George Allen

Mr. ALLEN

Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, I rise in support of legislation that I reintroduced today with a number of my Senate colleagues--the Volunteer Pilot Organization Protection Act of 2005. The spirit of volunteerism is indelibly rooted in our Nation's history. From when early settlers landed in Jamestown in 1607 to when our citizen soldiers took up arms against the British Crown in the Revolutionary War, volunteerism has always been a part of American culture. But that unwavering spirit did not stop there, it has continued and thrived in many individuals and charitable organizations today. One such group of organizations that has selflessly given back so much to Virginians and Americans are charitable medical transportation systems operated by volunteer pilot organizations, VPOs. The mission and purpose of public benefit and non-profit volunteer pilot organizations involved in patient transport is to ensure that no financially needy patient is denied access to distant specialized medical evaluation, diagnosis or treatment for lack of a means of long- distance medical air transportation. The principal goal is to remove the geographical and financial burdens that would deny access to specialized care. Last year public benefit flying non-profit volunteer pilot organizations provided long-distance, no-cost transportation for over 40,000 patients and their escorts in times of special need. Mr. President, this year, that figure will likely grow to roughly 54,000 people. One such organization that has played an intricate part in this mission is Angel Flight. Angel Flight is a not-for-profit grassroots organization with a volunteer corps of more than 6,200 volunteer pilots/plane owners--divided into six regions across the United States--who fly under the banner of Angel Flight America. Angel Flight provides flights of hope and healing by transporting patients and their families in private planes, free of charge, to hospitals for medical treatment. Following the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, the Department of Transportation and the FAA closed airports and grounded commercial air traffic, but the FAA allowed Angel Flight volunteers to fly. Angel Flight pilots flew firefighters, families of victims of the bombings, Red Cross personnel, medical and other supplies including the protective booties for the Search and Rescue dogs to New York and Washington, DC. In my years of public service, I have always maintained that we must provide access to care to all Virginians and Americans. Medical care should be available to all individuals. Sadly, our Nation is facing a medical crisis. Medical malpractice insurance costs and Medicare physician reimbursement are forcing many of our doctors to stop seeing ``high-risk'' patients or Medicare beneficiaries and in some cases forcing our doctors to give up practice altogether and retire. As a result, patients have to travel great distances to receive the medical care that they need to live happy, healthy and productive lives. Unfortunately, a number of these patients do not have the financial means to travel long distances, thus, ultimately denying patients access to life-saving or quality of life improving specialized treatment. We can say the same with patients who rely on volunteer pilot organizations such as Angel Flight or one of its subsidiary groups like Mercy Medical Airlift in my home Commonwealth of Virginia. Unfortunately, due to the public's apparent notion that organizations that use airplanes are financially well-off and have deep pockets, many of the volunteer pilot organizations are open to frivolous and junk lawsuits. This leads to an access to care issue. Also, aviation insurance has skyrocketed up in price and non-owned aircraft liability insurance is no longer reasonably available to volunteer pilot organizations. Many insurance companies had always provided this type of insurance but post September 11, 2001, this insurance is scarcely found and if found, the costs have increased greatly, to the astronomical sums of $5 million a year. Because of the exorbitant costs of insurance, volunteer pilot organizations have a difficult time recruiting and retaining pilots and professional persons. I would like to submit an editorial written by the Virginian Pilot. This editorial correctly identifies the obstacles that these volunteer pilot organizations have to go through. I would like that editorial inserted here. That is why I decided to introduce the Volunteer Pilot Organization Protection Act. In 1997, Congress passed the Volunteer Protection Act, which handled much of the liability issue for volunteer endeavors in the country; however, this legislation did not adequately address aviation-related matters. My bill amends the highly regarded Good Samaritan Act to provide necessary liability protections in the area of charitable medical air transportation and promote volunteer pilot organizations. More specifically, this legislation will protect volunteer pilot organizations, their boards and small paid staff and nonflying volunteers from liability should there be an accident. The VPOs are simply the ``match-makers'' between the volunteer pilot willing to help a neighbor and the needy patient family. The pilot has full and sole responsibility