel with language proficiency. In 1958, the National Defense Education Act, NDEA, was passed in response to the Soviet Union's first space launch. We were determined to win the space race and make certain that the United States never came up short again in the areas of math, science, technology, or foreign languages. The act provided loans and fellowships to students, and funds to universities to enhance their programs and purchase necessary equipment. After the NDEA expired in the early 1960s, Congress passed the National Security Education Act in 1991, which created the National Security Education program, NSEP. This program was intended to address the lack of language expertise in the Federal Government by providing limited undergraduate scholarships and graduate fellowships for students to study foreign language and foreign area studies, and providing funds to institutions of higher learning to develop faculty expertise in the less commonly taught languages. In turn, students who receive NSEP scholarships and fellowships are required to work for an office or agency of the Federal Government in national security affairs. While NSEP has been successful, it is obvious that more needs to be done. To address the Federal Government's lack of foreign language personnel, I introduced S. 589, the Homeland Security Federal Workforce Act, on March 11, 2003. I am pleased to have the support of Senators Durbin, Allen, Voinovich, Warner, Brownback, Chambliss, Rockefeller, and Collins in this effort. Our bipartisan bill would enhance the Federal Government's efforts to recruit and retain individuals possessing skills critical to preserving our national security. Through a targeted student loan repayment program and fellowships for graduate students, this legislation would help eliminate the Government's shortfall in science, mathematics, and foreign language skills. I am pleased to note that the Committee on Governmental Affairs favorably reported S. 589 in June. When this bill comes before the Senate for consideration, I urge swift passage so that Federal agencies with direct responsibility for protecting our homeland have personnel with foreign language and other necessary skills to deter and prevent another terrorist attack.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I rise today in strong support of the Senator from Nevada, Mr. Reid, who is offering an amendment to establish $20 million in grants to protect tourist populations. This amendment will ensure that homeland security funding allocations properly reflect a State's population, including its tourist population. Currently, Federal first responder funding is based on a State's permanent population. States with large tourist populations are left with the responsibility for protecting a larger number of individuals than is reflected by the funding they receive from the Federal Government. As a result, first responders in these States face severe funding shortfalls. We need to ensure that methods for allocating Federal assistance for homeland security, especially first responder funding, considers the resources needed to protect each and every individual in a State. Tourists represent a significant proportion of the population in many States. This is especially true for Hawaii, where, at any given time, there are over 160,000 tourists in the State. Since the current first responder grant formula does not account for tourist populations, Hawaii is responsible for protecting 13 percent of its total population without Federal assistance. This funding is critical for all States with significant tourist populations. For this reason, I am pleased to have worked with Senator Collins, chairman of the Governmental Affairs Committee, to include language in S. 1245, the Homeland Security Grant Enhancement Act of 2003, to ensure that tourist populations are fully addressed in first responder funding. This bill favorably passed out of committee unanimously. The Reid amendment builds on S. 1245 by providing the additional funding needed to protect tourist populations in Federal first responder funding. Federal funding for homeland security should fully account for the total population in a State, including tourist populations. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I rise today to offer an amendment to the Homeland Security Appropriations bill to help protect our ports and coasts from fire by making a small change to criteria for spending the appropriations for the Firefighters Assistance Grants program. I thank the floor managers for their assistance and their support. The amendment has the support of the Federal Emergency Management Agency. The language will permit FEMA the flexibility to give fire boats equal consideration to fire trucks when awarding grants for purchases of fire vehicles under the Firefighter Assistance Grants program. Ports security is critically important for Hawaii which imports 80 percent of its products. Ninety-eight percent of these products are brought to Hawaii by ship, and about half of these products come through Honolulu Harbor alone. Many of the Nation's