Wayne Allard

Mr. ALLARD

Mr. ALLARD. I 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 President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.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. I do not see that other countries are responding to our efforts. So I think we need to think about our own vulnerabilities and our own potential threats. That is what we are trying to do in the armed services bill. We are trying to at least give our scientists an opportunity to study our nuclear weapon vulnerabilities. Earlier on in the debate, some comment was made--I think we had a dialogue between a couple of Members who were supporting the Kennedy- Feinstein amendment. The point was made during that dialogue that this provision we have in the bill would lead to the building of new weapons. That is not true. We have a specific provision in the bill that says nothing in the provision shall be construed as authorizing the testing, acquisition, or deployment of low-yield nuclear weapons. What it does provide for is study and thinking about our vulnerabilities, our deterrence efforts, and our potential threats. I mentioned that Ambassador Linton Brooks testified in front of our subcommittee. I have a letter from General Jumper explaining how important it is that we at least study the low-yield nuclear weapons. I have a letter from Admiral Ellis talking about that need. We also have a letter from Secretary of State Colin Powell talking about the need of having low-yield nuclear weapons. I ask unanimous consent these three letters be printed in the Record.

Mr. ALLARD. Many rogue nations have built and are continuing to build hard and deeply buried facilities to protect their most valuable assets such as their leadership, communications equipment, and facilities for the manufacture of weapons of mass destruction. We know that conventional weapons cannot hold all of these targets at risk. A recent report by the Congressional Research Service cited a DIA estimate of some 1,400 known or suspected strategic underground facilities world wide. It further states that the only way to destroy them is with a strong shock wave that travels through the ground. The question that the Congress and the administration must now grapple with is how to ensure the continued credibility of the Nation's nuclear deterrent into the 21st century. We must recognize that today's stockpile was designed and manufactured to deter the threat by the former Soviet Union. As we all know, that threat no longer exists. Today, we are faced with a multi-dimensional challenge that requires a different set of tools. By repealing the ban on research and development of low-yield nuclear weapons, this does not mean the United States is about to resume nuclear weapons production. In fact, the United States has not manufactured a new nuclear weapon for more than a decade. The advanced concepts initiative merely allows the labs to explore the technical boundaries of providing solutions to new and emerging national security challenges. Advanced concepts work will allow the labs to train the next generation of scientists and engineers that the Nation will need to ensure a safe, secure and reliable nuclear deterrent. The fear of the erosion of the firewall between the use of nuclear and conventional weapons use is another unfounded issue. During the 1950s, 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s, when U.S. tactical nuclear weapons were deployed throughout the world and warfighting plans were in place, no U.S. nuclear weapons were ever used. We still maintain the policy that only the President can authorize the use of nuclear weapons and there are no plans to change that very important policy, nor is there any desire on the part of the Department of Defense to develop battlefield nuclear weapons to accomplish what our conventional weapons can already do. Now I will review the bill that is before us. It states specifically in the legislation that nothing in the repeal made by section A shall be construed as authorizing the testing, acquisition, or deployment of a low-yield nuclear weapon. We are just talking about studying, thinking about low-yield nuclear weapons. The key is if the U.S. President is faced with a situation so grave that the use of nuclear weapons is considered, we must have a full sweep of options. Options in our current stockpile are very limited and would result in a significant level of collateral damage if the nuclear weapon is required to resolve a crisis in terms of the best interests of the United States. These are challenging times, but they are crucial times, important times, and it is important we make the right decision because the world is changing. We need to know that. We need to know what the parameters are as we move forward in determining what is best to protect America. To have a provision in law that says you cannot study or think about all the options when you are looking at your vulnerabilities and where you need to go to protect America is foolhardy. I hope the Senate today will defeat the Kennedy-Feinstein amendment and at least allow for study and our scientists to think about various alternatives, including a low-yield nuclear weapon. I am here to ask my colleagues in the Senate to join me in voting no on the Kennedy- Feinstein amendment.

Mr. ALLARD

Mr. ALLARD. Our committee has worked and put in hours of effort and testimony on this issue of spiral development, or whether we have an inflexible program, which I think the Reed amendment leads us, to where you have specific timelines for specific parts of the system. What happens if you run into a problem in one particular part of the system? It delays the whole development. With the spiral concept, it gives the developers of the system, the Missile Defense Agency, the opportunity to move forward in other aspects of development. It is a multifaceted system. It has to do with communications for a number of different systems and parts. In my view, one of the problems we have had in the past, with cost overruns and whatnot, is where you have had inflexibility in the system and you find one real problem area and then all of a sudden it ties up moving forward. That is the whole concept between spiral development. We have had hours upon hours of this concept of spiral development. We have General Kadish and many of the individuals who are ``in the know'' testify about how important it is that we take this new approach so we can move forward with some of the more difficult and more technologically advanced programs, such as missile defense. Again, the assumption is that we have some regulations which I think are reasonable which we put in bills in years past, and we put some more in this year's bill. The assumption has been made that if we have fewer regulations, it is better. That is not an assumption we should make. I think there is a proper balance. I think the committee has worked and studied that issue. That we didn't have any amendments in the Strategic Subcommittee, as well as the Armed Services Committee, indicates that members of those committees having heard testimony for hours upon hours are comfortable where we are right now. I hope we oppose the Reed amendment.