for conducting the flight in a safe manner in accordance with Federal Aviation Regulations. In addition, this legislation will provide liability protection for the individual volunteer pilot over and above the liability insurance that they are required to carry. Furthermore, the Volunteer Pilot Protection Act will provide liability protection for ``referring agencies'' who tell their patients that the charitable flight service is available. Referring hospitals and clinics are becoming unwilling to inform their patients that charitable medical air transportation help is available for fear of a liability against them should something happen in a subsequent volunteer pilot flight. Hence, organizations like the Shriners Hospital System and the American Cancer Society would be able to make known available volunteer pilot services to transport their patients to Shriners or other hospitals where they receive care. I know a few people have concerns that this bill would provide blanket immunity to Volunteer Pilot Organizations but I want to stress that my bill requires insurance on the part of the pilot and if there is negligence on behalf of the pilot, the injured party does have legal recourse. This bill does not provide blanket immunity to VPOs, but has been carefully worded to allow legal action to be brought against the insurance policy of the pilot in event of negligence. By providing volunteer pilots with liability protection, insurance rates for these pilots will ultimately be reduced. Therefore, more pilots will be able to afford insurance and fly for the public good. With less-costly insurance available, I am confident that more pilots will generously give their time to fly for and help the medically needy. This bill enjoys the support of a number of charitable organizations, including the Children's Organ Transplant Association, the National Organization for Rare Disorders, the Air Care Alliance, the Independent Charities of America, the Health and Medical Research Charities of America, the National Association of Hospital Hospitality Houses, and many others. Not only does this legislation enjoy the support of numerous charitable organizations, it also enjoyed the support of the United States House of Representatives. On September 14, 2004, the House of Representatives passed the Volunteer Pilot Organization Protection Act of2004 by a vote of 385-12. Mr. President, this is a clear indication that this bill has broad bipartisan support in the House and I know the House will once again pass this commonsense legislation. I am confident that this legislation will start a trend to help curb the large amounts of counterproductive lawsuits, lower insurance costs, and promote the spirit of volunteerism that has been rooted in the framework of our country's storied history. I, along with the volunteer pilots and organizations, and with the thousands of families who rely and may rely on the help of volunteer pilot organizations, urge the Senate to quickly and finally pass this legislation in the 109th Congress. I would like to thank Congresswoman Thelma Drake, our newest member to the Virginia team, for taking over this legislation for former Congressman Ed Schrock and introducing the companion bill on the House side. In addition, I would also like to thank the original cosponsors of this legislation, Senators Chambliss, Inhofe, Coburn, Talent, Cornyn, and Isakson for their support as we work to pass this vitally necessary legislation. [From the (Norfolk) Virginian-Pilot, Mar. 11, 2003] Shield Helpful Pilots From Frivolous Lawsuits In the realm of volunteers, few outshine the generous folks at Angel Flight. This nonprofit organization flies patients for whom air transport would be otherwise unaffordable to medical facilities around the country. Private pilots spirit individuals to dialysis, chemotherapy sessions, organ transplants and other surgeries by donating their aircraft and their valuable time. The goal is a noble one: to ensure that no one in need is denied medical care for lack of long- distance transportation. But in our lawsuit-happy society, even these warmhearted souls can't escape the possibility of landing in court. While a law known as the Volunteer Protection Act shields most people who give their time to worthy causes from frivolous suits, it doesn't cover volunteer pilots or flight organizers. Liability insurance costs for Angel Flight and similar nonprofits have skyrocketed from $1,000 to more than $25,000 annually. This prohibitive price tag threatens the future of Angel Flight, which is funded solely through donations. A spokeswoman for Angel Flight Mid-Atlantic, headquartered in Virginia Beach, said the burden will ultimately fall on sick and needy patients. And with 600 volunteer pilots transporting an average of 100 medical cases a month, literally thousands of lives may be affected by this oversight in the law. Fortunately, lawmakers are paying attention. U.S. Rep. Ed Schrock recently introduced bipartisan legislation to add volunteer-pilot organizations to the ranks of those covered by the Volunteer Protection Act. U.S. Sen. George Allen is expected to introduce a similar measure in the Senate. Congress should pass these bills, the sooner the better. Keeping Angel Flight aloft is literally a life-and-death matter.