largest cities are located on the water, whether an ocean, a harbor, or a major river or lake, where thousands of people may live or visit. Suburban areas spreading out from a city can also be on the water, having marinas or piers. Commercial ports are essential to our economy. Ninety-five percent of all U.S. trade flows through the Nation's more than 400 ports. In a major industrial port area having the necessary marine firefighting equipment could prevent serious consequences for the port, a State, or even the national economy. My state of Hawaii is only one example. Eighty-five percent of all refined fuel products for the North East come from Delaware River ports. If a ship were to burn and sink in the single channel serving the ports the price and distribution of petroleum products in the North East could be seriously affected. The Firefighters Assistance Grants program under the U.S. Fire Administration is a major source of federal assistance to local fire departments around the Nation. It is a necessary and popular program that has distributed hundreds of millions of needed dollars to fire department nationwide. Purchases of firefighting vehicles are authorized under the Firefighter Assistance Grant program. However, the U.S. Fire Administration 2003 program guidance does not encourage fire departments to submit grants for fire boats. Fire trucks are given a priority one and fire boats a priority three in the Vehicle Acquisition Program priorities for urban areas. In suburban and rural areas, fire boats are a priority four. Due to funding constraints, the program guidance notes that it is unlikely that vehicles that are not listed as priority one or priority two would be funded. The Nation's fire boat resources are old and underfunded--a number of fire boats are more than 60 years old. If a fire department decides it wants a fire boat rather than a fire truck to meet its particular fire and disaster response needs it should be able to submit an application to that effect. Such an application should receive equal consideration to an application for a fire truck. My amendment is revenue neutral. It does not seek to add to the $750 million appropriated for the firefighter assistance grants' program in FY 2004, although the efforts by Senator Byrd and other Senators to increase the appropriations are timely and worthwhile. Rather, the intent of my amendment to put fire boats on equal footing with fire trucks in the firefighter assistance grants program if the geograhic of a local fire department makes the acquisition of a fire boat important to their fire fighting capabilities. I thank my colleagues for the time, and I look forward to the Senator's support for their amendment.

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I rise today to discuss the committee report to H.R. 2555, the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act of 2004, to ensure that the Department of Homeland Security fulfills it non-homeland security missions. I am pleased that the committee report includes many of the same reporting requirements of non-homeland security missions at S. 910, the Non-Homeland Security Mission Performance Act of 2003, which I introduced on April 11, 2003. My bill, which is cosponsored by Senators Carper, Lautenberg, and Durbin, will guarantee the fulfillment of non- homeland security functions that Americans rely on daily. S. 910 was reported out of the Government Affairs Committee unanimously on June 13, 2003. In my view, the reporting requirements in the committee report to H.R. 2555 and those in S. 910 achieve similar goals. However, I believe the reporting requirements in H.R. 2555 could be improved by including the reporting requirements in S. 910. The Department of Homeland Security should indicate the management flexibilities and personnel used to carry out non-homeland security functions; clarify whether any changes are required to the department's roles, responsibilities, and organizational structure to enable it to fully accomplish its non homeland security functions; and describe the management strategy the department will use to fulfill its non-homeland security missions. Moreover, the report should complement, not duplicate, existing reporting requirements the U.S. Coast Guard already provides the Department of Homeland Security Inspector General. The department should fully describe and evaluate how homeland security and non- homeland security functions will be fulfilled in government-wide performance reports to Congress, and the General Accounting Office should evaluate the extent to which the department is implementing the provisions in this bill and its non-homeland security missions generally. This report should be provided annually over a five year period, and submitted to the appropriations Committees, Governmental Affairs Committee, and the Government Reform Committee. The cost of creating a Department of Homeland Security should not come at the expense of essential non-homeland security missions. I urge that these provisions be included to complement those in the Committee Report to H.R. 2555.