Mr. ALLARD. I think maybe we can sit down and have some further discussion. All of a sudden, this gets brought up on the floor of the Senate and we need some time to maybe talk with the parties. As the Senator mentioned in his comments, we felt as if we pretty well worked this out in committee. The various members on my subcommittee who are knowledgeable on the subject, the Senator from Virginia and myself have worked out what we thought was a reasonable level of rules and regulations. Now we have an amendment that is calling for more rules and regulations. We might be able to work it out. I think we need some time. I hope this could be set aside at least for the time being to give us an opportunity to kind of work this issue a little bit more on the floor of the Senate and then perhaps come back to it at a later time.

Mr. ALLARD

Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, an historian and poet once penned that the history of Colorado would be written in water. In the midst of Colorado's worst drought in 300 years, this prediction has proven an accurate account of life in the headwater State and has proven a strong reminder that water is indeed our most precious natural resource. Yet in Southeastern Colorado, home of the Arkansas River, finding clean, inexpensive water, can be difficult. That is why today I am introducing legislation that will ensure the expedited construction of the Arkansas Valley Conduit--a pipeline that will provide the small, financially strapped towns and water agencies along the Arkansas River with safe, clean, affordable water. By creating a Federal/Local cost share formula to help offset the costs of constructing the Conduit, this legislation will protect the future of Southeastern Colorado. By way of background, the Arkansas Valley Conduit was originally authorized by Congress forty years ago as a part of the Fryingpan- Arkansas Project. Due to the authorizing statute's lack of a cost share provision and Southeastern Colorado's depressed economic status, the Conduit was never built. Until recently, the region has been fortunate to enjoy an economical and safe alternative to pipeline-transportation of Project Water: the Arkansas River. Sadly, the water quality in the Arkansas has degraded to a point where it is no longer economical to use as a means of transport. At the same time, the Federal government has continued to strengthen its unfunded water quality standards. In order to comply with these standards, the region's municipalities have begun exploring options for water treatment, some of which are estimated to cost between $20 million and $40 million. Taken together, the municipalities alone are facing potential expenditures of up to $640 million simply to comply with federally mandated water quality standards. Construction of over a half a billion dollars worth of water treatment facilities is simply not a feasible alternative for the financially strapped farming communities along the Arkansas River. With the Conduit, the communities will not need to build new water treatment facilities. In an effort to resurrect the Conduit, last year, Senator Ben Nighthorse Campbell and I, worked to secure $200,000 for a Bureau of Reclamation Re-evaluation Statement on the project. Thanks to this effort, the people of the valley are beginning to realize that the Conduit is much more than just a pipedream, and that Congress is serious about fulfilling the promise of the Fryingpan-Arkansas Project. According to the draft feasibility study, the Conduit is estimated to cost $200 million. My legislation calls for a 75/25 Federal/Local cost share, meaning that the local communities will be required to come up with at least $50 million to pay for their share. This is a sizeable sum, but is a far cry from the $640 million it would cost to build the new treatment facilities that would be required if the Conduit is not built. This will leave $150 million for the Federal government's share. However, I would like to point out that this $150 million undoubtedly would be exceeded if the communities were forced to seek Federal grants to help build new treatment plants. The Arkansas Valley Conduit will deliver fresh, clean water to dozens of valley communities and thousands of people along the river. The local sponsors of the project have initiated and are nearing the completion of an independently funded feasibility study of the Conduit, and have developed a coalition of support from water users in Southeastern Colorado. They continue to explore options for financing their share of the costs, and are working hard to develop the organization that will oversee the Conduit project. With the help of my colleagues, the promise made by Congress forty years ago to the people of Southeastern Colorado, will finally become a reality. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the legislation be printed in the Record.

Mr. ALLARD

Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, an historian and poet once penned that the history of Colorado would be written in water. In the midst of Colorado's worst drought in 300 years, this prediction has proven an accurate account of life in the headwater State and has proven a strong reminder that water is indeed our most precious natural resource. Yet in Southeastern Colorado, home of the Arkansas River, finding clean, inexpensive water, can be difficult. That is why today I am introducing legislation that will ensure the expedited construction of the Arkansas Valley Conduit--a pipeline that will provide the small, financially strapped towns and water agencies along the Arkansas River with safe, clean, affordable water. By creating a Federal/Local cost share formula to help offset the costs of constructing the Conduit, this legislation will protect the future of Southeastern Colorado. By way of background, the Arkansas Valley Conduit was originally authorized by Congress forty years ago as a part of the Fryingpan- Arkansas Project. Due to the authorizing statute's lack of a cost share provision and Southeastern Colorado's depressed economic status, the Conduit was never built. Until recently, the region has been fortunate to enjoy an economical and safe alternative to pipeline-transportation of Project Water: the Arkansas River. Sadly, the water quality in the Arkansas has degraded to a point where it is no longer economical to use as a means of transport. At the same time, the Federal government has continued to strengthen its unfunded water quality standards. In order to comply with these standards, the region's municipalities have begun exploring options for water treatment, some of which are estimated to cost between $20 million and $40 million. Taken together, the municipalities alone are facing potential expenditures of up to $640 million simply to comply with federally mandated water quality standards. Construction of over a half a billion dollars worth of water treatment facilities is simply not a feasible alternative for the financially strapped farming communities along the Arkansas River. With the Conduit, the communities will not need to build new water treatment facilities. In an effort to resurrect the Conduit, last year, Senator Ben Nighthorse Campbell and I, worked to secure $200,000 for a Bureau of Reclamation Re-evaluation Statement on the project. Thanks to this effort, the people of the valley are beginning to realize that the Conduit is much more than just a pipedream, and that Congress is serious about fulfilling the promise of the Fryingpan-Arkansas Project. According to the draft feasibility study, the Conduit is estimated to cost $200 million. My legislation calls for a 75/25 Federal/Local cost share, meaning that the local communities will be required to come up with at least $50 million to pay for their share. This is a sizeable sum, but is a far cry from the $640 million it would cost to build the new treatment facilities that would be required if the Conduit is not built. This will leave $150 million for the Federal government's share. However, I would like to point out that this $150 million undoubtedly would be exceeded if the communities were forced to seek Federal grants to help build new treatment plants. The Arkansas Valley Conduit will deliver fresh, clean water to dozens of valley communities and thousands of people along the river. The local sponsors of the project have initiated and are nearing the completion of an independently funded feasibility study of the Conduit, and have developed a coalition of support from water users in Southeastern Colorado. They continue to explore options for financing their share of the costs, and are working hard to develop the organization that will oversee the Conduit project. With the help of my colleagues, the promise made by Congress forty years ago to the people of Southeastern Colorado, will finally become a reality. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the legislation be printed in the Record.