Mr. ALLEN

Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, I rise in support of legislation that I reintroduced today with a number of my Senate colleagues--the Volunteer Pilot Organization Protection Act of 2005. The spirit of volunteerism is indelibly rooted in our Nation's history. From when early settlers landed in Jamestown in 1607 to when our citizen soldiers took up arms against the British Crown in the Revolutionary War, volunteerism has always been a part of American culture. But that unwavering spirit did not stop there, it has continued and thrived in many individuals and charitable organizations today. One such group of organizations that has selflessly given back so much to Virginians and Americans are charitable medical transportation systems operated by volunteer pilot organizations, VPOs. The mission and purpose of public benefit and non-profit volunteer pilot organizations involved in patient transport is to ensure that no financially needy patient is denied access to distant specialized medical evaluation, diagnosis or treatment for lack of a means of long- distance medical air transportation. The principal goal is to remove the geographical and financial burdens that would deny access to specialized care. Last year public benefit flying non-profit volunteer pilot organizations provided long-distance, no-cost transportation for over 40,000 patients and their escorts in times of special need. Mr. President, this year, that figure will likely grow to roughly 54,000 people. One such organization that has played an intricate part in this mission is Angel Flight. Angel Flight is a not-for-profit grassroots organization with a volunteer corps of more than 6,200 volunteer pilots/plane owners--divided into six regions across the United States--who fly under the banner of Angel Flight America. Angel Flight provides flights of hope and healing by transporting patients and their families in private planes, free of charge, to hospitals for medical treatment. Following the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, the Department of Transportation and the FAA closed airports and grounded commercial air traffic, but the FAA allowed Angel Flight volunteers to fly. Angel Flight pilots flew firefighters, families of victims of the bombings, Red Cross personnel, medical and other supplies including the protective booties for the Search and Rescue dogs to New York and Washington, DC. In my years of public service, I have always maintained that we must provide access to care to all Virginians and Americans. Medical care should be available to all individuals. Sadly, our Nation is facing a medical crisis. Medical malpractice insurance costs and Medicare physician reimbursement are forcing many of our doctors to stop seeing ``high-risk'' patients or Medicare beneficiaries and in some cases forcing our doctors to give up practice altogether and retire. As a result, patients have to travel great distances to receive the medical care that they need to live happy, healthy and productive lives. Unfortunately, a number of these patients do not have the financial means to travel long distances, thus, ultimately denying patients access to life-saving or quality of life improving specialized treatment. We can say the same with patients who rely on volunteer pilot organizations such as Angel Flight or one of its subsidiary groups like Mercy Medical Airlift in my home Commonwealth of Virginia. Unfortunately, due to the public's apparent notion that organizations that use airplanes are financially well-off and have deep pockets, many of the volunteer pilot organizations are open to frivolous and junk lawsuits. This leads to an access to care issue. Also, aviation insurance has skyrocketed up in price and non-owned aircraft liability insurance is no longer reasonably available to volunteer pilot organizations. Many insurance companies had always provided this type of insurance but post September 11, 2001, this insurance is scarcely found and if found, the costs have increased greatly, to the astronomical sums of $5 million a year. Because of the exorbitant costs of insurance, volunteer pilot organizations have a difficult time recruiting and retaining pilots and professional persons. I would like to submit an editorial written by the Virginian Pilot. This editorial correctly identifies the obstacles that these volunteer pilot organizations have to go through. I would like that editorial inserted here. That is why I decided to introduce the Volunteer Pilot Organization Protection Act. In 1997, Congress passed the Volunteer Protection Act, which handled much of the liability issue for volunteer endeavors in the country; however, this legislation did not adequately address aviation-related matters. My bill amends the highly regarded Good Samaritan Act to provide necessary liability protections in the area of charitable medical air transportation and promote volunteer pilot organizations. More specifically, this legislation will protect volunteer pilot organizations, their boards and small paid staff and nonflying volunteers from liability should there be an accident. The VPOs are simply the ``match-makers'' between the volunteer pilot willing to help a neighbor and the needy patient family. The pilot has full and sole responsibility