George Allen

Mr. ALLEN

Mr. ALLEN. Senator Rockefeller, may I have 1 minute of your time?

Mr. ALLEN

Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, I rise today to talk about a bill I introduced this morning. The first cosponsor of this measure is my good friend and colleague, Senator John Warner of Virginia. The bill is the Victims of Terrorism Relief Act of 2001, which would modify current tax policy to provide needed relief and compassion to the victims of the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001. As you well know--and all Americans know--on September 11, 2001, the world was stunned by what may prove to be the most vile, most horrifying act of hate and terror against a nation's people. While many questions will remain unanswered in the weeks and months to come, what is immediately clear is that the conduct of war, as previously waged by the enemies of the United States, has been suddenly altered. That conduct of war is so different than what we ever imagined as a civilized Nation. This new war does not differentiate between a military and a civilian target. The enemies of liberty and democracy do not distinguish between a trained soldier and an unarmed child. The Federal Government, and the Congress, have previously recognized, and rightfully so, the special circumstances of some of our citizens who voluntarily serve their country in potentially dangerous regions outside of the United States. Current law provides a reduction in the death tax liability of the estates of members of the Armed Forces who are killed while serving in a combat zone or die as a result of injuries suffered while serving in a combat zone. In addition, current law provides an exemption from the Federal income tax, on the income earned in the year of death, by Federal military and civilian employees who die during, or as a result of, injuries suffered in a military or terrorist attack outside of the United States. These brave and honorable individuals put their lives on the line for our country. It is only right that we recognize their extraordinary dedication and their sacrifice. Unfortunately, the advent of a new type of warfare means many provisions in our Tax Code, which were designed to provide tax relief to Federal military and civilian employees killed in service to their country, are now inadequate in the face of new threats. These benefits do not extend such relief to civilians who may be likewise killed in enemy attacks now indiscriminately aimed at civilian targets, as well as military installations. As we recognize that our world and the rules of war, as the terrorists use them, have changed, we, too, must change the tax benefits of those citizens and their families who are adversely affected. To address these inadequacies in the current Tax Code, I introduced the Victims of Terrorism Tax Relief Act of 2001 which would extend and expand current law benefits to any individual who died as a result of the terrorist attacks occurring on September 11, 2001. Specifically, my legislation eliminates all Federal death taxes on the estates of any individual killed during, or as a result of injuries derived from, the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. It exempts from Federal income tax, in the year of death, any income earned by any individual killed during, or who died as a result of injuries resulting from, the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. It ensures that all our citizens--law enforcement, firefighters, rescue and relief workers, nurses, doctors, anyone--are recognized for their heroism and their sacrifice. On September 13, 2001, the House of Representatives unanimously passed H.R. 2884, demonstrating overwhelming bipartisan support for extending current law tax benefits to civilian victims of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. While I do not believe the legislation went far enough, in that it does not provide for full relief from Federal death taxes, it takes a very strong stand, sending a message of unity from Washington. This is a recognition that all of those who lost their lives, in a violent act of war on the United States, on September 11, 2001, whether they are military personnel, civilian personnel, rescue workers, firefighters, police, nurses, citizens trying to help, citizens in their offices, children taking a plane trip, passengers on a plane, pilots of planes, all of these individuals have left us a legacy. Indeed, it is an enduring legacy of purpose, a legacy of compassion, a love of liberty, and a quest for justice. We must honor all of those who lost their lives in this vile act of war on the United States and never forget; for their memory has truly unified a very diverse nation and has made it an even stronger and more respectful nation. We will honor and always remember them. The U.S. Senate must rise to the occasion and stand in solidarity with the House of Representatives. The Senate must promptly pass this important legislation. It matters to those victims and their families. I have personally talked to many, too many, of those family members-- brothers, children, and wives--who have lost loved ones because of this dastardly terrorist attack. They are in a time of great grief. That grief will continue until the day they pass from this earth and reunite with their loved ones in heaven. In this new war against the United States, the enemy is making all Americans, whether they are military or civilian, young or old, parents, children or spouses, targets for their attacks. In this effort, the Federal Government must adapt its death benefits to take into consideration this sad truth: that the traditional line between combatants and noncombatants is not always respected. I have told those folks that their husband or their brother or their father is a hero and that they were killed because they were here in America. These grieving families need our assistance as much as do the families of our brave military personnel. What they do not need in this time of mourning is the added worry of filling out tax forms. It is going to be hard enough for them to get by emotionally, much less financially. For the Senate to act promptly on this legislation, would be to send a positive, reassuring message to these families: you are not going to have to worry about any of these tax forms, or how to afford new taxes in a time of grief--you are not alone in this. We must let them know we appreciate them as the heroes they are. We will always remember them, their acts of martyrdom and heroism unifying this Nation like I have never seen it unified in all of our history. I hope my Senate colleagues, as they all start coming back after the holy days, will rise in applause, and help to ensure that our tax benefit laws reflect the realities of the new war against civilians, allowing them the same sort of benefits that we provide for our brave military personnel. I ask unanimous consent that the text of my legislation introduced earlier in the day be printed in the Record.