Mr. ALLARD

Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, last year, I joined eleven colleagues in an effort to pass legislation that dealt with the eradication, monitoring, and surveillance of chronic wasting disease. Today, I am offering similar legislation, the ``Chronic Wasting Disease Support Act of 2003.'' Before I discuss the legislation further, I first want to thank Senator Feingold for his leadership on this matter and for working diligently to eradicate the disease. I also want to congratulate the State of Colorado, especially those Departments and Divisions that have been on the leading edge of disease management and eradication. They faced a horrendous task--processing tens of thousands of tests on a tight time frame. While more work lies ahead, they are to be commended for their effort. What was first a serious problem in the western United States, chronic wasting disease now poses a serious threat to every State of the union. As a United States Senator, chronic wasting disease presents not only a great animal health challenge, but a scientific quandary as well. As a veterinarian, chronic wasting disease presents an even greater challenge to the scientific communities of both the States and the Federal Government because we know so little about the disease. This legislation, cosponsored by Senators Feingold, Kohl, Roberts, Campbell, Burns and Craig, is a bipartisan effort to defeat the disease and to send a message that CWD must remain a priority for the Federal Government. The importance of this bill to both the State and Federal Government cannot be emphasized enough. It authorizes $34.5 million in the battle against chronic wasting disease. Although the bill authorizes a substantial amount Federal funding to fight and eradicate the disease, the States will retain their undisputed primacy and policy-making authority with regard to wildlife management. Nothing in this act interferes with or otherwise affects the primacy of the States in managing wildlife generally, or managing, surveying and monitoring the incidence of chronic wasting disease. It is important that all members of our delegation and in both the House and the Senate, coordinate our efforts as we fight the disease. Chronic wasting disease, or CWD, may be a new threat to some. Others may not be familiar with it at all. However, it is not new to those of us in Colorado and Wyoming, who have been dealing with it for over twenty years, and if the disease continues to spread, those unfamiliar with the fatal disease will, unfortunately, become experts in CWD policy. The scientific community has gone to great lengths to deal with the disease on limited budgets. These experts, through scientific publication and Congressional hearings, have told us that, although we have learned a tremendous amount about chronic wasting disease, there is much that we do not know and much that we must do to eradicate it. One thing we do know is that sound science is the answer, and that the Chronic Wasting Disease Support Act of 2003 is intended to greatly increase research, monitoring, surveillance, and management of the disease on all levels. It bolsters testing capacity, diagnostics capabilities, and funding authorization. Increased research and research funding is necessary because the disease is quite simply a mystery--the origin and transmission of CWD remains unknown. Unfortunately, the only way to treat an animal with CWD or to contain the disease is to destroy the animal and cull the herd. Together, we must embark on an ambitious and sound scientific commitment for research and investigation to end chronic wasting disease. That is what this bill calls for--cooperation and collaboration, working together at both the State and Federal level to achieve a common objective. We must end chronic wasting disease, and we must begin our eradication efforts now. The impact CWD will have on wildlife and agriculture is undeniable, and the economic and emotional toll of the disease cannot be overstated. Communities that are economically reliant upon deer and elk related enterprises will feel the impact of CWD as concern about the disease grows. But we can stop this, and we must stop this. We have an opportunity to restore cervid health, to contain the disease, and, most importantly, to eradicate the disease. This is the challenge that I urge my colleagues to accept, and to take decisive action; adequate research funding that is directed toward the complete eradication of chronic wasting disease starts with this authorizing legislation. In those States that are already dealing with CWD, the fiscal demands required to manage the disease is quite apparent. State budgets are stretched thin as they cull wild and captive herds and research for workable solutions to stop the disease. With State budgets already strained, an infusion of Federal resources and technical assistance is required to help the States keep CWD from spreading, to treat infected or exposed populations, and to greatly expand research for testing and possible cures. This bill does just that by providing assistance in the form of grants, Federal research programs and incidence reporting, as well as scientific assistance. State and Federal cooperation will protect animal welfare, safeguard our valued livestock industry, provide relief to family elk ranchers, help guarantee America's food safety, and protect the public health. The Chronic Wasting Disease Support Act of 2003 provides the foundation for a nationwide increase in diagnostic capabilities. Undoubtedly, the spread of CWD and the increased awareness of the disease, will cause the demand for testing to grow exponentially--this bill helps us prepare to handle a large volume of cases efficiently and reliably. The legislation calls for the development of new testing methods to help us understand the disease, as well as developing a live test. Chronic wasting disease presents a common problem to the States and the Federal Government. The Federal conduit role that is provided in the bill will allow animal health experts to unravel the CWD mystery. The challenge we face is to achieve what we all recognize as a common objective--to understand CWD and to eradicate it. But, we must act quickly or this disease will redefine the wildlife characteristics of our States. Thank you, Senator Feingold. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. ALLARD

Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, last year, I joined eleven colleagues in an effort to pass legislation that dealt with the eradication, monitoring, and surveillance of chronic wasting disease. Today, I am offering similar legislation, the ``Chronic Wasting Disease Support Act of 2003.'' Before I discuss the legislation further, I first want to thank Senator Feingold for his leadership on this matter and for working diligently to eradicate the disease. I also want to congratulate the State of Colorado, especially those Departments and Divisions that have been on the leading edge of disease management and eradication. They faced a horrendous task--processing tens of thousands of tests on a tight time frame. While more work lies ahead, they are to be commended for their effort. What was first a serious problem in the western United States, chronic wasting disease now poses a serious threat to every State of the union. As a United States Senator, chronic wasting disease presents not only a great animal health challenge, but a scientific quandary as well. As a veterinarian, chronic wasting disease presents an even greater challenge to the scientific communities of both the States and the Federal Government because we know so little about the disease. This legislation, cosponsored by Senators Feingold, Kohl, Roberts, Campbell, Burns and Craig, is a bipartisan effort to defeat the disease and to send a message that CWD must remain a priority for the Federal Government. The importance of this bill to both the State and Federal Government cannot be emphasized enough. It authorizes $34.5 million in the battle against chronic wasting disease. Although the bill authorizes a substantial amount Federal funding to fight and eradicate the disease, the States will retain their undisputed primacy and policy-making authority with regard to wildlife management. Nothing in this act interferes with or otherwise affects the primacy of the States in managing wildlife generally, or managing, surveying and monitoring the incidence of chronic wasting disease. It is important that all members of our delegation and in both the House and the Senate, coordinate our efforts as we fight the disease. Chronic wasting disease, or CWD, may be a new threat to some. Others may not be familiar with it at all. However, it is not new to those of us in Colorado and Wyoming, who have been dealing with it for over twenty years, and if the disease continues to spread, those unfamiliar with the fatal disease will, unfortunately, become experts in CWD policy. The scientific community has gone to great lengths to deal with the disease on limited budgets. These experts, through scientific publication and Congressional hearings, have told us that, although we have learned a tremendous amount about chronic wasting disease, there is much that we do not know and much that we must do to eradicate it. One thing we do know is that sound science is the answer, and that the Chronic Wasting Disease Support Act of 2003 is intended to greatly increase research, monitoring, surveillance, and management of the disease on all levels. It bolsters testing capacity, diagnostics capabilities, and funding authorization. Increased research and research funding is necessary because the disease is quite simply a mystery--the origin and transmission of CWD remains unknown. Unfortunately, the only way to treat an animal with CWD or to contain the disease is to destroy the animal and cull the herd. Together, we must embark on an ambitious and sound scientific commitment for research and investigation to end chronic wasting disease. That is what this bill calls for--cooperation and collaboration, working together at both the State and Federal level to achieve a common objective. We must end chronic wasting disease, and we must begin our eradication efforts now. The impact CWD will have on wildlife and agriculture is undeniable, and the economic and emotional toll of the disease cannot be overstated. Communities that are economically reliant upon deer and elk related enterprises will feel the impact of CWD as concern about the disease grows. But we can stop this, and we must stop this. We have an opportunity to restore cervid health, to contain the disease, and, most importantly, to eradicate the disease. This is the challenge that I urge my colleagues to accept, and to take decisive action; adequate research funding that is directed toward the complete eradication of chronic wasting disease starts with this authorizing legislation. In those States that are already dealing with CWD, the fiscal demands required to manage the disease is quite apparent. State budgets are stretched thin as they cull wild and captive herds and research for workable solutions to stop the disease. With State budgets already strained, an infusion of Federal resources and technical assistance is required to help the States keep CWD from spreading, to treat infected or exposed populations, and to greatly expand research for testing and possible cures. This bill does just that by providing assistance in the form of grants, Federal research programs and incidence reporting, as well as scientific assistance. State and Federal cooperation will protect animal welfare, safeguard our valued livestock industry, provide relief to family elk ranchers, help guarantee America's food safety, and protect the public health. The Chronic Wasting Disease Support Act of 2003 provides the foundation for a nationwide increase in diagnostic capabilities. Undoubtedly, the spread of CWD and the increased awareness of the disease, will cause the demand for testing to grow exponentially--this bill helps us prepare to handle a large volume of cases efficiently and reliably. The legislation calls for the development of new testing methods to help us understand the disease, as well as developing a live test. Chronic wasting disease presents a common problem to the States and the Federal Government. The Federal conduit role that is provided in the bill will allow animal health experts to unravel the CWD mystery. The challenge we face is to achieve what we all recognize as a common objective--to understand CWD and to eradicate it. But, we must act quickly or this disease will redefine the wildlife characteristics of our States. Thank you, Senator Feingold. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. ALLARD

Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, I rise in support of the proposed North American Treaty Alliance expansion before the Senate today. When the NATO countries met in Prague last November, they agreed to invite seven new countries to join the Alliance as full members. These seven countries: Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia have submitted their applications and proven their willingness and ability to respect the political and military obligations of NATO membership and to contribute to the Alliance's common-funded budgets and programs. The NATO Alliance has been enormously successful over the last 50 years and will continue to do so for many to come. Too often some only see NATO as a coalition of nations organized for collective defense. It is so much more. NATO enhances the political and economic stability for all countries in the Euro-Atlantic area. By helping these new members as they strengthen good governance, rule of law, and human rights, NATO will also facilitate a better long-term environment for American trade and investment as well as collective defense and security. In our war against terrorism, NATO serves a vital role. Strengthening the Alliance for this purpose is a positive development. From the conflicts in the Balkans, the war in Afghanistan or the most recent Operation Iraqi Freedom, the seven invitee nations have contributed, or have committed to contribute, critical support in the form of personnel, overflight or basing rights. As a matter of fact, in this most recent war with Iraq, we received greater support from these seven countries than some of our more historical European allies. The value of loyal allies committed to democracy and making the world free from tyranny, regardless of any business dealings, cannot be understated. These seven countries are committed to eliminating and addressing past wrongs. Whether it is the atrocities performed during the Second World War and the Holocaust to the proliferation of military weaponry known as Grey Arms, each of these countries has recognized the issues and is committed to correcting the wrongs done. Expansion of NATO is not a new or unusual event. Throughout its tenure, NATO has continually added new members. Turkey and Greece were the first new members to join in 1952, followed soon after by Germany, in 1955. Spain entered in 1982 and the first former Warsaw Pact countries, Czech Republic, Hungary and Poland joined in 1999. It is also likely there will be another round of expansion, inviting such countries as Albania, Croatia and Macedonia. President Bush has espoused an ``open door'' policy to NATO membership. Today the door should not be held open for some and kept shut for others. The defined membership criteria encourages all that satisfy these requirements will be welcomed. NATO expansion will serve U.S. interests by strengthening both NATO and our bilateral ties with these new allies, who have already done a great deal to support our vision for NATO and collective security. I do have concerns regarding NATO and its future viability. We need to take a long look at the arbitrary and politically motivated, but indefensible use of the ``consensus rule'' NATO employs, and those nations who try to manipulate the path to peace for less than honorable purposes. I understand my good friend from Virginia, Senator Warner, and Senator Levin will offer an amendment related to the ``consensus rule.'' I think the amendment is a good idea and deserves the support of this body. Finally, the path to peace is broad enough to allow all those who wish to traverse it in good company. We should welcome them with open arms.

Mr. ALLARD

Mr. ALLARD. I yield 12 minutes to the Senator from Iowa.

Mr. ALLARD

Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, it is with great sadness, but greater pride, that I rise today to recognize a true warrior and Colorado native who gave of the ultimate sacrifice. SFC Randall Rehn, of Niwot, CO, served with honor and distinction. Sergeant Rehn was killed during one of the most significant events of this war. His vehicle was destroyed during the fight to take Saddam International Airport. It is because of sacrifices such as Sergeant Rehn's, a tyrant and his oppressive regime will be defeated. While I grieve for the loss of Sergeant Rehn, my pride and respect abound. I know that Colorado, as Gov. Bill Owens said, ``has gained a hero.'' My prayers go out to the family of this fallen hero and hope they know this country honors Sergeant Rehn's sacrifice and recognizes their loss. Mr. President, I wish to salute a fallen soldier of the great State of Colorado. Capt. Russell Rippetoe gave the greatest sacrifice in the service of his country and for the freedom of his fellow Americans. Captain Rippetoe joined an Army ROTC unit while he attended Metro State College in Denver. He entered the Army's elite Ranger unit and served in Afghanistan before being deployed to Iraq. Captain Rippetoe continued his family's proud tradition of serving his country. His father retired as a lieutenant colonel. I think his family said it best when they said, ``Russell loved this nation and America has lost a true American hero.'' I want to echo that sentiment by saying that Colorado has lost a warrior, a great citizen, and a son. Mr. President, I also stand today to acknowledge a true hero. Colorado said farewell to one of its own. Marine Cpl Randall Rosacker was laid to rest, as he requested, in a Colorado veterans graveyard with full military honors. Corporal Rosacker served this great Nation proudly in Afghanistan and gave the ultimate sacrifice in the war with Iraq. He was killed in a firefight early in the war, but paved the way to future success on the battlefield. His service to the country will always be remembered and appreciated. Corporal Rosacker was born in Alamosa and still has strong Colorado roots with grandparents and great-grandparents still residing in Colorado. My prayers go out to the family of this fallen hero and hope they know this country honors Corporal Rosacker's sacrifice and recognizes their loss. Today I ask the Senate to recognize this great American as Colorado has. And I ask we recognize one of the heroes of the war in Iraq. LCpl Thomas Slocum of Thornton, CO, was killed in action while defending the principles of freedom and justice against a brutal dictator's regime. Corporal Slocum's unit was ambushed by a group of Iraqis who cowardly indicated they were surrendering and then opened fire. He was a brave and patriotic son of Colorado. He will be remembered by all as ``proud to be a marine.'' He believed in what he was doing over there. Though any loss of life is tragic, we as Americans can hold our heads high because of the sacrifices of our servicemen such as Thomas Slocum. My prayers go out to the family of this fallen hero and hope they know this country honors Corporal Slocum's sacrifice and recognizes their loss.