for conducting the flight in a safe manner in accordance with Federal Aviation Regulations. In addition, this legislation will provide liability protection for the individual volunteer pilot over and above the liability insurance that they are required to carry. Furthermore, the Volunteer Pilot Protection Act will provide liability protection for ``referring agencies'' who tell their patients that the charitable flight service is available. Referring hospitals and clinics are becoming unwilling to inform their patients that charitable medical air transportation help is available for fear of a liability against them should something happen in a subsequent volunteer pilot flight. Hence, organizations like the Shriners Hospital System and the American Cancer Society would be able to make known available volunteer pilot services to transport their patients to Shriners or other hospitals where they receive care. I know a few people have concerns that this bill would provide blanket immunity to Volunteer Pilot Organizations but I want to stress that my bill requires insurance on the part of the pilot and if there is negligence on behalf of the pilot, the injured party does have legal recourse. This bill does not provide blanket immunity to VPOs, but has been carefully worded to allow legal action to be brought against the insurance policy of the pilot in event of negligence. By providing volunteer pilots with liability protection, insurance rates for these pilots will ultimately be reduced. Therefore, more pilots will be able to afford insurance and fly for the public good. With less-costly insurance available, I am confident that more pilots will generously give their time to fly for and help the medically needy. This bill enjoys the support of a number of charitable organizations, including the Children's Organ Transplant Association, the National Organization for Rare Disorders, the Air Care Alliance, the Independent Charities of America, the Health and Medical Research Charities of America, the National Association of Hospital Hospitality Houses, and many others. Not only does this legislation enjoy the support of numerous charitable organizations, it also enjoyed the support of the United States House of Representatives. On September 14, 2004, the House of Representatives passed the Volunteer Pilot Organization Protection Act of2004 by a vote of 385-12. Mr. President, this is a clear indication that this bill has broad bipartisan support in the House and I know the House will once again pass this commonsense legislation. I am confident that this legislation will start a trend to help curb the large amounts of counterproductive lawsuits, lower insurance costs, and promote the spirit of volunteerism that has been rooted in the framework of our country's storied history. I, along with the volunteer pilots and organizations, and with the thousands of families who rely and may rely on the help of volunteer pilot organizations, urge the Senate to quickly and finally pass this legislation in the 109th Congress. I would like to thank Congresswoman Thelma Drake, our newest member to the Virginia team, for taking over this legislation for former Congressman Ed Schrock and introducing the companion bill on the House side. In addition, I would also like to thank the original cosponsors of this legislation, Senators Chambliss, Inhofe, Coburn, Talent, Cornyn, and Isakson for their support as we work to pass this vitally necessary legislation. [From the (Norfolk) Virginian-Pilot, Mar. 11, 2003] Shield Helpful Pilots From Frivolous Lawsuits In the realm of volunteers, few outshine the generous folks at Angel Flight. This nonprofit organization flies patients for whom air transport would be otherwise unaffordable to medical facilities around the country. Private pilots spirit individuals to dialysis, chemotherapy sessions, organ transplants and other surgeries by donating their aircraft and their valuable time. The goal is a noble one: to ensure that no one in need is denied medical care for lack of long- distance transportation. But in our lawsuit-happy society, even these warmhearted souls can't escape the possibility of landing in court. While a law known as the Volunteer Protection Act shields most people who give their time to worthy causes from frivolous suits, it doesn't cover volunteer pilots or flight organizers. Liability insurance costs for Angel Flight and similar nonprofits have skyrocketed from $1,000 to more than $25,000 annually. This prohibitive price tag threatens the future of Angel Flight, which is funded solely through donations. A spokeswoman for Angel Flight Mid-Atlantic, headquartered in Virginia Beach, said the burden will ultimately fall on sick and needy patients. And with 600 volunteer pilots transporting an average of 100 medical cases a month, literally thousands of lives may be affected by this oversight in the law. Fortunately, lawmakers are paying attention. U.S. Rep. Ed Schrock recently introduced bipartisan legislation to add volunteer-pilot organizations to the ranks of those covered by the Volunteer Protection Act. U.S. Sen. George Allen is expected to introduce a similar measure in the Senate. Congress should pass these bills, the sooner the better. Keeping Angel Flight aloft is literally a life-and-death matter.