Mr. ALLEN

Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, I rise today to talk about a bill I introduced this morning. The first cosponsor of this measure is my good friend and colleague, Senator John Warner of Virginia. The bill is the Victims of Terrorism Relief Act of 2001, which would modify current tax policy to provide needed relief and compassion to the victims of the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001. As you well know--and all Americans know--on September 11, 2001, the world was stunned by what may prove to be the most vile, most horrifying act of hate and terror against a nation's people. While many questions will remain unanswered in the weeks and months to come, what is immediately clear is that the conduct of war, as previously waged by the enemies of the United States, has been suddenly altered. That conduct of war is so different than what we ever imagined as a civilized Nation. This new war does not differentiate between a military and a civilian target. The enemies of liberty and democracy do not distinguish between a trained soldier and an unarmed child. The Federal Government, and the Congress, have previously recognized, and rightfully so, the special circumstances of some of our citizens who voluntarily serve their country in potentially dangerous regions outside of the United States. Current law provides a reduction in the death tax liability of the estates of members of the Armed Forces who are killed while serving in a combat zone or die as a result of injuries suffered while serving in a combat zone. In addition, current law provides an exemption from the Federal income tax, on the income earned in the year of death, by Federal military and civilian employees who die during, or as a result of, injuries suffered in a military or terrorist attack outside of the United States. These brave and honorable individuals put their lives on the line for our country. It is only right that we recognize their extraordinary dedication and their sacrifice. Unfortunately, the advent of a new type of warfare means many provisions in our Tax Code, which were designed to provide tax relief to Federal military and civilian employees killed in service to their country, are now inadequate in the face of new threats. These benefits do not extend such relief to civilians who may be likewise killed in enemy attacks now indiscriminately aimed at civilian targets, as well as military installations. As we recognize that our world and the rules of war, as the terrorists use them, have changed, we, too, must change the tax benefits of those citizens and their families who are adversely affected. To address these inadequacies in the current Tax Code, I introduced the Victims of Terrorism Tax Relief Act of 2001 which would extend and expand current law benefits to any individual who died as a result of the terrorist attacks occurring on September 11, 2001. Specifically, my legislation eliminates all Federal death taxes on the estates of any individual killed during, or as a result of injuries derived from, the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. It exempts from Federal income tax, in the year of death, any income earned by any individual killed during, or who died as a result of injuries resulting from, the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. It ensures that all our citizens--law enforcement, firefighters, rescue and relief workers, nurses, doctors, anyone--are recognized for their heroism and their sacrifice. On September 13, 2001, the House of Representatives unanimously passed H.R. 2884, demonstrating overwhelming bipartisan support for extending current law tax benefits to civilian victims of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. While I do not believe the legislation went far enough, in that it does not provide for full relief from Federal death taxes, it takes a very strong stand, sending a message of unity from Washington. This is a recognition that all of those who lost their lives, in a violent act of war on the United States, on September 11, 2001, whether they are military personnel, civilian personnel, rescue workers, firefighters, police, nurses, citizens trying to help, citizens in their offices, children taking a plane trip, passengers on a plane, pilots of planes, all of these individuals have left us a legacy. Indeed, it is an enduring legacy of purpose, a legacy of compassion, a love of liberty, and a quest for justice. We must honor all of those who lost their lives in this vile act of war on the United States and never forget; for their memory has truly unified a very diverse nation and has made it an even stronger and more respectful nation. We will honor and always remember them. The U.S. Senate must rise to the occasion and stand in solidarity with the House of Representatives. The Senate must promptly pass this important legislation. It matters to those victims and their families. I have personally talked to many, too many, of those family members-- brothers, children, and wives--who have lost loved ones because of this dastardly terrorist attack. They are in a time of great grief. That grief will continue until the day they pass from this earth and reunite with their loved ones in heaven. In this new war against the United States, the enemy is making all Americans, whether they are military or civilian, young or old, parents, children or spouses, targets for their attacks. In this effort, the Federal Government must adapt its death benefits to take into consideration this sad truth: that the traditional line between combatants and noncombatants is not always respected. I have told those folks that their husband or their brother or their father is a hero and that they were killed because they were here in America. These grieving families need our assistance as much as do the families of our brave military personnel. What they do not need in this time of mourning is the added worry of filling out tax forms. It is going to be hard enough for them to get by emotionally, much less financially. For the Senate to act promptly on this legislation, would be to send a positive, reassuring message to these families: you are not going to have to worry about any of these tax forms, or how to afford new taxes in a time of grief--you are not alone in this. We must let them know we appreciate them as the heroes they are. We will always remember them, their acts of martyrdom and heroism unifying this Nation like I have never seen it unified in all of our history. I hope my Senate colleagues, as they all start coming back after the holy days, will rise in applause, and help to ensure that our tax benefit laws reflect the realities of the new war against civilians, allowing them the same sort of benefits that we provide for our brave military personnel. I ask unanimous consent that the text of my legislation introduced earlier in the day be printed in the Record.

Mr. ALLEN

Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak as in morning business for up to 15 minutes.

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

Mr. ALLEN

Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, I say to my friend and colleague from North Dakota, in relation to his eloquent remarks about the Happy Hooligans, we are glad the Happy Hooligans are on our side. I knew that this training was going on. These Air Guardsmen--and possibly women as well--were very important in scrambling to protect our Nation's Capital. I know of one of those pilots actually who is from Virginia. I am not going to get into the details because it is important for national security not to reveal what they were doing, but they were very much in harm's way. I will not get into any more detail other than to say, these pilots--the Happy Hooligans, and any others who were involved in that scrambled mission to protect our Nation's Capital, and the region here in the DC area--really were willing to give their lives in a generally undefended position. So I am glad the Senator saluted the Happy Hooligans. I salute the Happy Hooligans and all those Air Guard pilots who scrambled to our Nation's defense, with complete risk to their lives, possibly having to give their lives to protect others. They will be called upon again, undoubtedly, in service to our interests, our freedom, and our allies. We do salute them and their families and their employers, whether they may be in North Dakota, Virginia, Minnesota, Wisconsin, or anywhere else in this country because they are patriots. We have all seen the patriotism that defines our country.

Mr. ALLEN

Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, I congratulate Chairman Hollings and Senator Gregg for including in this appropriations measure a grant of $500,000 to the National Capital Area Council of the Boy Scouts of America for its ``Learning for Life'' program that serves 20,000 students in Washington, D.C., Virginia and Maryland. This is not a new program; the Congress has funded it for the past two years. By continuing to fund ``Learning for Life'' for another year, thousands of young people in the Washington metropolitan area will be able to participate in an innovative program that helps them develop social and life skills, assists their character development, and helps them formulate positive personal values. ``Learning for Life'' is designed to support our schools in their efforts to prepare youth to successfully handle the complexities of contemporary society and to enhance their self-confidence and motivation. It prepares youth to make ethical decisions that will help them achieve their full potential. At a time when drugs and gangs are ravaging our schools and communities, this program is a catalyst to help stop this trend. Teachers use age-appropriate, grade-specific lesson plans that give the boys and girls in our schools the skills and information that helps them cope with the complexities of today's society. By making academic learning fun and relevant to real-life situations, the core values and skills learned by the students participating in this program prepare them to participate in and provide leadership in American society. Senators Hollings and Gregg have been, and continue to be, strong supporters of efforts to enhance educational opportunities for the youth of our country. The thousands of boys and girls who participate in this program join me in expressing our gratitude for the continued leadership of Senators Hollings and Gregg. I am also thankful for the support of Senators Thurmond and Sessions who joined me in working to continue funding for ``Learning for Life.''