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I rise today to speak in favor of the disaster mitigation programs as funded in the fiscal year 2004 Homeland Security appropriations bill. The Federal Emergency Management Agency, FEMA, currently has two programs for disaster mitigation, a pre- and postdisaster program. Since 2001, the administration has sought to combine these two programs into one predisaster program. In response to the administration's initiatives, I asked the General Accounting Office, GAO, to examine the administration's proposed changes. The GAO report, released in 2002, concluded that FEMA's mitigation programs, ``differ substantially in how they have sought to reduce the risks from hazards but each has features that the State emergency management community believes has been successful for mitigation.'' Congress funded both programs in fiscal year 2002 and fiscal year 2003. In addition, the Senate and House Homeland Security appropriations reports for the fiscal year 2004 Homeland Security appropriations speak highly of both programs. The Senate report noted that the committee thought the post-disaster program had been ``very successful and will continue to be a valuable tool in the disaster relief process.'' The report goes on to say the committee ``has also continued funding for the national pre-disaster mitigation fund, believing that a balance in pre- and post-disaster mitigation funds allows for greater flexibility in emergency management at the local level.'' The House Appropriations Committee also reviewed the two programs favorably. The House committee report said the ``postdisaster hazard mitigation grant program is an effective mechanism to ensure mitigation activities are undertaken when the need is most apparent, which is immediately after a disaster strikes. When used in conjunction with the pre-disaster mitigation grant program, a comprehensive mitigation strategy can be accomplished.'' I look forward to Congress's continued support for these two important programs.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I rise today to support Senator Feinstein's amendment to the Fiscal Year 2004 State Department Authorization bill that would require the State Department to submit an annual report on nations that are not cooperating with programs concerning small arms and light weapons. The U.N. estimates that there are more than 500 million small arms and light weapons in the world and about half of these are illicit. Of the 49 major conflicts fought during the 1990s, small arms were used in 47 of them, causing four million deaths. Ninety percent of the deaths were civilians and eighty percent of those were women and children. The death and destruction caused by small arms and light weapons has led U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan to characterize them as a ``global scourge.'' In July 2001 a United Nation's conference took place on the illicit trade in small arms and light weapons. The conference adopted a program of action to eliminate these weapons. The first review of the program of action is taking place this week in New York. U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for Political-Military Affairs Lincoln Bloomfield echoed Secretary-General Annan's comments in his address to the conference. Mr. Bloomfield told the delegates that, ``the illicit trade in small arms and light weapons poses a serious threat to stability and security in this hemisphere as well as parts of Africa, South Asia, the Middle East, and elsewhere.'' Mr. Bloomfield called on all nations to ``work even more energetically to curb the illicit trade in small arms and light weapons.'' The United States has made a substantial contribution to this effort. Over the past two years, some five million dollars have been spent on destruction assistance programs. U.S.-supported programs in 10 countries have led to the destruction of over 400,000 excess or illegal weapons and 44 millions rounds of ammunition. The size of the problem means there is much work left to be done. President Bush in a speech last month outlining his agenda for his trip to Africa said that his ``first great goal in our partnership with Africa is to help establish peace and security across the continent.'' He underscored, ``Many thousands of African men and women and children are killed every year in regional wars.'' Africa has suffered terribly from the scourge of small arms. I urge the President to make the control of small arms and light weapons an even greater priority, and I hope the administration will continue to emphasize the importance of controlling and eliminating small arms and seek additional funding when it is needed. Senator Feinstein's amendment will assist the United States in its efforts to encourage other countries to participate in programs to control these weapons. An annual report on illicit small arms will allow the government to better track countries that are not yet cooperating. It will also allow Congress to be better informed about the State Department's efforts to gain cooperation of those countries. I thank the Senator for her efforts. We should do as much as possible to address the scourge of small arms that is taking the lives of so many innocent people throughout the world. amendment no. 1155

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I rise today to support Senator Biden's amendment to the Fiscal Year 2004 State Department Authorization bill concerning sharing information about the export of small arms with the State Department office responsible for the collection and destruction of small arms. In July 2001 a United Nation's conference took place on the illicit trade in small arms and light weapons. The conference adopted a program of action to eliminate these weapons. After two years, the first meeting to review progress on this program of action convened this week in New York. U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan in a message sent to the conference said, ``It is difficult to overstate the importance of implementation of the program of action.'' He noted, ``After all, small arms and light weapons cause mass destruction. They kill about 60 people an hour or half a million people a year, 90 percent of them women and children.'' U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for Political-Military Affairs Lincoln Bloomfield described to participants the significant contribution the United States has made in the area of destruction assistance programs. Commendably, since early 2001, U.S.