Mr. ALLEN

Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, I thank my good colleague Senator Warner for his great leadership on this matter. This is a bipartisan effort. Let us recall what this amendment is about. It is to provide our Navy with the maximum flexibility to project our power in East Asia. The Senator's amendment says before we mothball the JFK, two things have to happen. There is the Quadrennial Defense Review to determine how this mixture should be, and actually 180 days thereafter, and also assure us we can have a nuclear carrier ported in Japan, which prohibits nuclear- powered ships in their land. A little over 2 years ago, Admiral Clark said: The current force of 12 carriers and 12 amphibious groups is the minimum we can have to sustain the operations we are in. In the 2002 naval posture statement: Aircraft carrier force levels have been set at 12 ships as a result of fiscal constraints. However, real-world experience and analysis indicate that a carrier force of at least 15 ships is necessary to meet the warfighting Commander in Chief's requirements for carrier presence in all regions of importance to the United States. What has happened in the last 2 years? Nothing to restrain or think that these threats are less than they were before. We are still in the war on terrorism. China is building up their navy. They are passing anticession laws, threatening Taiwan more than ever. So while we are standing down, to some extent, our building of a navy, then reducing a carrier which would not be available to be in Japan in that theater of concern, it is illogical to take away this flexibility of protecting our security interests in the Indian Ocean as well as, for that matter, the Pacific Ocean. I believe a plan to mothball the Kennedy at this time is shortsighted, especially in this time of war and with the rapid buildup of the Chinese Navy.

Mr. ALLEN. I ask unanimous consent for an additional 30 seconds.

Mr. ALLEN. The threats in the western Pacific are greater than they were before. Even last year, the funding was put in for this year for the refurbishment and the maintenance of the JFK. For the sake of our security and the flexibility we need for projecting our power, protecting our interests in the Far East, the wise thing to do is accept the amendment of the Senator from Virginia, which is shared by cosponsors from Florida and elsewhere. I yield to the Senator from Florida.

Mr. ALLEN

Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, I thank my colleague from Virginia and the Senator from Maryland. I urge my colleagues to support the cloture motion on this amendment. It is an immigration issue, but it is more importantly a small business issue. There are a lot of small businesses that are seasonal in nature. It may be construction, landscaping, tourism, or the seafood industry. It is vitally important that we get this immigration, this H-2B visa issue, in order logically. These are law-abiding citizens who want to keep their small business in operation, providing the services that people in their communities so desire. I thank the Chair and my colleagues. I hope all colleagues will vote for small businesses, to keep them operating in States all across the Nation and bring some common sense with this temporary remedy, to bring some common sense and reasonableness to a program that every year ends up in a crisis. I thank Senator Mikulski of Maryland and my colleague from Virginia, Senator Warner, of course. All of us are working together for the betterment of many family businesses.

Mr. ALLEN

Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, I rise in support of the amendment offered by the senior Senator from Virginia, Mr. Warner, of which I am a cosponsor as well as the two Senators from Florida. The Department of Defense is on an ill-timed course to weaken our military strength by reducing the number of aircraft carriers from 12 to 11 and maybe even more. This decision is completely inconsistent with recent past statements on the absolute number of carriers needed to conduct operations. According to ADM Vernon Clark, Chief of Naval Operations, just a little over 2 years ago: The current force of 12 carriers and 12 amphibious groups is the minimum we can have and sustain the kind of operations we are in. According to the 2002 Naval Posture Statement: Aircraft carrier force levels have been set at 12 ships as a result of fiscal constraints; however, real-world experience and analysis indicate that a carrier force level of 15 ships is necessary to meet the warfighting Commander in Chief's requirements for carrier presence in all regions of importance to the United States. I am not convinced that reducing our carrier fleet is the best strategic decision in the midst of our global war against terrorism. Realistically, it looks like the Department of Defense and the Navy are maneuvering quickly to negate any legislative oversight. But we in Congress should make sure that all considerations are taken into account before we rush into a decision that may hamper our military's ability to fight this global war on terrorism. That is why this amendment is being offered. What does this amendment achieve? First, the amendment ensures that the Navy proceeds on the scheduled necessary maintenance of the USS John F. Kennedy so that the carrier is kept in active status. In addition, this amendment requires the Navy to keep 12 carriers until the latter of the following: 180 days after the quadrennial defense review comes before Congress or that the Secretary of Defense has certified to Congress that agreements have been entered into to provide port facilities for the permanent forward deployment of such numbers of aircraft carriers that are necessary in the Pacific Command Area of Responsibility to fulfill the roles and missions of that command. Moreover, it is important that we keep the Kennedy available because Admiral Clark stated that it is essential to have a carrier home ported in Japan. However, we know that Japan has serious reservations--in fact, prohibitions--about allowing us to port a nuclear carrier there, and currently there is no sign that that prohibition would be removed for nuclear carriers. Therefore, with Japan's prohibition on nuclear vessels, it is unwise to limit our options by retiring one of the only two nonnuclear aircraft carriers. The other is the Kitty Hawk, which is actually an older vessel than the JFK. The bottom line is that the United States must have maximum flexibility in protecting our security interests in the Pacific and the Indian oceans. I believe any plan to mothball the Kennedy is shortsighted, especially during this time of war and with China's rapid naval buildup. In addition, as far as China is concerned, with the continued tension between China and Taiwan, it is imperative that we have a carrier in the region that can respond quickly to any possible conflict that may arise. In that regard, the Washington Post published a story written by Edward Cody on April 12, 2005, entitled ``China Builds A Smaller, Stronger Military; Modernization Can Alter Regional Balance Of Power Raising Stakes For The U.S.'' I ask unanimous consent that this article be printed in the Record.