Mr. ALLEN

Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, my fellow Members of the Senate, this is a very sad day as we witness all of the implications and tragedies and lives lost from yesterday's dastardly terrorist attacks on the United States. Yesterday's attacks were attacks not just on the United States and our particular Commonwealth of Virginia or State of New York, it is an attack on freedom-loving people and everything we stand for as a unique and great nation. On Monday afternoon, Senator Boxer and I were ready to introduce a resolution condemning the suicide bombings in the Middle East. We would have introduced that resolution on Monday, but wanted to include another clause recognizing the attacks in Israel on Sunday. We now see with great shock and horror, that the United States is obviously not impervious to these suicide bombings and such attacks. What we need to do now is coalesce, coalesce as a people with our shared beliefs, coalesce to comfort those who have lost loved ones and then also determine where we need to go to move forward to try to prevent such acts from occurring in the future. Our goal and focus right now must be on the rescue, hoping there are those who are still alive. Secondly, we need to find as many details and information as to how our security was breached so as to hopefully prevent it in the future. And thirdly of course, hold those who are responsible accountable and bring them to justice. We are hearing stories just in the first day of great heroes. Heroes in New York. People who knew that the building was going to collapse, but nevertheless stayed there trying to usher people out. On C-SPAN this morning, one of those who was just a volunteer helper knew what was going on, where those who were emergency and federal FBI agents were as well, knowing that the building was going to collapse, staying there knowing those were the last minutes of their life trying to save people. The same was happening in Virginia where we have lost many lives, untold numbers, as of yet, at the Pentagon as well as the passengers on flight 77 flying from Dulles, VA, that was hijacked and crashed into the Pentagon. There are great stories of bravery, with people going above and beyond what is expected, and that should give us comfort as a nation. This tragedy has affected many lives, and we still don't know how many lives. It will probably take a week if not weeks to determine how many lives have been lost. Even in the small neighborhood where we live, where my daughter goes to middle school, children were crying because their parents work at the Pentagon. Others work at Fort Belvoir and there was worry that Fort Belvoir was being hit. There's only maybe a couple of dozen houses in our development, but a youngster--who came by our house to get to know my children, his father was on Flight 77. So, as the days go forward, we are all going to be learning these stories of innocent people whose lives have been lost and the families that will forever be scarred with the loss of that loved one. Our thoughts and prayers must be with those families. Whether they're in New York or people who are from Connecticut or New Jersey, people from Virginia, here in the D.C. area, I'm sure there are folks from Maryland and the District, clearly people from Massachusetts were on the hijacked flight from Boston. Clearly a lot of people from California, since the destination of all of those flights was to be California. This is truly a day that will live in infamy. History will record these as the most violent, insane, cowardly acts that have ever been perpetrated on our homeland in the United States of America. We need to be united, coalesced as Americans, but also with our allies in our resolve, our resolve to pursue these cowardly conspirators who perpetrated these murderous acts. In our response to justice, we need to be sure, we need to be swift, and we need to be severe. In my view, we have allowed terrorism to go on too long, thinking that we could be immune from it. But nevertheless, we need to recognize that we're going to have to wage warfare. These people have struck against the symbol of American strength and power. They are not, though, going to be able to weaken the will of the people of the United States. We will stay united, defending our interests and our principles. We will also stick together, not just as Virginians and New Yorkers, but as Americans aiding and helping the families who have lost loved ones in whatever they can do. The senior Senator from Virginia, John Warner, and I will work together to make sure that for those Federal employees that the Government is doing all they can as well as for the civilian employees. And it is not just as Virginians. I know that the Presiding Officer, sitting there from Florida, cares just as much as anybody else does. And so we are all going to stick together in that regard. We do need to learn from this, though. And as we learn, we must make sure that as we learn the facts, we do not allow these attacks to succeed in tempting us in any way to diminish what makes us a great nation. And what makes us a great nation is that this is a country that understands that people have God-given rights and liberties. And we cannot--in our efforts to bring justice--diminish those liberties. Clearly, this is not a simple, normal criminal case. This is an act of war, and those rules apply. But at home and domestically, we need to make sure that we are not tempted to abrogate any civil rights such as habeas corpus or protections against unreasonable searches and seizures, or the freedom of expression and peaceable assembly, freedom of religion. And just because somebody may come from an ethnic background, that means nothing. They are American citizens. And so let's make sure that in our anger and in our efforts to bring justice, we remember our basic foundational civil liberties and do not abrogate them. We are a nation of laws, of good-hearted people, of loving people. And so I would say in closing, Mr. President, let's make sure we pray for and comfort those who have lost loved ones. Let's get the facts, move swiftly and properly. But most importantly, as Americans, let's stay strong. Let's stay resolved, and let's keep moving forward. Because, indeed, all the world is watching, not just the Senate; they are watching the United States and Americans. What will their response be? Let's keep moving forward. We are the beacon for freedom-loving people in the world, sticking together we will persevere. We will bring justice. And we will come out safer and stronger in the end. Thank you, Mr. President.

Mr. ALLEN

Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, I rise to speak on the Craig amendment.

Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, I rise in support of the amendment of our colleague, Senator Craig of Idaho, of which I am a cosponsor. I listened very carefully to the eloquent words of the Senator from Connecticut, Mr. Dodd, and his arguments in opposition to this amendment. In my view, the proposed International Criminal Court is a threat to the sovereignty of the United States and our individual God-given rights that are protected in the Constitution of the United States and in the constitutions and laws of several states. President Clinton, in my view, made a serious mistake when he signed the Rome treaty in the waning days of his administration. That treaty, which would establish a permanent international criminal court, creates a number of undesirable, unprecedented challenges for the people of the United States. The ICC will have the power to investigate and prosecute a series of international criminal offenses such as crimes against humanity, heretofore enforceable only in national courts or tribunals of limited application which have broad international support, such as the Nuremberg trials, which Senator Dodd brought up. Obviously, everyone here thinks the Nazis should be prosecuted. We do support, obviously, the tribunal that is trying Milosevic right at this moment. The International Court in The Hague is the proper approach, which does not impinge upon our sovereignty. Senator Dodd, in arguing against this amendment, did mention he would oppose the Rome treaty as written if we were going to be voting on it at this moment. But if the Senate were to ratify this ill-advised treaty, this International Criminal Court would have the authority to try to punish Americans for alleged offenses abroad or in the United States, and that Court will be entirely unaccountable for its actions. This International Criminal Court, in fact, would be in a position to punish individual American officials for the foreign policy and military actions of the United States and would not offer even minimum guarantees afforded in the Bill of Rights to any defendants before it. At the heart of the ICC is an independent prosecutor accountable to no one. The international prosecutor is empowered to enforce justice as that prosecutor sees fit. If the international prosecutor believes that a local trial in our U.S. courts has been inadequate, he or she is authorized to indict an alleged human rights abuser and demand a new international trial. The international prosecutor may think a local pardon or an amnesty or a finding of not guilty was improper. That international prosecutor can ignore that finding. What this authority symbolizes is the theory that all nations, including constitutional democracies, should surrender their sovereignty to the altar of international control. Control of our own courts is one of our most cherished internal decisions about justice and order in our civilization. The United States was founded on the basic principle that the people of the States and our country have the right to govern themselves and chart their own course. The elected officials in the United States, as well as our military and citizenry at large, are ultimately responsible to the legal and political institutions established by our Federal and State constitutions, which reflect the values and the sovereignty of the American people. The Rome treaty would erect an institution in the form of the ICC that would claim authority superior to that of the Federal Government and the States and superior to the American voters themselves. This Court would assert the ultimate authority to determine whether the elected officials of the United States as well as any other American citizen have acted unlawfully on any particular occasion. In this, the Rome treaty is fundamentally inconsistent with the first tenet of our American Republic, that anyone who exercises power must be responsible for its use to those subject to that power. In our country, the Government derives its just powers from the consent of the people. That is foundational and fundamental. The values of the ICC's prosecutor and judges are unlikely to be the same values of those of the United States. The Rome treaty has been embraced by many nations with legal and political traditions dramatically different from those of our own. This includes such states as Cambodia, Iran, Haiti, Nigeria, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen, all of which have been implicated in torture or extrajudicial killings or both. Even our closest allies, including European states following the civil law system, begin with a very different assumption about the powers of courts and the rights of the accused. Nevertheless, if it is permitted to be established, the ICC will claim the power to try individual Americans, including U.S. service personnel and officials acting fully in accordance with U.S. law and our interests. The Court itself would be the final arbiter of its own power, and there would be no appeal from its decisions. In 1791, Thomas Jefferson, our country's first Secretary of State, said: No court can have jurisdiction over a sovereign nation. Last year this Congress prohibited the use of taxpayers' money to support the International Criminal Court. I say, let's put another lock on that door by adopting this amendment, the Craig amendment, and let's put a lock on the door to the Preparatory Commission as well. In closing, I quote again from Mr. Jefferson. Thomas Jefferson said: It is the right of every nation to prohibit acts of sovereignty from being exercised by any other within its limits. I urge my colleagues to join me in exercising this right and supporting this amendment to protect the sovereignty of the American people. I yield the floor.