-supported programs in 10 countries have led to the destruction of over 400,000 excess or illegal weapons and 44 million rounds of ammunition. Senator Biden's amendment will add needed rationality to U.S. policy in this area. If the United States permits the export of small arms or light weapons, the office within the State Department responsible for the collection and destruction of these arms should be informed. Otherwise we may unknowingly pay states to destroy small arms at the same time that we are giving them more weapons. I thank the Senator from Delaware for this amendment. It is important that the right hand of the government knows what the left hand is doing. The U.N. estimates that there are more than 500 million small arms and light weapons in the world and around half of these are illicit. We have far to go in our global effort to control and eliminate these illicit arms. Every step we can take to achieve this goal should be pursued.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Madam President, I rise today to speak on S. 1, the Prescription Drug and Medicare Improvement Act of 2003. For far too long Medicare has lacked a prescription drug benefit. The lack of this benefit has been the gaping hole in the Medicare safety net. Prescription drugs are the largest out-of-pocket health care cost for seniors. Many who cannot afford drug coverage often break the drugs in half, skip doses, or do not fill their prescriptions. The legislation the Senate passed last night will finally establish a benefit. I supported this bill because it is an important step forward in meeting the prescription drug needs of seniors. However, I am particularly concerned that the bill provides insufficient prescription drug coverage for seniors and depends excessively on private plans. Medicare beneficiaries will experience a gap in their prescription drug coverage after their drug expenditures reach $4,500. They will not receive any benefits until their total drug expenditures reach at least $5,813 unless they qualify for the additional low-income support. This gap in coverage will occur while they are still paying premiums. It is unfortunate that amendments designed to fill in the gap were defeated. This issue must be revisited in the future. Also, the eligibility requirements for the additional low-income support are too restrictive and will deny many seniors in need the extra help that they need. The dependence on private insurers to administer this benefit presents additional challenges to providing seniors with access to prescription drugs. Prescription drug-only insurance policies are currently not offered and they will need to be developed. The utilization of private plans creates a system in which insurers have incentives to limit access to needed drugs. In addition, the premiums that seniors pay for coverage are likely to vary depending on what region people live in. It is not equitable for a Federal benefit to have different prices across the country. Seniors should have the option of choosing a Medicare-administered plan instead of one that is run by a private insurer. It is unfortunate that amendments to strengthen the prescription drug coverage and to provide seniors with an option to enroll in a Medicare administered plan were defeated. I look forward to continue working with my colleagues to address these important issues to improve the Medicare prescription drug benefit. Again, I supported this bill because it is an important step towards providing much needed prescription drug coverage for seniors. Also, I am pleased that my amendment to restore a Medicaid disproportionate share hospital, DSH, allotment for Hawaii was adopted. This amendment is vital to Hawaii's hospitals which are struggling to meet the elevated demands placed upon them by the increasing number of uninsured patients. DSH payments will help Hawaii hospitals meet the rising health care needs of our communities. I hope that this provision is retained in conference.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I rise as a cosponsor of the Money Wire Improvement and Remittance Enhancement Act introduced by my colleague, Senator Corzine. I thank Senator Corzine for his leadership on this issue. Immigrants often send a portion of their hard-earned wages to their relatives abroad. Remittances are often used to improve the standard of living of recipients by increasing access to health care, education, and essentials of daily life. In addition, remittances contribute significantly to the economic development of nations. For example, Philippines workers across the globe sent an estimated $6.4 billion back to the Philippines in 2001. Despite the tremendous importance of remittances, people who send them are often unaware of the fees and exchange rates assessed in these transactions which reduce the amount of money received by their family members. Fees for sending remittances often can be ten to twenty percent of the value of the transaction. Also, the exchange rate used in the transaction can be significantly lower than the market rate. Consumers and their families cannot afford to remain uninformed about their financial service options and the fees placed on their transactions. This legislation would ensure that each customer is fully informed of all of the fees and the exchange rates used in sending money. I am hopeful that the enactment of this legislation will result in more people utilizing banks and credit unions for remittances because these institutions do not charge the exorbitant fees often associated with remittances processed by certain other entities. In addition, if unbanked immigrants take advantage of the remittance services offered by banks and credit unions, they will be more likely to open up an account. This would allow immigrants to take advantage of the opportunities for saving and borrowing found at mainstream financial institutions and offer them alternatives to fringe banking products, such as check cashing services. The Money Wire Improvement and Remittance Enhancement Act has special significance to my home State of Hawaii. Hawaii is home to significant numbers of recent immigrants from many nations, including the Philippines, who send remittances to their relatives abroad. We must do what we can to ensure that their hard-earned dollars are not eroded by unnecessary fees or a lack of transparency regarding exchange rates. I encourage my colleagues to support this much-needed legislation.