Mr. ALLARD

Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, I thank the chairman of the Budget Committee for yielding me some time. I also want to thank him and let him know how much I appreciate the yeoman work he is doing in regard to this budget. I am a member of the Budget Committee. I had an opportunity to serve with him during the deliberations in the committee, and at the very start the chairman of the Budget Committee, Senator Nickles, said: We are going to work in a bipartisan way. We are going to work with the President, we are going to work with the House of Representatives, we are going to work with the Members of the Senate. But his most important priority is to get a budget passed. I think he had it right because the most important thing we can do in this Senate is to pass a budget. Now, it may not be a perfect budget that I would envision or the chairman would envision or somebody in the House or the President would envision, but we need to have a blueprint that will lay out the plan for this Senate and how we are going to handle those valuable tax dollars that get sent to Washington, DC. People refer to the sham in this budget. The sham is when we do not pass the budget. The big failure in the last Congress was that we did not pass a budget. There was an attempt to try to pass appropriations bills and spending bills through the process, but they did not have a blueprint to follow. We did not have a budget. Well, we are working hard to get a budget passed now so we will have a blueprint. I was struck by the comments that Senator Grassley, the chairman of the Finance Committee, made when he said, I do not recall an amendment that was ever put forward by those who oppose the President's tax cut plan that suggested we ought to cut spending. There were some Republican amendments, particularly the traditional one offered by Senator McCain, where he goes after porkbarrel spending that was actually working to cut spending, but I do not recall any others. Then I got to thinking about when we started this process this year, we came back in, we got sworn in, and the first two weeks we are working on an appropriations bill in an omnibus bill. There were 11 appropriations bills we did not get passed in the last session because we did not have a budget, we did not have a blueprint. While that omnibus bill was going through, there were some $50 billion in amendments that were offered by that group of individuals who are opposing the President's plan. So we move on further and then we bring up the budget resolution itself, and if we look at the number of amendments from those who oppose the budget and oppose the President's plan, there was $1.6 trillion at the desk to be acted on. It ended up being about $950 billion, all spending increases, all increasing the deficit, all increasing the total debt. I am speaking of the 40 amendments we ended up acting on, on the last day when we had our voting marathon. Then we had the supplemental bill that came up and now is in the conference committee this week that we have been working on, and here we have $12.3 billion in new spending that was put in the supplemental that was supposed to take care of just emergency spending. Many who are opposing this budget today, who oppose the President's plan, the amendments they offered increased spending. They did not cut spending, but they added to the deficit, and they did not have to comply with the budget rules because it was an emergency supplemental. When we have an emergency supplemental, that means that the budget rules do not apply. So we have Members of this body who cannot wait to have an opportunity to have an emergency supplemental bill come through because amendments or legislation that fall under the budget guidelines that we should pass with every Congress every year, that gives them a chance to get out from under those rules because they increase spending. The only time we hear from many of the individuals who are opposing this budget, opposing the President's plan, and who speak about how important it is to eliminate deficit spending is when we are talking about tax cuts. I think we need to have tax cuts. I think we need to have something to stimulate the economy. How are we going to stimulate the economy? I do not think we do it by increased spending. We started our spending binge as early as 2002. If we look back at what has been happening to the gross domestic product, it has been growing, probably peaked out somewhere around 2001, 2002--our spending binge started about 2000 actually, and all the agencies that want to increase spending always wanted to talk about how much they were spending as a percentage of gross domestic product because gross domestic product measured all the goods and services that happen in our economy. There has been phenomenal growth. So it made their budgets look relatively small in relation to the total economy of this country. The taxpayers in this country are paying a burden that is among the highest it has ever been in the history of the country as a percentage of gross domestic product, especially since World War II. That tells me we have to do something to stimulate the economy. The only solution is to cut taxes. Increased spending will not do it. Doing nothing is not acceptable. We need to cut taxes. I strongly support any effort we have to cut taxes. I don't think our tax cut package is big enough, considering how big our gross domestic product is. It really needs to be more to stimulate the economy. Finally, we need to get this bill passed. The longer we delay getting it passed, the more it tends to delay our efforts. We need to get our money to take care of the needs of our men and women on the military. I was as disappointed as anyone about the increased spending driven because of September 11, and increased spending as a result of trying to maintain peace in the world in the Iraq crisis. It is a need we had to face. As a businessman, I realize sometimes you have to incur debt to take care of immediate problems in the business. You always had a plan to pay off the debt. There is a plan in this budget to pay off this debt. That is not easy to come up with. The chairman of the Budget Committee worked hard to have a plan laid out to meet what the President was wanting to see as far as tax cuts to meet the increased needs, and then to have a plan out there to eliminate deficit spending within 10 years. I compliment the chairman. He is doing a great job. I support the budget. I yield the floor.

Mr. ALLARD

Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the American Dream Downpayment Act. I am pleased to have Senator Sessions join me in introducing this bill. Homeownership has long been the American dream, and we are incredibly fortunate that in America more and more families have been able to achieve the dream of homeownership. In fact, right now more American families own their home than ever before, and that number continues to increase. However, for some working families, low income families, women-headed households, minority families, urban dwellers, and young families the dream of homeownership remains elusive. This is particularly true for minority families. While Americans enjoy the world's greatest opportunities for becoming homeowners, only 47 percent of African-American and Hispanic families own their homes, as compared to 75 percent of white families. We must eliminate this gap in homeownership, so I am pleased to join with President Bush and Secretary Martinez in the initiative to create 5.5 million new minority homeowner families by the end of the decade. One key component of this initiative is the American Dream Downpayment Initiative, which I am pleased to introduced today in the Senate. This bill will provide $200 million annually to State and local governments for downpayment assistance programs. One of the greatest barriers for families in becoming homeowners is their inability to afford the downpayment requirements and closing costs. These are hard working families that can make mortgage payments, they simply need assistance with the downpayment and closing costs. The American Dream Downpayment Initiative will create 40,000 new homeowners each year, focusing on low-income and first-time homebuyers. And because the initiative will be administered through HUD's existing HOME program, it will minimize bureaucracy and duplication while maximizing flexibility for local jurisdictions. Homeownership has many benefits for cities, neighborhood, and families. In fact, a study released by the Homeownership Alliance revealed that children living in an owned home scored nine percent higher on math tests and seven percent higher in reading achievement. Homeownership has the power to transform individual lives and to strengthen entire communities. Increasing homeownership, particularly among minorities, is a top goal for me. The $200 million for the American Dream Downpayment Fund will help make that dream come true for more American families. I look forward to the opportunity to working with my colleagues to get the American Dream Downpayment Initiative enacted into law. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. ALLARD

Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the American Dream Downpayment Act. I am pleased to have Senator Sessions join me in introducing this bill. Homeownership has long been the American dream, and we are incredibly fortunate that in America more and more families have been able to achieve the dream of homeownership. In fact, right now more American families own their home than ever before, and that number continues to increase. However, for some working families, low income families, women-headed households, minority families, urban dwellers, and young families the dream of homeownership remains elusive. This is particularly true for minority families. While Americans enjoy the world's greatest opportunities for becoming homeowners, only 47 percent of African-American and Hispanic families own their homes, as compared to 75 percent of white families. We must eliminate this gap in homeownership, so I am pleased to join with President Bush and Secretary Martinez in the initiative to create 5.5 million new minority homeowner families by the end of the decade. One key component of this initiative is the American Dream Downpayment Initiative, which I am pleased to introduced today in the Senate. This bill will provide $200 million annually to State and local governments for downpayment assistance programs. One of the greatest barriers for families in becoming homeowners is their inability to afford the downpayment requirements and closing costs. These are hard working families that can make mortgage payments, they simply need assistance with the downpayment and closing costs. The American Dream Downpayment Initiative will create 40,000 new homeowners each year, focusing on low-income and first-time homebuyers. And because the initiative will be administered through HUD's existing HOME program, it will minimize bureaucracy and duplication while maximizing flexibility for local jurisdictions. Homeownership has many benefits for cities, neighborhood, and families. In fact, a study released by the Homeownership Alliance revealed that children living in an owned home scored nine percent higher on math tests and seven percent higher in reading achievement. Homeownership has the power to transform individual lives and to strengthen entire communities. Increasing homeownership, particularly among minorities, is a top goal for me. The $200 million for the American Dream Downpayment Fund will help make that dream come true for more American families. I look forward to the opportunity to working with my colleagues to get the American Dream Downpayment Initiative enacted into law. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. ALLARD

Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, I rise to speak under morning business that we set aside to salute our troops in Iraq. Initially, the plan that was put together by the military leadership was criticized, but today it is heralded as one of the great military strategies put together and will probably go down in the annals of military strategy. A number of individuals throughout the country are writing comments about our troops in Iraq. I have an article written by Rick Atkinson, Washington Post Foreign Service, Thursday, April 3, 2003. It reads: An enthusiastic welcome for U.S. forces in Najaf turned jubilant today, as several thousand Iraqis braved sporadic firefights for what one Special Forces officer described as ``the Macy's Day parade,'' applauding a U.S. patrol that pushed close to a religious shrine at the center of the city. Four days after encircling Najaf, the 101st Airborne Division tightened the occupation today. Three infantry battalions rolled through the streets, including neighborhoods around the venerated tomb of Ali, son-in-law of the prophet Muhammad. Fourteen M1 Abrams tanks clanked up and down the southern boulevards, and another brigade of several thousand troops cinched the cordon on the north, seizing arms caches and swapping fire with elusive gunmen who are now believed to number no more than a few score. In the midst of the fighting, a U.S. patrol approached Ali's tomb attempting to contact local clerics but were met instead by a crowd. Lt. Col. Chris Hughes, a battalion commander in the 1st Brigade, said, ``We waited about an hour and a half, and the hair on the back of my neck began to stand up. The crowd got bigger and bigger, so we pulled back out. But it was like the liberation of Paris.'' I state our troops have been mindful of the Iraqi culture during the push north toward Baghdad. Our soldiers have been helping guard a religious shrine in southern Iraq. The temple is called the Temple of Ziggurat and was built 4,000 years ago. Many know the site as the birthplace of Abraham. This is just one example of the way our men and women were respectful of the rich heritage of the Iraqi people and committed to helping them preserve their legacy. I have a picture of a small Iraqi child giving a thumbs-up to our American soldiers because he recognizes the great job our men and women are doing in Iraq and recognizes the fact it is his freedom we are talking about. They are fighting not only to protect America but to provide an environment where freedom will thrive in a new Iraq. I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. ALLARD

Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, I take a moment to welcome our Chaplain for the day. Frank and Krista Cirone, with their four children: Andrew, Benjamin, Isaak, and Anikka, live and minister at Ravencrest Chalet of the Torchbearer International Missionary Fellowship. Ravencrest Chalet is a Bible school and Christian conference center in Estes Park, CO. The Cirones enjoy hiking, mountain biking, and snowboarding in the Colorado Rockies. Frank graduated from Philadelphia Biblical University in 1989 prior to joining the staff at Ravencrest Chalet. Frank is pursuing his master's degree in leadership from Denver Seminary. At Ravencrest, he serves as principal of the Bible school, resident instructor and coordinator of the second year leadership program. Besides his responsibilities at Ravencrest, Frank spends time traveling and speaking at various conferences and retreats both in North America and overseas. He very much enjoys motivating people to a deeper love for Christ that influences all aspects of daily living through dynamic communication and interaction. I want to thank Mr. Cirone and his family for making the trip to Washington, DC and participating today in the opening prayer of the Senate.