Mr. ALLEN

Mr. ALLEN. Madam President, I congratulate Senator Gramm, Senator Enzi, and Senator Sarbanes who have worked diligently to craft this broadly supported measure. President Bush and his team also deserve a great deal of credit for weighing in, in support of this legislation. This bill represents a logical improvement over the outdated Export Administration Act that was passed in 1979 and the current patchwork of Executive orders regulating export controls issued under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. S. 149 dramatically enhances our national security needs by increasing penalties, by focusing attention on truly sensitive items, and granting the President new control authority in cases involving national security and terrorists. At the same time, this legislation will remove unnecessarily burdensome punitive regulatory controls on mass market and readily available foreign technology products that have hindered the competitiveness of U.S. technology industries. Many studies have concluded that the present system of export controls has the unenviable distinction of harming American private enterprise without enhancing our security. At a time when our technology industries are seeing declining sales--and, indeed, the technology sector of our economy is in a recession--it is imperative that the Congress remove unnecessary and ineffective barriers to exports and, by doing so, help keep technology jobs in our country. Current U.S. policy on export controls is harming good paying jobs for Americans, and it is time that Congress acts to remedy this situation. Existing export controls which aim to keep our computing power out of the hands of potential U.S. adversaries do not work given the technological and global realities of the 21st century. These policies must be reformed. One may ask why. There are five main reasons. No. 1, they are outdated; No. 2, they are ineffective; No. 3, they are unrealistic; No. 4, they are potentially dangerous; and No. 5, these current laws are bad economics. Let me expand on that and actually cite some studies that point out the inefficiencies and ineffectiveness of these current laws. They are outdated: The current policy was formulated during the cold war when we once had a very clear adversary, the U.S.S.R., and when computers were the size of a dorm room. Today's international makeup is much more vague. Our potential adversaries or enemies are not as easily identified, and computers are now the size of a large remote control. There are some computers, such as Zybernaut's Mobile Assistant, which you can wear on your belt. They weigh a couple of pounds at most. The export controls we have now are ineffective. Access to high- performance computing capability cannot be restricted. Almost anyone, whether they are in Vienna or Venezuela or Virginia, can download computing power off the Internet or link lower level computers together to perform certain calculations. These current laws are unrealistic. The United States cannot attempt to control access to computer hardware or components when foreign competitors are producing the same types of technology as domestic firms. In today's global economy, the United States no longer has a clear monopoly on technological innovation. These rules are potentially dangerous. By struggling to control access to computers and computer hardware that is readily available worldwide, we are diverting resources from policing the truly sensitive capabilities. All the while, our military is way behind the curve when it comes to taking advantage of the very technologies we are trying to restrict. Finally, these current laws are just bad economics. As high-tech industry suffers a dramatic downshift, we are limiting their access to the fastest growing consumer markets in the world. In the new global economy, being first to market is a critical advantage. Currently our companies are not on a level playing field. This hurts their ability to make inroads into millions of potential new customers, not to mention reducing how much U.S. firms can spend on continued R&D, or research and development, to maintain our competitive and innovative leadership. I say to my colleagues in the Senate, the time is right to modernize and reform export controls. Leading members of the Senate Banking Committee have worked closely to develop a thoughtful, reasonable approach to balancing U.S. national security and economic interests. There is broad bipartisan support for reform, including among the national security establishment. President Bush and his national security advisers, including Secretary of State Colin Powell, and Condoleezza Rice, Commerce Secretary Don Evans, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, former President Clinton, four former Secretaries of Defense, the Pentagon, the Defense Science Board, and the General Accounting Office, Democrats and Republicans alike, have all drawn the same conclusions: The current system is broken. For example, under the current law, the President is required to use an outmoded standard called MTOPS, millions of theoretical operations per second, to measure computer performance and set export control thresholds based on country tiers. A recent report on ``Computer Exports and National Security in the Global Era'' issued by the Center for Strategic and International Studies reflects the widespread consensus amongst those in the U.S. defense and security communities that MTOPS-based computer hardware controls are ``ineffective given the global diffusion of information technology and rapid increases in performance.'' The report explains, for example, while various U.S. computer systems are currently subject to controls based on their MTOPS ratings, the equivalent computing power can be easily achieved by clustering several widely available low-level systems. A recent report from the Department of Defense itself also concludes, ``MTOPS has lost its effectiveness as a control measure due to rapid technology advances.'' The General Accounting Office's report to the Senate Armed Services Committee similarly concludes that the MTOPS standard is outdated and invalid and the current export control system for high-performance computers which focuses on controlling individual machines is ineffective because it cannot prevent countries of concern from linking or clustering many lower performance uncontrolled computers to collectively perform at higher levels than current export controls allow. The Defense Science Board echoes this same analysis, warning that ``clinging to a failing policy of export controls has undesirable consequences beyond self-delusion.'' Finally, a multilateral export control study recently released by the security-minded Harry Stimson Center reflects the overall consensus view that: [T]he system of controlling the export of militarily sensitive goods is increasingly at odds with the world characterized by rapid technological innovation, the globalization of business and the internationalization of the industrial base, including that of defense companies. Although efforts have been made to adapt Cold War processes and regulations to changed circumstances, the current approach to controlling militarily relevant trade has failed to keep pace with changing international conditions and often falls short of adequately protecting U.S. national security interests. In effect, the Center for Strategic and International Studies, the Department of Defense, the General Accounting Office, and the Defense Science Board all agree that while the most advanced stand-alone high- performance computers may be controllable, high-performance computing is not. Thus, by struggling to control the uncontrollable, the Federal Government is diverting our attention away from the export of truly sensitive technologies. By keeping ineffective export controls in place, the Federal Government is restricting U.S. industry's access to the fastest growing consumer markets around the world without achieving any significant national security advantage. In the process, the Federal Government is creating an unlevel playing field for U.S. companies and stifling future research and development efforts upon which U.S. technological and military supremacy demands and depends. For the U.S. computer industry to maintain its preeminence in innovation and business, we must promote policies that encourage investment in R&D, not hinder it. S. 149 represents a solid stride toward an export control system that effectively balances our Nation's economic and national security interests. As it relates to computer exports, this bill removes the MTOPS regulatory straitjacket and empowers the President, the Secretary of Commerce, and the Secretary of Defense to review the national security control lists and determine both what computers should be controlled and how they may be controlled. The bill does not alter the way in which computer exports are currently controlled under existing regulations. Rather, it simply gives the President, the Secretary of Commerce, and the Secretary of Defense the flexibility to reassess the effectiveness of these controls in the future, taking into account all relevant risk assessment factors, including the factors affecting an item's controllability, such as foreign availability and mass market status, as well as other relevant factors such as, in the case of computers, whether the capability or performance provided by the item can be effectively restricted. Passage of S. 149 does not in any way equal decontrol of computer hardware sales. Many levels of restrictions will still exist to protect U.S. national security interests if the EAA becomes law, such as rogue country embargoes. Those rogue country embargoes will remain in place, and user restrictions will allow the Government to prevent specific sale of computer technology to certain organizations or individuals, and protections over highly specialized military hardware and software applications will still exist. The success of export control efforts depends on vigorous enforcement of the law, with meaningful punishment of violators. For many potential violators, the monetary penalties associated with the current Export Administration Act pose no compelling deterrent. The Weapons of Mass Destruction Commission noted that under current law, ``an export control violator could view the risk and burden of penalty for a violation as low enough to merely be a cost of doing business, to be balanced against the revenue received from an illegal transaction.'' The Cox committee recommended that particular attention be given to reestablishing higher penalties for export control violations. Toward that end, S. 149 significantly enhances criminal and civil penalties for export control violations. Section 503 of the bill imposes a criminal fine of up to 10 times the value of the exports or $1 million for each violation, whichever is greater, for willfully violating or willfully conspiring to violate the provisions of S. 149 or any regulation issued under it. In addition, individuals may be imprisoned for a period of up to 10 years, and companies can be fined up to 10 times the value of the export, or $5 million, whichever is greater, for each violation. Additionally, the Secretary of Commerce may impose on a violator, in addition to or in lieu of the criminal penalties, a maximum civil fine of $500,000 for each export control violation. This bill gives the Secretary of Commerce the discretion he or she needs to take into account the aggravating and mitigating factors that may be present in any given case. Finally, the Government will be able to focus its resources on those critical technologies it must protect, rather than wasting time and money on the futile exercise of attempting to control access to commodity computing power and technology. I say to Members of the Senate, Senators Enzi, Gramm, and Sarbanes have worked diligently in crafting an outstanding bill. The passage of S. 149 is important to the future of national security and economic interests of the people of the United States of America. I thank Members for their efforts and urge support of S. 149.