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I rise today to discuss the Federal Employee Protection of Disclosures Act. I offered legislation under this title earlier this month. I am modifying that measure, S. 1229, by introducing a new bill today which is cosponsored by Senators Grassley, Levin, Leahy, and Durbin. This bill, as with S. 1229, amends the Whistleblower Protection Act, WPA. These amendments are necessary to safeguard Federal employees from retaliation and protect American taxpayers from government waste, fraud, and abuse. Our bill follows S. 995 and S. 3070, the latter of which was favorably reported by the Governmental Affairs Committee in the 107th Congress. The bill we introduce today is the result of a bipartisan compromise to protect our federal whistleblowers. Our bill would codify the repeated and unequivocal statements of congressional intent that Federal employees are to be protected when making ``any disclosure'' evidencing violations of law, gross mismanagement, or a gross waste of funds. The bill would also clarify the test that must be met to prove that a Federal employee reasonably believed that his or her disclosure was evidence of wrongdoing. The clear language of the WPA says that an employee is protected for disclosing information he or she reasonably believes evidences a violation. However, the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals, which has sole jurisdiction over whistleblower cases, ruled in 1999 that the reasonableness review must begin with the presumption that public officers perform their duties in good faith and that this presumption stands unless there is ``irrefragable proof'' to the contrary. As irrefragable means impossible to refute, our bill replaces this excessively high burden with the more reasonable standard of substantial evidence. The measure would also provide independent litigating authority to the Office of Special Counsel, OSC. Under current law, OSC has no authority to request the Merit Systems Protection Board, MSPB, to reconsider its decision or to seek review of a MSPB decision by the Federal Circuit. The limitation undermines both OSC's ability to protect whistleblowers and the integrity of the WPA. As such, our bill would provide OSC authority to appear in any civil action brought in connection with the WPA and obtain review of any MSPB order where OSC determines MSPB erred and the case will impact the enforcement of the WPA. Our bill would codify an ``anti-gag'' provision that Congress has passed annually since 1988 as part of the appropriations process. The yearly appropriations language bars agencies from implementing or enforcing any nondisclosure policy, form, or agreement that does not contain specified language preserving open government statutes. In addition, the bill would make it a prohibited personnel practice to enforce a non-disclosure agreement that does not comply with open government statutes. Enactment of the Federal Employee Protection of Disclosures Act will strengthen the rights and protections afforded to federal whistleblowers and encourage the disclosure of information vital to an effective government. Following the events of September 11, we realized that whistleblowing is even more important when our national security is at stake. In many instances, the security of our Nation depends upon those who step forward to blow the whistle on significant lapses in our efforts to protect the United States against potential terrorist attacks. Congress should act quickly to assure whistleblowers that disclosing illegal activities and mismanagement within their agencies will not be met with retaliation. I urge my colleagues to join with me in protecting our federal whistleblowers. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I rise today to discuss the Federal Employee Protection of Disclosures Act. I offered legislation under this title earlier this month. I am modifying that measure, S. 1229, by introducing a new bill today which is cosponsored by Senators Grassley, Levin, Leahy, and Durbin. This bill, as with S. 1229, amends the Whistleblower Protection Act, WPA. These amendments are necessary to safeguard Federal employees from retaliation and protect American taxpayers from government waste, fraud, and abuse. Our bill follows S. 995 and S. 3070, the latter of which was favorably reported by the Governmental Affairs Committee in the 107th Congress. The bill we introduce today is the result of a bipartisan compromise to protect our federal whistleblowers. Our bill would codify the repeated and unequivocal statements of congressional intent that Federal employees are to be protected when making ``any disclosure'' evidencing violations of law, gross mismanagement, or a gross waste of funds. The bill would also clarify the test that must be met to prove that a Federal employee reasonably believed that his or her disclosure was evidence of wrongdoing. The clear language of the WPA says that an employee is protected for disclosing information he or she reasonably believes evidences a violation. However, the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals, which