Mr. ALLARD

Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, Members of the Congress have been receiving reports on a daily basis on the conflict in Iraq. At these briefings, I report back to Members of the Congress and America that things have been going well, much better than many expected, in the war in Iraq. What we have been getting out of these briefings is just how highly trained are our men and women in the Armed Forces and how the technological developments of this country have helped make their job easier on the battlefield. We have learned to appreciate their courage and commitment to protecting America's freedom. Today marks the 14th day of Operation Iraqi Freedom, and the fight for freedom continues in the Middle East. Our brave members of the U.S. military have shown the entire world how truly committed the United States is to ending the dangerous regime in Iraq. By sacrificing their lives so those in Iraq can finally be allowed peace, coalition forces continue to courageously march toward Baghdad. During the last 2 weeks, I, along with many of my colleagues, have continued to come down to the Senate floor daily to honor our troops and praise their valor. While we stand in the safety of the Capitol Building, our words will not be heard by those who are directly in harm's way, but the words are still needed. It is important for us to continue to honor these men and women, some of whom will not come home, who fight for freedom and the safety and security of the United States of America. I would like at this time to honor some of those brave men and women from my home State of Colorado who this very day are being moved into the Persian Gulf. The 3rd Armored Calvary Regiment as well as the 3rd Brigade Combat Team have been deployed from Fort Carson over the 3 weeks and continue to do so today. Many of these individuals have been waiting for the chance to stand shoulder to shoulder with their comrades already participating in Operation Iraqi Freedom. I salute them for their bravery. It is clear that after all of the deployments from Fort Carson are completed, it will mark the biggest mobilization from the base since World War II. I sincerely hoped that the course of events that have led to the mobilization of soldiers not only from Colorado but those stationed all over the world would not have happened. But it was apparent from the beginning that our Armed Forces would need to be involved in the manner that they are now. And they have performed admirably. I pray for a safe return for our troops and that this conflict can end as soon as possible. I would be remiss if I did not mention the names of our military personnel who will not be returning home. I offer my condolences to those families whose sons and daughters have already been lost. To the families of LCpl Thomas Slocum and Cpl Randal Kent, I give my deepest and most sincere sympathies for the loss of their sons. In their passing, they have continued the valued Marine Corps tradition of esprit de corps, and I will continue to pray for you as you mourn your loss. Our thoughts and prayers are with our Armed Forces both at home and overseas. Our thoughts and prayers are with the families and friends. God bless America. I yield the floor.

Mr. ALLARD

Mr. ALLARD. No. I want to ask for a clarification. Will I introduce my amendment following the Landrieu amendment?

Mr. ALLARD. I ask that the pending amendments be set aside.

Mr. ALLARD. I send an amendment to the desk and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, I thank the chairman for giving me an opportunity to offer this amendment. Twice this past week, the Secretary of the Air Force, James Roche, and the Air Force Chief of Staff, GEN John Jumpers, testified before congressional committees on the progress of the Air Force's investigation into the allegation of sexual misconduct at the U.S. Air Force Academy. Like many of my colleagues, I was stunned to hear these officials exonerate the leadership of the Academy. The Air Force investigation has not been completed, yet Secretary Roche and General Jumper have already determined that these officials were not responsible. To make this determination before the investigation is completed is irresponsible and inappropriate, in my view. Mr. President, 42 former and current cadets who allegedly were sexually assaulted or raped have contacted my office. Some of these cases are between 5 and 10 years old. Most, however, took place within the last 5 years; 20 have occurred within the last 2 years. Let me repeat that: 20 cadets say they were sexually assaulted or raped in the last 2 years at the U.S. Air Force Academy. The Air Force said the current leadership did not know about this problem. I disagree. I believe they chose to ignore it. Since 1998, the Academy Office for Character Development has been conducting student surveys on sexual assaults. The surveys, which were reviewed by the Academy's leadership, clearly indicated a pervasive problem with sexual assaults at the Academy. Here are some of the results from these surveys. In 1998, 22 cadets said they had been sexually assaulted at the Academy. In 2000, 17 cadets say they had been sexually assaulted at the Academy. In 2001, 167 cadets indicated they had been sexually assaulted--167. In 2002, 80 cadets said they had been sexually assaulted at the academy. These surveys were, at the very least, a warning that the Academy leadership chose to ignore. I served on the Academy's Board of Visitors for 4 years, and never during that time did the Air Force leadership or Academy officials bring up this issue. The first time problems of sexual misconduct at the Academy were discussed was last week. I issued repeatedly over the last year at Board of Visitors meetings a concern about sexual misconduct. Last June, for example, I urged Academy officials to investigate a highly sexual drama competition put on by cadets. I was assured that the Academy would review sexual misconduct at the Academy. Last September, I again brought up a number of concerns raised by parents of cadets about sexual assaults at the Academy. Again I was assured the Academy would look into it. Enough is enough. It is time to take action. I appreciate the fact that the Air Force moved so quickly on its investigation. I am also pleased the Air Force has issued a number of directives. But clearly, given the history involved and the lack of action in the past, an external review is necessary. Therefore, Senator Warner, Senator Pryor, Senator McCain, Senator Graham, and I, along with several others, will offer an amendment to the legislation currently before the Senate. This amendment will create an independent panel that will review the Air Force's directives and determine those who were responsible for the atmosphere that was conducive to recent acts of sexual misconduct at the Air Force Academy. The panel will begin its work by May 1, 2003, and submit a report to the President, Secretary of Defense, Secretary of the Air Force, and Congress within 90 days. I still believe in the Air Force Academy. It is a fine institution. It has trained and equipped thousands of Air Force officers. Yet this current crisis has tarnished the reputation of the school and cast doubt on its graduates. It is time for us to take action. I urge my colleagues to support our amendment. I yield the floor.

Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, I add an additional cosponsor to the amendment, Senator Dodd.