Wayne Allard

Mr. ALLARD

Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, I rise today out of concern for the Western United States. The Rocky Mountain West is currently facing a very real threat to one of its most rare and precious resources. Out West there are few things more important than water, and it is this very important and increasingly needed resource that is in peril. This threat was in part brought upon us by a scourge barely larger than my finger tip, the bark beetle. This devious little devil has chewed its way through nearly 7,500,000 trees in Colorado. The beetle left these drought weakened trees dead and dying. This threat is exacerbated by the additional 6,300,000 acres of hazardous fuels that have accumulated throughout Colorado. This devastation is concerning enough on its own, but when you consider the fire danger that it has created, and the direct threat that a catastrophic fire would pose to our watersheds, the true weight of this situation becomes clear. Much of the precipitation that falls into the forests ultimately finds its way into streams, ponds, rivers and lakes. Changes to forested lands caused by fire can have strong and devastating repercussions on the quality and quantity of water in these bodies. A forest fire is one big chemical reaction which releases a myriad of chemical elements from forest materials into the ecosystem. These chemicals can be washed or leach into our water systems. Forest fires can cause immediate and lasting changes to the chemistry of forest water systems, this happens as a result of increases in water temperature and from the smoke and ash created during the burning process. These effects can last long after the flames have passed, effecting water quality for years after the initial fire. Colorado should be called ``the Headwaters State,'' because it is the origin point of major rivers flowing both east and west and the source of a vast amount of the water of the United States. In fact the Colorado Rocky Mountains create the headwaters for 4 regional watersheds that eventually supply water to 19 Western States. Should the streams and rivers flowing out of Colorado become choked and polluted with ash and debris from a forest fire much of the United States' water supply would be affected. The Federal agencies that manage the majority of the affected areas need to adopt an accelerated pace to reduce the public health and safety risk as soon as possible. To address this I am introducing The Headwater Protection and Restoration Act today that would work to help alleviate the pending threat to our Nation's water supply. My legislation takes into consideration the desperate need to create healthy forests in the lands around our Nation's water supply. This bill will not only help provide relief from this threat in the short term, but will help to create the necessary infrastructure to ensure that it does not happen again. It will give us a long term solution to this desperate problem. This would be achieved through steady, judicious, and effective forest management over time. This displays a much better and more cost effective strategy than dealing with the management of catastrophic events under emergency circumstances. Today we find ourselves poised in a position to take steps to help avert this potential disaster before it starts. It is my hope that I will be joined by my colleagues here in the Senate to act swiftly on my legislation before it is too late.