has sole jurisdiction over whistleblower cases, ruled in 1999 that the reasonableness review must begin with the presumption that public officers perform their duties in good faith and that this presumption stands unless there is ``irrefragable proof'' to the contrary. As irrefragable means impossible to refute, our bill replaces this excessively high burden with the more reasonable standard of substantial evidence. The measure would also provide independent litigating authority to the Office of Special Counsel, OSC. Under current law, OSC has no authority to request the Merit Systems Protection Board, MSPB, to reconsider its decision or to seek review of a MSPB decision by the Federal Circuit. The limitation undermines both OSC's ability to protect whistleblowers and the integrity of the WPA. As such, our bill would provide OSC authority to appear in any civil action brought in connection with the WPA and obtain review of any MSPB order where OSC determines MSPB erred and the case will impact the enforcement of the WPA. Our bill would codify an ``anti-gag'' provision that Congress has passed annually since 1988 as part of the appropriations process. The yearly appropriations language bars agencies from implementing or enforcing any nondisclosure policy, form, or agreement that does not contain specified language preserving open government statutes. In addition, the bill would make it a prohibited personnel practice to enforce a non-disclosure agreement that does not comply with open government statutes. Enactment of the Federal Employee Protection of Disclosures Act will strengthen the rights and protections afforded to federal whistleblowers and encourage the disclosure of information vital to an effective government. Following the events of September 11, we realized that whistleblowing is even more important when our national security is at stake. In many instances, the security of our Nation depends upon those who step forward to blow the whistle on significant lapses in our efforts to protect the United States against potential terrorist attacks. Congress should act quickly to assure whistleblowers that disclosing illegal activities and mismanagement within their agencies will not be met with retaliation. I urge my colleagues to join with me in protecting our federal whistleblowers. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I rise as a cosponsor of the Money Wire Improvement and Remittance Enhancement Act introduced by my colleague, Senator Corzine. I thank Senator Corzine for his leadership on this issue. Immigrants often send a portion of their hard-earned wages to their relatives abroad. Remittances are often used to improve the standard of living of recipients by increasing access to health care, education, and essentials of daily life. In addition, remittances contribute significantly to the economic development of nations. For example, Philippines workers across the globe sent an estimated $6.4 billion back to the Philippines in 2001. Despite the tremendous importance of remittances, people who send them are often unaware of the fees and exchange rates assessed in these transactions which reduce the amount of money received by their family members. Fees for sending remittances often can be ten to twenty percent of the value of the transaction. Also, the exchange rate used in the transaction can be significantly lower than the market rate. Consumers and their families cannot afford to remain uninformed about their financial service options and the fees placed on their transactions. This legislation would ensure that each customer is fully informed of all of the fees and the exchange rates used in sending money. I am hopeful that the enactment of this legislation will result in more people utilizing banks and credit unions for remittances because these institutions do not charge the exorbitant fees often associated with remittances processed by certain other entities. In addition, if unbanked immigrants take advantage of the remittance services offered by banks and credit unions, they will be more likely to open up an account. This would allow immigrants to take advantage of the opportunities for saving and borrowing found at mainstream financial institutions and offer them alternatives to fringe banking products, such as check cashing services. The Money Wire Improvement and Remittance Enhancement Act has special significance to my home State of Hawaii. Hawaii is home to significant numbers of recent immigrants from many nations, including the Philippines, who send remittances to their relatives abroad. We must do what we can to ensure that their hard-earned dollars are not eroded by unnecessary fees or a lack of transparency regarding exchange rates. I encourage my colleagues to support this much-needed legislation.