Mr. ALLEN. Madam President, I am pleased to rise in support of S. 149, the Export Administration Act of 2001. Back on June 28, 2001, I joined my colleagues of the Republican Senate high-tech task force, Senators Allard, Bennett, Brownback, Burns, Grassley, Hatch, and Hutchison, in sending a letter to majority leader Tom Daschle urging him to bring S. 149 to the Senate floor as early as possible. I am grateful to the majority leader for heeding our request and permitting the Senate to consider this very important legislation. I ask unanimous consent that the letter my colleagues and I sent to Senator Daschle be printed in the Record.

Mr. ALLEN

Mr. ALLEN. If the Senator will yield for a further question, I ask the Senator from Arizona this: The formula he is proposing here, though, is based, as he states, on needs, actual needs. How do you determine those needs? What is the formula? What is the criterion by which needs are addressed?

Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, I ask the Senator if he will yield for a further question. There was an assertion that this will affect some of the bonding and expected amounts of money. The Senator is saying after the 2002 analysis, or the survey for wastewater monies, which is calculated on an antiquated, outdated, inaccurate formula, there would be a change. Even if nothing happened, even if the Senate does not act in a farsighted, appropriate way and vote for the amendment, there still would be changes in allocations to the different States anyway. Isn't that correct?

Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, let me say to my colleagues I very much support the Safe Drinking Water Act. There are tremendous needs throughout America and in our Commonwealth of Virginia, especially in the southwestern region of Virginia. This issue deals with wastewater and the need for cleaning up our wastewater, where there are combined sewer overflow situations in Lynchburg, Richmond, and other areas, as well as the Northern Virginia area, which flows into the Potomac, which affects the Chesapeake Bay, which is important to Virginia and the State of Maryland; and the Chair's home State of Delaware has a few tributaries that flow into the Chesapeake Bay. It is also important to Pennsylvania and New York, which are also part of that watershed. Now, again, I am very much in favor of all these ideas. The question is: How do you meet the needs? In trying to determine how you meet the needs for clean water, drinking water, and clean water as regards wastewater treatment, you want to have a good, objective, up-to-date determination of needs. The drinking water allocations are based on EPA's recommendations. There is a needs survey. But as I best understand it--and I may ask, in a moment, my colleague from Arizona, Senator Kyl, to join me to explain this because some fellow Senators are saying they don't understand this, and I want to have a better understanding. The wastewater moneys are based on a 1970s population number and have not changed since the law was passed in 1987, 14 years ago. As I understand this formula change, what it attempts is to bring in fairness and equity and address the needs for wastewater cleanup and base the numbers on EPA's wastewater needs survey. So it is a similar sort of logic and formula and survey that is used for drinking water that we would want to use for wastewater. It strikes me, regarding the matter of fairness, that a minority of States in this proposal get way more than the percentage EPA recommends under the current formula and a majority receive much less--mostly in States that are growing faster. Regardless, everyone recognizes--and I haven't heard anybody listening to the debate on the floor or in between saying that the current formula is right--now is the time to make sure the wastewater allocations, the taxpayer dollars, are being utilized in a way that addresses the needs of the various States. The formula change also does not affect the so-called earmarks. That is separate and in a smaller pot of money. I ask the Senator from Arizona, Mr. Kyl, if he will please take the floor and let me ask him a few questions so we can clear up any misunderstandings that have been proffered here by others who may not seem to understand this proposal. I ask the Senator from Arizona this: The current plan, the current allocation for wastewater moneys, is it a formula based on population from the 1970 census?