Mr. ALLARD

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

Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, I come to the floor to respond to some of the comments that were just made by my colleague from Massachusetts. I want to start off by saying that I have been very supportive of the President on the war in Iraq because he has had a plan and he has stayed the course. That is what gives me confidence in the President. I think it is what gives confidence to many American people. They understand that he has made a strong commitment in Iraq to stick with the Iraqi people, and he has confidence in those people. Even though the political winds are twirling around, he has been able to ignore those and move forward. He is showing success. Sometimes it is not as great as we would like to see or as dramatic, but I think what we see today in the criticism of the President is individuals who are being spun in the political winds, unlike the President. When my colleague from Massachusetts calls the strategy of today counterproductive and says we ought to pull out our forces immediately from Iraq, that is a catastrophic suggestion. It is not anything that we should consider very seriously. It wasn't that long ago when my colleague from Massachusetts was saying that it would be a disaster and a disgraceful betrayal of principle to speed up the process and simply lay the groundwork for expedient withdrawal of American troops, which would risk the hijacking of Iraq by former terrorist groups and former Baathists. This quote was in the runup to the 2004 election. So we see some being spun in the political winds, while the President remains strong, forceful. The President truly is a leader in a very difficult situation in Iraq. That is why I feel so very committed to supporting the President. You cannot deny the fact that this President truly wants to see democracy survive in Iraq, and he truly believes in the Iraqi people. Contrary to criticism coming from the other side of the aisle, he does have a plan, and he is sticking to that plan. As we move through various phases of the President's plan, we have seen that criticism has changed from the other side. I think they criticize just for the sake of criticism, trying to get the President off course. But to his credit, he has stayed the course. I think that is commendable. That is what helps make him a strong and effective President. I want to make this point: Al-Qaida is still a threat in Iraq, but we are making significant advances there. I have to base that on discussions I have had with troops that have come freshly out of Iraq. They all believe they are indeed improving our situation in Iraq. They think they are making a difference in Iraqi lives, and they truly believe the Iraqi people they associate with appreciate what is happening and appreciate their efforts. There is a statewide elected official in Colorado, Mike Coffman, who has returned from Iraq. His mission was to help set up local governments throughout Iraq. We found in our military forces that we didn't have that expertise. And Mike, who is in the Reserves, could make a difference in Iraq. The military said: We need you, Mike Coffman, to help set up these local governments. He spent almost a year in Iraq helping set up local governments and the story he has to tell is one of progress in Iraq, that the people in Iraq are truly moving forward and trying to set up their local governments. He thinks that our soldiers are making a difference. Not for one moment has he expressed any regrets in having taken a year out of his political life in Colorado to go to Iraq and make a difference in Iraqi lives and help support the President and the plan he has for stabilizing Iraq and a gradual withdrawal. This is the point: my colleague from Massachusetts seemed to have learned the lessons of 9/11 when he warned against a precipitous withdrawal from Iraq in the past, but as the political winds have changed, he seems to have forgotten those lessons anew. Republicans will never forget the lessons of 9/11 and will continue to support the President's efforts to bring peace and stability to Iraq. I am supporting the President because he is staying the course. He has a plan in Iraq. He is putting the plan to work. I think that in the long run he is going to make a difference. We are going to have a better world because of his efforts. We are going to have a more stable Middle East, and this President will truly go down in history as a great leader. I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak as in morning business.

Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, in light of the fact that we have those who are calling for the immediate withdrawal from Iraq, I think we ought to sit back and look at what has happened in Operation Iraqi Freedom for the last 3 years. We have made remarkable progress in Iraq in the last 3 years. On March 19, 2003, the United States and coalition forces launched Operation Iraqi Freedom. At that time, life in Iraq, under Saddam Hussein, was marked by brutality and fear and terror. Iraqis had no voice in their country or their lives. Saddam devastated Iraq, wrecked its economy, ruined and plundered its infrastructure, and destroyed its human capital. Let's look at what is happening today. Iraq has a democratically elected government. The reign of a dictator has been replaced by a democratically elected government, operating under one of the most progressive constitutions in the Arab world. Millions of Iraqis have joined the political process over the past year alone. Today, Saddam Hussein is facing justice in an Iraqi court. The Iraqi people are holding Saddam accountable for his crimes and atrocities. I believe the next year will bring a consolidation of these gains, helping a new government stabilize and build a solid foundation for democracy and increased economic growth. Iraq's elected leaders are diligently working to form a government that will represent all the Iraqi people. As the Iraqi Government comes together and Iraqi security forces improve their readiness, efforts to stabilize the nation will increasingly be Iraqi-led. I point out that securing a lasting victory in Iraq will make America safer, more secure, and stronger--make it safer by depriving terrorists of a safe haven from which they can plan and launch attacks against the United States and American interests overseas; more secure by facilitating reform in a region that has been a source of violence and depriving terrorist control over a hub of the world's economy; stronger by demonstrating to our friends and enemies the reliability of U.S. power, the strength of our commitment to our friends, and the tenacity of resolve against our enemies. Despite progress, the situation on the ground is tense. As al-Qaida's actions show, terrorists want to impose a dictatorial government on the Iraqi people. The coalition is united in support of the Iraqi people in helping them win their struggle for freedom. The terrorists know they lack the military strength to challenge Iraqi and coalition forces directly, so their only hope is to try to provoke a civil war and create despair. The President's national security for victory in Iraq has three tracks. I would like to go over those briefly. They are a political track, a security track, and an economic track, and I would add that all three tracks are progressing. On the political track, many are participating in Iraq's political process. Iraqis completed two successful nationwide elections and a national constitutional referendum in 2005. Each successive election experienced less violence, bigger voter turnout, and broader political participation. On December 15, more than 75 percent of the Iraqi voting-age population participated in the election for a new government--an increase of more than 3 million voters over the January election. I will talk a little bit about the security track. Iraqi security forces are increasingly in the lead. Three years ago, under Saddam Hussein's rule, the Iraqi Army was an instrument of repression. Today, an all-volunteer Iraqi security force is taking increasing responsibility for protecting the Iraqi people. Iraqi security forces are growing in number and assuming a larger role. More than 240,000 Iraqi security forces have been trained and equipped. Over 112,000 Iraqi soldiers, sailors, and airmen have now been trained and equipped. More than 87,000 police have been trained and equipped. These police work alongside over 40,000 other Ministry of Interior forces. Additional Iraqi battalions are conducting operations. Last fall, there were over 120 Iraqi Army and police combat battalions in the fight against the enemy, and 40 of those were taking the lead in the fight. Today, the number of battalions in the fight has increased to more than 130, with more than 60 taking the lead. Let's briefly look at the economic track. Iraq's economy is recovering, and the Iraqi people have better access to essential services. In 2005, the Iraqi economy grew an estimated 2.6 percent in real terms, and the International Monetary Fund has estimated it will grow by more than 10 percent in 2006. Mr. President, 3.1 million Iraqis enjoy improved access to clean water, and 5.1 million have improved access to sewage treatment. More than 30 percent of Iraq's schools have been rehabilitated, and more than 36,000 teachers have been trained. This is what our American soldiers in Iraq have helped accomplish for the Iraqi people and for America. We should be proud and thankful for their willingness to step forward for freedom. Freedom does work. It works for America, and I believe it will work for Iraq. The solution is not a hasty retreat; the solution is to carry on with the President's plan for victory. Mr. President, I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. ALLARD

Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, I also have been working on a terrorist visa amendment. I call up that amendment, No. 3216, for consideration.

Mr. ALLARD. I am very disappointed we cannot get that amendment up. I have been working now for some time to get that amendment to move forward. It is an amendment I filed last week. It is a simple, commonsense amendment that denies visas to advocates of terrorism. Yesterday morning, I came to the Senate to speak on that amendment and asked for a vote. Now, more than 24 hours later, we have still not had a vote on my simple, 14-line amendment. It is just one example of the Democrats continued obstruction of well intentioned efforts to debate and make improvements to the immigration bill. Put simply, the Democrats are denying me a vote on my proposal to deny visas to terrorists. Any Democrat who says this is anything other than partisan obstructionism are themselves in denial. To demonstrate the height to which this obstructionism has risen, I am again going to explain what my amendment does and how simple it really is. My amendment is so simple, in fact, that it adds only 6 words to the entire Immigration and Nationality Act. And half of those are the word ``or.'' The other three are ``advocate,'' ``advocates,'' and ``advocated.'' These 6 words are narrowly targeted to address a loophole in our current visa system that is evidenced by the following statement: Colleagues, believe it or not, this a heading from our very own Department of State Foreign Affairs Manual. The same Foreign Affairs Manual issued to the Department's 25,000 employees located in more than 250 posts or missions worldwide. Even more alarmingly, this is from the chapter that instructs our consular officers to whom visas should be issued. Visas are, of course, the ticket that foreigners, including terrorists, need to enter the U.S. This instruction says to the consular officer deciding whether or not to issue a visa that they need not deny a visa to an individual who advocates terrorism. I, for one, cannot imagine a more pertinent ground for denial. If advocacy of terrorism is not grounds for exclusion, I don't know what is. Not only am I concerned about the message this sends to our dedicated consular officers, I am just as concerned about the message this sends to terrorists. It says to them, feel free to lay the groundwork for an attack at home, apply for a visa, and come to America to finish the job. This is not the message that the U.S. should be conveying to terrorists. This Congress has already passed important legislation denying visas to terrorists, including in the PATRIOT and REAL ID Acts. The REAL ID Act, signed into law on May 11, 2005, specifically states that one who endorses or espouses terrorist activity is inadmissible. The real REAL ID Act became public law on May 11 of last year, 8 days after publication of this manual. Yet, today, more 10 months later, the State Department is still instructing its consular officers that advocacy of terrorism may not be a ground for exclusion. Clearly, the State Department needs to be sent a message that we, in Congress, are serious about securing our borders. And particularly serious about preventing known advocates of terrorism--people who are most likely to wish harm to our country--from entering into the United States. Admittance to the United States is a privilege, not a right. My amendment says, if you advocate terrorism, you lose the privilege of coming to the United States. I would like the opportunity to debate this amendment. I, for one, am curious to hear from the Democrats their reason for opposing it. It is a common sense amendment worthy of debate and a vote. I urge my colleagues to join me in calling for a vote on this legislation that slams the door shut in the face of advocates of terrorism who seek to enter our country. I also submitted a second amendment last week which I believe is another commonsense amendment to improve the immigration bill. My amendment No. 3213 calls upon the administration to develop a plan for securing the borders to curb the inflow of vast quantities of methamphetamine into this country. Our Nation has been hard hit by the illegal trafficking of methamphetamine. My home State of Colorado is no exception. In just 10 years, methamphetamine has become America's worst drug problem--worse than marijuana, cocaine or heroin. According to estimates from the DEA, an alarming 80 percent of the methamphetamine used in the United States comes from larger labs, increasingly abroad, while only 20 percent of the methamphetamine consumed in this country comes from the small laboratories. Therefore, my simple amendment calls for a formal plan that outlines the diplomatic, law enforcement, and other procedures that the Federal Government will implement to reduce the amount of methamphetamine being trafficked into the United States. My amendment aims to build upon the methamphetamine provisions of the PATRIOT Act. We must impress upon the Secretary of State, the Attorney General, and the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security the immediate need for a firm plan of action. It is imperative that such a plan include, at a minimum, a specific timeline to reduce the inflow of methamphetamine into the United States. There must be a tough standard for keeping excessive amounts of pseudophedrine products out of the hands of methamphetamine traffickers. We must outline a specific plan to engage the top five exporters of methamphetamine precursor chemicals. It is important that we protect our borders to ensure national security and the safety of our communities. Now, here we are today, 1 week to the day after filing my methamphetamine amendment, and still there has been no opportunity for a debate, much less a vote. I urge my colleagues from across the aisle to allow us to proceed on this and other amendments worthy of debate. Mr. President, I yield for a question from the Senator from Illinois.

Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, I understand negotiations are going on between the leadership in both parties, and my understanding is the methamphetamine amendment may very well be included in a managers' amendment and we will not have to be necessarily voting on that particular amendment. There is a second amendment, though, that is very important we do bring up for a vote. I know this is also being discussed by the leadership. That is the one which states that advocates of terrorism be denied a visa. I have two amendments. My hope is we can get that particular amendment up for a vote. It is the one I just recently asked for a vote on and was denied by your side. But I also understand the leadership on both sides are negotiating. I understand they are negotiating seriously. So I appreciate the fact it is being considered.

Mr. ALLARD. Yes.

Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Illinois for indicating support for that. I just think we need to go and get more specific language in the bill that we will be considering and, hopefully, will be reported off the floor of the Senate. I am just trying to address that. Mr. President, I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. ALLARD

Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, I have an amendment I am ready to offer, and I would like to speak to that amendment. So the way the agreement is being put together now, I will be expected not to offer that amendment until after we have had more discussion between both sides; is that correct?

Mr. ALLARD

Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, in this debate on immigration reform, there are three basic goals I have in mind. No. 1, and foremost, I want us to seal our borders. I wish to see us identify the illegal aliens we have in this country. We don't know for sure how many are in this country. We hear a lot of numbers thrown out. Originally it was 8 to 10 million and now it seems the common number being thrown around is 11 million. But when you get right down to it, nobody knows how many illegal immigrants we have in this country. We need to identify those individuals to help reach some reasonable conclusions. The third goal is to do it in a manner that does not disrupt our economy. And, finally, I don't believe we should have amnesty. I have a couple of amendments I am going to be presenting to the Senate. The first amendment is an attempt to put together a plan. We direct the agencies to come together with a plan on how they are going to manage immigration, both from a diplomatic point of view as well as from a border immigration point of view. That particular amendment I hope will be accepted as a managers' amendment. I don't expect it to be controversial. The other amendment I will talk about this morning I hope to call up later today for a vote. That is amendment numbered 3216. I will not call it up this morning, but I will debate it in the Senate and describe the amendment as to what it does. I rise today to share with my colleagues six words I believe will be as surprising to others as to me. Those words are ``advocacy of terrorism not always exclusionary.'' Am I reading these from a terrorist handbook? No. Am I reading them from the United States law passed by the Congress and signed by the President? Most certainly not. Am I reading it from a how-to book on exploiting loopholes in the United States visa system? I may as well be. Colleagues, believe it or not, I am reading from our very own Department of State Foreign Affairs Manual. The same Foreign Affairs Manual issued to the Department's 25,000 employees located in more than 250 posts worldwide. Even more alarming, this is from the chapter that instructs our consular officers to whom visas should be issued. Visas are, of course, the ticket foreigners, including terrorists, need to enter the United States. This instruction says to the consular officer deciding whether to issue a visa that they need not deny a visa to an individual who advocates terrorism. I, for one, cannot imagine a more pertinent ground for denial. If advocacy of terrorism is not grounds for exclusion, then I don't know what is. Not only am I concerned about the message this sends to our dedicated consular officers, I am just as concerned about the message this sends to terrorists. It says to them, feel free to lay the groundwork for an attack at home, apply for a visa, and come to America to finish the job. This is not the message the United States should be conveying to terrorists. This Congress has already passed important legislation denying visas to terrorists, including in the PATRIOT and REAL ID Acts. The REAL ID Act, signed into law on May 11, 2005, specifically states one who endorses or espouses terrorist activity is inadmissible. The REAL ID Act became public law on May 11 of last year, 8 days after publication of this manual. Yet today, more than 10 months later, the State Department is still instructing its consular offices that advocacy of terrorism may not be a ground for exclusion. Certainly, the State Department needs to send a message that we in Congress are serious about securing our borders and particularly serious about preventing known advocates of terrorism, people who are most likely to wish harm to our country, from entering into the United States. Admittance to the United States is a privilege; it is not a right. My amendment says if you advocate terrorism, you lose the privilege of coming to the United States, recognizing, of course, that special circumstances under which someone who meets these criteria may nonetheless need to be admitted. My amendment does nothing to change the authority of the Secretaries of State and Homeland Security in consultation with the Attorney General to waive an individual's inadmissibility when they deem it in the interest of the United States. I will urge my colleagues to join me in voting for this amendment that slams the door shut on the face of advocates of terrorism who seek to cross the borders into our country.

Mr. ALLARD. That will work out fine for me.

Mr. ALLARD

Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on International Operations and Terrorism be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, April 4, 2006, at 10 a.m., hold a closed briefing on Counterterrorism Priorities.

Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on Personnel be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on April 4, 2006, at 2:30 p.m., in open session to continue to received testimony on health benefits and programs in review of the Defense authorized request for fiscal year 2007.

Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on Seapower be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on April 4, 2006, at 3:30 p.m., in open session to received testimony on the posture of the U.S. transportation command in review of the Defense authorization request for fiscal year 2007 and future years defense program.

Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on Strategic Forces be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on April 4, 2006, at 10 a.m., in open session to receive testimony on missile defense programs in review of the Defense authorization request for fiscal year 2007.

Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on April 4, 2006, at 10 a.m., to conduct a hearing on ``A Current Assessment of Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing Threats and Countermeasures.''

Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on April 4, 2006, at 3 p.m., to conduct a hearing on ``Reform of FHA's Title I Manufactured Housing Loan Programs.''

Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation be authorized to meet on Tuesday, April 4, 2006, at 10 a.m. on TSA.

Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Finance be authorized to meet during the session on Tuesday, April 4, 2006, at 10 a.m., in 215 Dirksen Senate Office Building, to hear testimony on ``Preparing Your Taxes: How Costly Is It?''.

Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Select Committee on Intelligence be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on April 4, 2006, at 2:30 p.m. to hold a closed hearing.