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I rise today to honor a great American hero, General Eric Shinseki, the Army's 34th Chief of Staff. General Shinseki, a native of Hawaii, attained the Army's highest position as the Army's Chief of Staff in June 1999 and retired in June 2003. Ric Shinseki graduated from the United States Military Academy, West Point, in 1965. He served two combat tours in Vietnam and was wounded twice in combat. Throughout his 37 years of service to this country, he has given his personal best, serving with great pride and dignity. His legacy to this Nation will live on for years to come. Over the span of his career, I've watched his progress as a soldier and was privileged to participate in his promotion ceremony to Colonel. At that time, I thought he had a stellar career as a ``soldier's soldier.'' I was very proud to witness his four years of service as the Army's Chief of Staff. He was the perfect soldier to lead our Army into the 21st century. This remarkable man and distinguished decorated soldier set a new standard for the Army. With extraordinary vision, he transformed the Army into an agile, lean, flexible, and lethal fighting force. This man of honor, integrity, and courage set a higher standard for all to follow, all while embodying the spirit of aloha. With his deep sense of pride and dedication to service, he made our Army stronger, one able to achieve swift victories during Operations Enduring Freedom and Iraqi Freedom. As I quoted in the Senate Resolution, President John F. Kennedy once said, ``When at some future date the high court of history sits in judgment of each one of us--recording whether in our brief span of service we fulfilled our responsibilities, we will be measured by the answers to four questions--were we truly men of courage . . . were we truly men of judgment . . . were we truly men of integrity . . . were we truly men of dedication?'' When history looks back at the Army's 34th Chief of Staff, it will be clear that this was truly a man of courage, judgment, integrity, and dedication. General Shinseki is to be commended for his patriotism, unwavering commitment to this Nation, and his meritorious service to this country.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I rise in support of my amendment to restore a Medicaid disproportionate share hospital, DSH, allotment for Hawaii. Medicaid DSH payments are designed to provide additional support to hospitals that treat large numbers of Medicaid and uninsured patients. The Balanced Budget Act of 1997, BBA, created specific DSH allotments for each State based on each their actual DSH expenditures for fiscal year 1995. In 1994, the State of 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 flood for DSH allotments. However, States without allotments were again left out. Other States that have obtained waivers similar to Hawaii's have retained their DSH allotments. Only two States, Hawaii and Tennessee, do not have DSH allotments. As currently drafted, S. 1 provides that States without DSH allotments could obtain an allotment if their waiver was terminated or removed. It is my understanding that while this language would permit an allotment for Tennessee, it would prevent Hawaii from obtaining its DSH allotment as long as the QUEST program remains in place. My amendment would provide a DSH allotment to Hawaii and allow for my home State to participate in the Medicaid DSH program. This amendment is needed because many of our hospitals in Hawaii are struggling to meet the elevated demands placed upon them by the increasing number of uninsured people. DSH payments will help Hawaii hospitals meet the rising health care needs of our communities and reinforce our health care safety net. All 50 States need to have access to Medicaid DSH support. My amendment is similar to language included in the Senate passed version of S. 2, the Jobs and Growth Tax Act of 2003, that would have provided assistance to low DSH States and would have provided an allotment for Hawaii. Unfortunately, the DSH provisions were not retained in the conference report. A Hawaii specific provision is necessary as we attempt to provide additional support for hospitals in low DSH States in this legislation. I appreciate all of the work done by my colleague from New Mexico, Senator Bingaman, to provide additional support for low DSH States. I urge that my colleagues support this amendment to allow the State of Hawaii to be treated like other extremely low DSH States and finally receive a Medicaid DSH allotment.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, amendment No. 979 would ensure that the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program could not reduce the level of prescription drug coverage available to Medicare-covered Federal civilian annuitants. I thank my colleague from Maryland, Senator Mikulski, for cosponsoring the amendment. I strongly support the creation of a prescription drug benefit for Medicare beneficiaries. Thirty-eight percent of Medicare beneficiaries report that they do not have prescription drug coverage. Far too many seniors are unable to afford the medications that they need, and the establishment of a prescription drug benefit will provide much needed access to medications that our seniors desperately need. However, the Congressional Budget Office believes that Medicare drug coverage authorized by this bill