Mr. ALLEN. As far as that is concerned in bonding and hypothecating expected revenues from the Federal Government, it is a risky business for State governments or local or regional municipal waterworks anyway. As I understand it, the Senator is trying to make sure we are allocating scarce taxpayer resources; we are making a priority. Obviously, on drinking water--and that is not affected by this--in the wisdom of the Senate, the House, and the Federal Government, they said--before the Presiding Officer and I were in the Senate, but it made sense--let us make sure the money is getting to those who need it the most. The same logic is applied in the measure of the Senator from Arizona, as far as wastewater is concerned, which is very important for recreation, for water treatment and, obviously, for our enjoyment and health. It seems to me the Senator from Arizona is moving forward, making sure, when the survey is done next year, it will utilize a needs assessment, not outdated population figures that are 20 or 30 years old, and making sure we are getting the funds to the areas that need it the most. Most tributaries do not just flow out of one State; they start in one State and sometimes travel through several others. For example, as I mentioned, Delaware: Folks from Delaware say everything flows into the Atlantic Ocean or towards the oceanside. Some of the rivers or streams will flow through Maryland into the Chesapeake Bay. Therefore, if there is some waste coming from a stream that--and I am sure there would not be too much, but there can be from time to time, as we all know, on the Delmarva peninsula. But the point is, if one is cleaning it up on the riparian areas of the river in Delaware, that helps Maryland and that helps Virginia as well. Sometimes we look at it on a State-by-State basis. The Colorado River flows, obviously, out of Colorado through Utah, through Arizona, through a part of or at least the border of Nevada and California. The Potomac River actually starts some of the tributaries in Virginia, goes through West Virginia, obviously through Maryland, and obviously on the banks of Virginia. The same with the Missouri, the Mississippi, the Ohio, the Kanawa, the Cheat--all sorts of rivers go through many States. I ask the Senator from Arizona one final question: What would he say is the most salient point in how his proposal would more accurately reflect the actual wastewater treatment needs of this country than the old formula that is admitted by all to be outdated and wrong? How would his proposal, in the most salient way, make it a more accurate determination and allocation of scarce funds to the actual needs of wastewater cleanup?

Mr. ALLEN. I thank the Senator from Arizona, and I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting the Senator from Arizona. I think it is the Kyl-Fitzgerald-McCain amendment. It is a matter of fairness. It is addressing actual needs, and there is a reason population would be more of a concern, because as population increases, obviously there may be a corresponding increase in wastewater treatment needs. I conclude by saying I urge my colleagues to use objective standards. Do not use politics but look at objective needs to clean up the wastewater in this country. I am very grateful to the Senator from Arizona for spending this amount of time and effort to try to correct this inequity. It seems to have been around for several decades, and this is the time to act. Who knows when we will have another chance, the way the Senate moves. Again, I commend the Senator from Arizona. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this amendment. It will be good for the water in their States and the water throughout the United States.

Mr. ALLEN

Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, I rise today to engage in a short colloquy with Virginia's Senior Senator, Senator Warner; Senators Mikulski and Sarbanes from Maryland; Transportation Appropriations Subcommittee chair, Senator Murray and ranking member, Senator Shelby regarding the Woodrow Wilson Memorial Bridge.

Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, I thank the Transportation Appropriations chair and ranking member for their willingness to work with us on this issue and for their leadership in crafting a bill that increases transportation funding across the entire country. I also thank my colleagues from Maryland and Senator Warner for their continued representation and leadership for the people of the region and America. We look forward to completing the much-needed Woodrow Wilson Memorial Bridge replacement and closing the debate on the bill permanently. florida projects

Mr. ALLEN

Mr. ALLEN. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Mr. ALLEN. Madam President, I thank the ranking member of the Small Business Committee, Senator Bond, who cares a great deal about small business issues. I am pleased to stand with my colleague and for all the people in the Senate today and give my support for the confirmation of Hector V. Barreto, Jr., as Administrator of the Small Business Administration, which is, of course, the top post in that agency. On July 19, the Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship, of which I am a member, unanimously approved Mr. Barreto for the position of Administrator of the Small Business Administration. As a member of the committee, it was my privilege to attend the hearing and cast my vote in support of this fine candidate. What also was very inspirational was Mr. Hector V. Barreto, Sr., and his story, a gentleman who came up from Mexico, settled in Missouri, and started a business. And then Hector, of course, went on even further. It really is the American dream of opportunity, of a small business, a man with a dream, his father, and then obviously inculcating in his son that same sort of spirit and hard work and dedication and honesty. I know that Mr. Barreto, Sr. was very proud of his young son and what everyone was saying about him that day of the committee hearing. This nomination does come at a particularly crucial time, as the SBA will need the guidance of a strong and qualified leader to ensure that its assistance and development programs are available to small businesses during this time of challenging, slowing economic growth. I believe Mr. Barreto is particularly qualified to develop new and innovative ways for the Small Business Administration to refocus and better target its resources to promote growth and access to capital for small business owners and entrepreneurs and increase opportunities for minorities and women in the small business community. Madam President, I want to take this opportunity to focus on Mr. Barreto's background and his experiences because what somebody has done in the past is a good indicator of what he or she will do in the future. I believe it will provide him also with a very special insight into the unique challenges facing minority- and women-owned businesses, especially small businesses. Mr. Barreto, just 3 years out of college, left his home State of Missouri and moved to California to start up a small insurance and financial services company to address the financial needs of southern California's expanding Latino population and the needs of all southern California's minority communities. Once in southern California, Mr. Barreto became involved in the Latin Business Association, serving as the organization's chairman in recent years. In addition, Mr. Barreto served on the award-winning Los Angeles Minority Business Opportunity Committee and also as vice chairman of the U.S. Hispanic Chamber of Commerce. As a result of his dedication and outreach, Hector Barreto has received the support of many businesses and business organizations nationwide, including a significant number from California-based organizations and Latino business groups. It would take far too long to mention all of the groups supporting his nomination, but I want to mention a few. The endorsements have come from widely diverse groups, such as the Hispanic Business Roundtable and the Minority Business Roundtable, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the U.S. Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, as well as other Chamber affiliates, such as the Los Angeles Area Chamber, New Jersey Regional Chamber, San Antonio Hispanic Chamber, the Korean American Coalition, and the Hispanic Business Women's Organization. Given Mr. Barreto's credentials, background, and past experiences, the work he has done to increase economic opportunities for minority communities, the extremely positive and overwhelming bipartisan support afforded him by members of the Small Business Committee, I believe he is exactly the right candidate for this position. A vote in favor of this nomination is a vote in support of the interests and the needs of small business owners, particularly minority business owners, providing them with the experience, dedication, and leadership that Mr. Barreto will bring to the Small Business Administration and its very important programs. I thank the Chair and I yield back the remainder of my time.

Mr. ALLEN. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. Vote On The Nomination Of Wade Horn