Mr. ALLARD

Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, I am honored to recognize the University of Colorado--CU--ski team for claiming their 17th national ski championship title at the 53rd Annual NCAA Championship. I am also extremely proud that the CU ski team has been invited to participate in the National Student-Athlete Day activities at the White House on April 6. This is an incredible honor for these young athletes, their coaches, their parents, and the University of Colorado. The CU ski team overcame insurmountable odds to claim their 17th national ski championship. This year's ski team was the first team in U.S. history to win the national title without a full 12-skier team. This year's team broke and set the largest comeback record in NCAA ski team history--winning the title after being ranked sixth following the first full day of competition. Battling injury, illness, and an underdog status, the CU ski team went on to claim a national victory with a 98-point lead--the fourth largest margin of victory in NCAA ski team history. CU team skiers also claimed four individual titles and eight All-American honors. These team members deserve national recognition for their focus, determination, and spirit. It is this team's spirit, leadership, and record of achievement that will be honored by President Bush on National Student-Athlete Day, this April 6th. The CU ski team is being honored for their excellence in academics and athletics as well as for their contributions to their community. National Student-Athlete Day also represents an opportunity to recognize the parents, teachers, and coaches who have helped mold and challenge these outstanding student-athletes. This honor is representative of the University of Colorado under the outstanding leadership and commitment of University president Hank Brown, CU athletic director Mike Bohn, and Colorado ski team head coach Richard Rokos. Due to the talent, dedication, and leadership of the CU athletes, coaches, and university leadership, the University of Colorado is back on top of the collegiate skiing world. Congratulations to the University of Colorado, the ski team, the coaches, and the community that has supported this team throughout this winning, landmark season. On behalf of the State of Colorado, I am proud to honor and commemorate the University of Colorado's ski team and request that my colleagues join me in paying tribute to the University of Colorado and these outstanding young men and women.

Mr. ALLARD

Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, I rise today to recognize the work of a good friend of mine and a distinguished public servant, Secretary of Interior Gale Norton. Today is her final day as Secretary of Interior. I am certain that her presence in that position will be missed. Secretary Norton hails from my home State of Colorado where she built a reputation as a hardworking conservationist and public servant. In Colorado she served as the State's attorney general where she represented the State before the Supreme Court on several occasions. But arguing cases before the Supreme Court wasn't challenging enough for Gale, so when asked by President Bush to be the first female to head the Department of Interior she wholeheartedly agreed. Throughout her time at Interior she employed a commonsense approach and an understanding of Western issues which has proven to be an asset to the agency and the Nation. It is vital to have someone who appreciates Western issues as Secretary of Interior. This understanding is so crucial because, on average, 52 percent of the land mass in the 13 Western States is federally owned, while the average for the rest of the Nation is 4 percent. Secretary Norton has guided Interior through one of the most challenging periods in the Department's history with an enthusiasm, confidence, and expertise that will be difficult to match. She saw the Department through some of the most devastating fire seasons in recent history, and in response to this was charged with implementing one of the most important natural resource laws ever enacted, the Healthy Forest Restoration Act. The benefits of this legislation and her actions are already being seen on the ground on public land throughout the Nation. Secretary Norton also recognized the importance of domestic energy production before many others; her legacy will help decrease our dependence on foreign energy sources. This understanding of energy needs was priceless as she worked with Congress on the most comprehensive energy reform legislation in decades. She also worked tirelessly to improve the efficiency of DOI, reducing duplicative measures and cutting bureaucracy while improving citizen satisfaction with the Department. She excelled at pushing issues on a national level, but was also instrumental in several projects which are closer to my heart as they are located in Colorado. Secretary Norton helped with the creation of our Nation's newest national park, The Great Sand Dunes National Park in Colorado. She also helped to create the largest Wildlife Refuge in Colorado, the 92,500 acre Baca National Wildlife Refuge. Secretary Norton worked to help take the Rocky Mountain Arsenal and Rocky Flats and transform them from national defense sites to wildlife refuges. As Gale steps down I am somewhat saddened. Her moving on signals the closing of one of the most productive chapters in the Department of Interior's history. But I am excited to see what new endeavors she will take on. In these new adventures I have no doubt that she will meet challenges head on and find the same success that she has seen as Secretary of Interior. I wish Secretary Norton all of the best in her new adventures. Thank you, Gale, for all your hard work.