is likely to act as an incentive for employers to drop their employer-sponsored drug benefits. An estimated 37 percent of retired workers with employer-sponsored drug benefits could lose their coverage under this bill according to CBO. I am troubled that older Americans who already have earned coverage through an employer-sponsored plan could lose their existing benefits. We have seen over the past few years that there has been a disturbing trend of reducing benefits for retirees. Creating this voluntary benefit could only accelerate this trend. The intent of the legislation is to expand prescription drug coverage for seniors, not merely to shift the financial burden of existing coverage to the Federal Government. If Medicare beneficiaries lose their employer-based coverage, they may have to pay more for a Medicare drug benefit that provides less comprehensive coverage. We must encourage employers to maintain their current coverage, and I will support efforts to do so. We should not shift the existing costs of prescription drug coverage to the Medicare program. If this occurs, there will be fewer resources available to pay for the medications of those who currently need insurance. My amendment will ensure that present and future Federal retirees retain their current level of prescription drug coverage. They should not face a situation in which they must rely on Medicare. My amendment requires the FEHBP to preserve current-level drug coverage for Federal retirees and survivors. The Government health care plan stands as a model employer-sponsored health care plan, and my amendment protects the Nation's Federal annuitants and their survivors. Accepting this amendment sends a message to other employer-sponsored plans that the Federal Government stands behind its commitment to retired workers. I ask unanimous consent that letters from the National Association of Retired Federal Employees and the National Treasury Employees Union in support of my amendment be printed in the Record.

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I urge my colleagues to support my amendment and look forward to working with them to ensure drug coverage for retirees under other plans. I yield the floor.

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

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I rise today to offer amendment No. 980 to restore Medicaid and State Children's Health Insurance Program eligibility for children and pregnant women who are citizens from the Freely Associated States and reside in the United States lawfully. The United States entered into a Compact of Free Association with the Federated States of Micronesia and the Republic of the Marshall Islands in 1986, and with the Republic of Palau in 1994. The political relationship between the United States and the FAS is based on mutual support. In exchange for the United States having strategic denial and a defense veto over the FAS, the United States provides military and economic assistance to the RMI, FSM and Palau with the goal of assisting these countries in achieving economic self- sufficiency following the termination of their status as U.N. Trust territories. Pursuant to the Compact, FAS citizens are allowed to freely enter the United States and are not considered immigrants. Legal immigrants and FAS citizens lost many of their public benefits as a result of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996. I appreciate the work done by my colleague from Florida, Senator Graham, to restore the eligibility for Medicaid and SCHIP for legal immigrants who are children and pregnant women. The language that has been included in S. 1, the Prescription Drug and Medicare Improvement Act, would give States the option to provide this coverage and allow them to use Federal resources to do so. However, the current text does not restore these benefits to citizens from the FAS lawfully residing in the United States. Arguably, FAS citizens have strong ties with the United States as they come from the countries that are perpetually bound to the United States in free association. It is important for Congress to restore these benefits for FAS citizens that were taken away from a relatively small but important population. The Congressional Research Service estimates that 11,500 FAS citizens have migrated to the United States since the Compact was enacted. They have come to the United States to seek economic opportunity, education, and access health care. The State of Hawaii, Guam, American Samoa, and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands have supported FAS citizens with necessary health care services, but not without significant and increasing costs. The Federal Government must provide matching resources to help States meet the health care needs of FAS citizens and to meet the obligations of the Federal commitment. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment to restore a portion of the benefits that were taken away from FAS citizens in 1996. Mr. President, I have another amendment, amendment No. 979, to offer to S. 1.

Mr. AKAKA. The amendments are at the desk.