Mr. ALLEN

Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Liberty Bill Act, which directs the United States Treasury to print an abridged Constitution with the titles of salient articles and amendments of the Constitution of the United States on the back of our one dollar bill. Indeed, the redesign of a Ten, Twenty, Fifty or 100 dollar bill could incorporate this goal. This important and innovative legislation is designed to educate, encourage and promote the understanding of the fundamental principles, the concept of self-government, free will and the protection of individual rights, of the United States for all Americans and people around the world who may use U.S. currency. I believe that it is most fitting that the idea for the Liberty Bill Act began in a classroom in Liberty Middle School, in Ashland VA, and carried forth by students at Patrick Henry High School in Hanover County, VA, by students who wanted to do something good for this country and its democratic principles. A little more than three years ago at Virginia's Poor Farm Park's amphitheatre, 170 students, representing Liberty Middle School, recited the abridged Constitution as part of a school project. The so-called Liberty Bill project left them with a deeper appreciation of the Constitution and how important it is that we, as Americans, fully understand our heritage and the principles of freedom, justice and liberty. And, fortunately for the rest of us, the Liberty Bill project also left them with the desire to communicate this appreciation to all Americans and to all people worldwide. I am proud to say that these students did not simply stop their education at this juncture. Instead, they worked with their teacher, Mr. Randy Wright, to create a proposal that would serve as a reminder of our rights and responsibilities as citizens of the United States. After careful thought and consideration, the students decided that putting the thoughts of our Constitution on the back of the dollar bill, something that passes through the hands of millions of people around the world every day, would serve as the powerful reminder of how important the Constitution is to our representative democracy. In addition, the newly revised dollar bill would teach the progress of American history, highlighting amendments that were added to the Constitution as our nation evolved into the free and prosperous global leader it is today. For example, despite a strong belief in what some termed the ``inherent and unalienable rights of man,'' the fledgling American government did not protect the individual rights and liberties of all Americans. In fact, it was not until 1865, upon the adoption of amendment XIII, slavery was abolished and all races were guaranteed their freedom under the law. In addition, the right to vote and have a say in one's government and the policies that affect everyday life, was not extended to all Americans. In fact, only white men could vote until amendment XV, proclaimed in 1870, provided that all men could vote, regardless of their race or status as a former slave. Later, in 1920, amendment XIX rightfully extended suffrage to all of America's people, securing the right of women to have a voice in our government as well. For a representative democracy is not truly representative until all people are heard. Referencing constitutional amendments, such as amendments XIII, XV, and XIX on our dollar bill, would help to highlight not only the adaptive qualities of our Constitution and its ability to reflect an increasingly enlightened awareness of the rights of all people, but teach us to appreciate and value these freedoms and rights as Americans. The Constitution of the United States is one of the most important documents in all of history. Yet in this day and age many Americans do not even know all the rights and protections enshrined in the first ten amendments, our Bill of Rights. Many Americans fail to recognize the Constitution as framework of the United States government and its impact on our government and prosperity as a nation of free people. The dollar bill is the most used and most recognized currency in the world, every day it pass through the hands of millions of people around the world. And, as the students of Liberty Middle School asked themselves three years ago: ``What better way than to highlight the Constitution and promote the ideals and values it represents than putting the principles it embodies on the back of the dollar bill?'' Every day I come across adults who complain that they are powerless to affect our political process or laws. They claim that even their vote will not make a difference. Yet, a group of middle school students, through their commitment and determination, have persevered. In just three years these students have taken up the challenge to help ensure every American understands the basic precepts of our treasured Constitution. This group of students developed a plan to reach this goal. They have gained media coverage and the endorsement of editorialists nationwide and their local governments, receiving acclaim from such notables as the Wall Street Journal and CNN News, although, I have to believe that one of the most notable endorsements of all was from a middle school student named Jessie, who said of the Liberty Bill project: ``A fantastic learning experience, the Liberty Bill has inspired me to pursue politics like never before.'' Because of their work and dedication, the impact of the Liberty Bill project on the education of our students can be felt nationwide. A remarkable 21 schools, representing seven states, have also joined their effort, ranging from Bedwell Elementary School in New Jersey and Festus High School in Festus, MO, to Dickinson High School in North Dakota and Newcastle Middle School in Wyoming. The students have taken their effort all the way to Capitol Hill. The Liberty Bill Act, H.R. 903, introduced in the 106th Congress eventually secured 107 consponsors and was supported by leadership on both sides of the aisle, including Speaker Hastert, Majority Leader Armey, Majority Whip DeLay, and Minority Leader Gephardt. In addition, eight Committee Chairmen and 3 Ranking Members endorsed the Liberty Bill proposal. I am confident that under the guidance of Congressman Cantor, the Liberty Bill will enjoy even more success during the 107th Congress in the House of Representatives and I am looking forward to working with my colleagues to secure the Liberty Bill's success in the Senate. Last February, I had the opportunity to attend a Liberty Bill Project presentation performed by students from the Patrick Henry High School of Ashland, VA. I cannot tell you how encouraging it is to see a group of young people who really get, who realize how important a full understanding of our Constitution is and the values it represents. Not only was this presentation one of the most wholesome and inspirational I have seen, it convinced me that the Liberty Bill Project is an exemplary way of capturing our imagination and providing a major contribution toward our understanding of our Constitution, history, and form of government. Therefore, it is my privilege to stand here today, joining my colleague in the House of Representatives, Congressman Eric Cantor, and introduce the companion legislation in the Senate. I am proud to act as a representative for the hard work and dedication of our students and support their efforts to teach all Americans about the importance of the values and principles embodied by our Constitution. Finally, I would like to take this opportunity to commend the fine efforts of the students of Liberty Middle School and their teacher, Mr. Randy Wright. Their success is a lesson to all of us, demonstrating that with initiative and hard work we can easily, positively educate Americans. Thomas Jefferson once said, ``If a Nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be.'' This remarkable group of young people has shown all of us what can be accomplished through dedication, creativity and a desire to do what has not been done before. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. ALLEN

Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Liberty Bill Act, which directs the United States Treasury to print an abridged Constitution with the titles of salient articles and amendments of the Constitution of the United States on the back of our one dollar bill. Indeed, the redesign of a Ten, Twenty, Fifty or 100 dollar bill could incorporate this goal. This important and innovative legislation is designed to educate, encourage and promote the understanding of the fundamental principles, the concept of self-government, free will and the protection of individual rights, of the United States for all Americans and people around the world who may use U.S. currency. I believe that it is most fitting that the idea for the Liberty Bill Act began in a classroom in Liberty Middle School, in Ashland VA, and carried forth by students at Patrick Henry High School in Hanover County, VA, by students who wanted to do something good for this country and its democratic principles. A little more than three years ago at Virginia's Poor Farm Park's amphitheatre, 170 students, representing Liberty Middle School, recited the abridged Constitution as part of a school project. The so-called Liberty Bill project left them with a deeper appreciation of the Constitution and how important it is that we, as Americans, fully understand our heritage and the principles of freedom, justice and liberty. And, fortunately for the rest of us, the Liberty Bill project also left them with the desire to communicate this appreciation to all Americans and to all people worldwide. I am proud to say that these students did not simply stop their education at this juncture. Instead, they worked with their teacher, Mr. Randy Wright, to create a proposal that would serve as a reminder of our rights and responsibilities as citizens of the United States. After careful thought and consideration, the students decided that putting the thoughts of our Constitution on the back of the dollar bill, something that passes through the hands of millions of people around the world every day, would serve as the powerful reminder of how important the Constitution is to our representative democracy. In addition, the newly revised dollar bill would teach the progress of American history, highlighting amendments that were added to the Constitution as our nation evolved into the free and prosperous global leader it is today. For example, despite a strong belief in what some termed the ``inherent and unalienable rights of man,'' the fledgling American government did not protect the individual rights and liberties of all Americans. In fact, it was not until 1865, upon the adoption of amendment XIII, slavery was abolished and all races were guaranteed their freedom under the law. In addition, the right to vote and have a say in one's government and the policies that affect everyday life, was not extended to all Americans. In fact, only white men could vote until amendment XV, proclaimed in 1870, provided that all men could vote, regardless of their race or status as a former slave. Later, in 1920, amendment XIX rightfully extended suffrage to all of America's people, securing the right of women to have a voice in our government as well. For a representative democracy is not truly representative until all people are heard. Referencing constitutional amendments, such as amendments XIII, XV, and XIX on our dollar bill, would help to highlight not only the adaptive qualities of our Constitution and its ability to reflect an increasingly enlightened awareness of the rights of all people, but teach us to appreciate and value these freedoms and rights as Americans. The Constitution of the United States is one of the most important documents in all of history. Yet in this day and age many Americans do not even know all the rights and protections enshrined in the first ten amendments, our Bill of Rights. Many Americans fail to recognize the Constitution as framework of the United States government and its impact on our government and prosperity as a nation of free people. The dollar bill is the most used and most recognized currency in the world, every day it pass through the hands of millions of people around the world. And, as the students of Liberty Middle School asked themselves three years ago: ``What better way than to highlight the Constitution and promote the ideals and values it represents than putting the principles it embodies on the back of the dollar bill?'' Every day I come across adults who complain that they are powerless to affect our political process or laws. They claim that even their vote will not make a difference. Yet, a group of middle school students, through their commitment and determination, have persevered. In just three years these students have taken up the challenge to help ensure every American understands the basic precepts of our treasured Constitution. This group of students developed a plan to reach this goal. They have gained media coverage and the endorsement of editorialists nationwide and their local governments, receiving acclaim from such notables as the Wall Street Journal and CNN News, although, I have to believe that one of the most notable endorsements of all was from a middle school student named Jessie, who said of the Liberty Bill project: ``A fantastic learning experience, the Liberty Bill has inspired me to pursue politics like never before.'' Because of their work and dedication, the impact of the Liberty Bill project on the education of our students can be felt nationwide. A remarkable 21 schools, representing seven states, have also joined their effort, ranging from Bedwell Elementary School in New Jersey and Festus High School in Festus, MO, to Dickinson High School in North Dakota and Newcastle Middle School in Wyoming. The students have taken their effort all the way to Capitol Hill. The Liberty Bill Act, H.R. 903, introduced in the 106th Congress eventually secured 107 consponsors and was supported by leadership on both sides of the aisle, including Speaker Hastert, Majority Leader Armey, Majority Whip DeLay, and Minority Leader Gephardt. In addition, eight Committee Chairmen and 3 Ranking Members endorsed the Liberty Bill proposal. I am confident that under the guidance of Congressman Cantor, the Liberty Bill will enjoy even more success during the 107th Congress in the House of Representatives and I am looking forward to working with my colleagues to secure the Liberty Bill's success in the Senate. Last February, I had the opportunity to attend a Liberty Bill Project presentation performed by students from the Patrick Henry High School of Ashland, VA. I cannot tell you how encouraging it is to see a group of young people who really get, who realize how important a full understanding of our Constitution is and the values it represents. Not only was this presentation one of the most wholesome and inspirational I have seen, it convinced me that the Liberty Bill Project is an exemplary way of capturing our imagination and providing a major contribution toward our understanding of our Constitution, history, and form of government. Therefore, it is my privilege to stand here today, joining my colleague in the House of Representatives, Congressman Eric Cantor, and introduce the companion legislation in the Senate. I am proud to act as a representative for the hard work and dedication of our students and support their efforts to teach all Americans about the importance of the values and principles embodied by our Constitution. Finally, I would like to take this opportunity to commend the fine efforts of the students of Liberty Middle School and their teacher, Mr. Randy Wright. Their success is a lesson to all of us, demonstrating that with initiative and hard work we can easily, positively educate Americans. Thomas Jefferson once said, ``If a Nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be.'' This remarkable group of young people has shown all of us what can be accomplished through dedication, creativity and a desire to do what has not been done before. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. ALLEN

Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, I thank my colleague, John Warner, for his remarks. I reflect on the first statement I made on this Senate floor on January 25 when I rose to address the appointment of Roger Gregory to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. When I spoke, I asked my colleagues to move the nomination of Judge Gregory on the basis of his qualifications. I asked my colleagues, and indeed the President, to not view Roger Gregory based upon the former President's political manipulations. Fortunately, President Bush has heeded my advice and the advice of my good friend and colleague, Senator John Warner, who stood with me on that first speech back in January. Fortunately, President Bush has acted. As a Virginian and as an American, I am proud to rise again today in support of the confirmation of Judge Roger Gregory. I am also proud to see that Members of both parties in the Senate and President Bush have risen above the past procedural aggravation and have acted in a statesmanlike manner. It is my belief that in Roger Gregory the Fourth Circuit and indeed America have a well-respected and honorable jurist who will administer justice with integrity and dignity. He will, in my judgment, decide cases based upon and in adherence to duly adopted laws and the Constitution. He is the first African-American to serve on the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals. This is a good and historic vote we are about to take. I share the salient reasons I support Roger Gregory, whom we are about to vote to confirm. We hear a lot of inspirational stories. Yesterday, in the Small Business Administration hearings on the nomination of Hector Barreto Jr., John Ensign and I thought what an inspirational story about that young man and his father who came to this country. What a success story. Roger Gregory is an inspirational story, as well. Judge Roger Gregory is a testament to what can be achieved in America through hard work and personal determination. He is the first person in his family to finish high school. He went on to graduate summa cum laude from Virginia State University, where his mother had once worked as a maid. Before his investiture as a judge, he was a founding partner of the firm of Wilder & Gregory, a highly respected litigator representing municipal and corporate clients in the Richmond area. He has been active in civic and community affairs. He and I both served together on the board of the Historic Riverfront Foundation in Richmond. He has an AV rating in Martindale-Hubbell, which is the highest combined legal ability and general recommendation rating given to lawyers. What is most important to me, what truly impressed me, is he has a proper judicial philosophy. He understands that the role of the judiciary is to administer the law based on the facts and the evidence, administering the law, not legislating from the bench. He will follow the rule of law, not participate--in his words--in an activist court as result-oriented judges are very dangerous. In particular, I also think it is important he understands, and stated to me an understanding of our Federal system, that the States have broad prerogatives and you apply the Constitution and you do not easily overrule the laws enacted by legislators which ought to be upheld and respected by the courts. I commend the chairman, Chairman Patrick Leahy, the Senator from Vermont, and Senator Hatch for the dispatch in which they have moved the nomination of Roger Gregory. Let me congratulate President Bush for the confidence and good judgment he has shown in nominating Judge Gregory to be the first African-American to hold a permanent seat on the Fourth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals. Judge Roger L. Gregory is an exemplary citizen of the Commonwealth of Virginia. He has a sense of the properly restrained role of the judiciary and is eminently qualified to serve with distinction for many years, many decades to come. I respectfully ask my colleagues to join me in confirming Judge Gregory to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.