Mr. ALLEN. At a time when our military is already stretched thin, why would we want to eliminate one of the most effective methods of projecting our power and possibly opening up an area of vulnerability for the United States and our allies. The decision is clear: We must preserve at least a 12-carrier minimum for the safety of Americans and for the rest of the world, particularly our allies. I strongly support this amendment and urge my colleagues to do the same. This amendment offers a lifeline to the USS John F. Kennedy, and I am pleased that my good partner, Senator Warner, was able to offer this commonsense approach to keeping the Kennedy viable as well as our deterrence and our ability to protect our interests in the western Pacific. I yield the floor.

Mr. ALLEN

Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, I rise today to speak in support of an amendment that my good friend from Maryland, Senator Mikulski, and I and a number of other Senators have offered and which does have bipartisan support. It has to do with the H-2B visa program. Small businesses all over our Nation count on the H-2B visa program to keep their businesses operating. Many use this program year after year because it is the only way they can legally hire temporary or seasonal positions when no American workers are available. These companies hire all the American workers they can find, and they do look for American workers. But if they cannot find them, they need to get additional seasonal help, they need to find workers to meet the demands of their businesses and, indeed, to stay in business. These businesses are in construction, seafood, yard services, tourism and other season enterprises. Congress has capped the H-2B visa program at 66,000 visas per year. That has not been adjusted since this visa category was initially capped in 1990. So since 1990 the visa cap has been 66,000. However, during those years, and here we are 15 years later, there are a variety of factors that have hampered U.S. employers from having the ability to find and hire more willing American workers for short-term positions. The shortages occur for a variety of reasons. It is actually getting much worse because Americans are unwilling to engage in low-skilled, semi-skilled short-term employment. In most instances, Americans are unwilling to relocate to a new location for several months out of a year, a move that many of these short-term jobs require. That is logical. People aren't going to want to move for 3 or 4 months and then move back to another place. According to the Department of Homeland Security, the H-2B cap of 66,000 was reached a few months into the fiscal year. This is the second year in a row the cap has been reached this early. You may wonder why we are reaching the cap at such an early stage. What is the problem? Under current law employers cannot file an H-2B application until 120 days before they need the employee. Therefore, the H-2B program puts businesses whose peaks are in the summer and in the autumn at a disadvantage because the Citizenship and Immigration Services cannot process their applications until at least January or February, since these jobs generally start around Memorial Day. Therefore, if the cap is reached in January and February, as it was in the last several years, these employers who rely on seasonal workers are clearly put at a disadvantage. I have heard from these employers. One of our most important jobs that I have as a Senator is to listen to people out there in the real world, to see what are the effects of certain laws and see if there are ways to allow those in the free enterprise system, particularly small businesses, to continue to operate. I do listen to my constituents. My constituents have clearly voiced their concerns about the H-2B program and have asked for help. I think it is important that we respond. I will give some examples of what is going on. There is a company called WEMOW. WEMOW is a landscaping design and lawn maintenance company in Blacksburg, VA. This company relies heavily on the H-2B program, and sadly they have had to cut back on services they can provide because of the lack of a workforce to meet that demand. Christopher Via, who is the president of WEMOW, wrote me. I will quote from his letter. He said: While my company spends considerable time and money to recruit U.S. workers, the positions we need to fill are hot, labor intensive, physically exhausting low- and semiskilled jobs that many Americans do not want to fill. Therefore, our ability to meet seasonal demand and stay in business relies on finding temporary workers. H-2B workers have proven critical in filling this need. Of course, they are late in the season, so therefore they do not get the workers they could to meet those needs. Another letter I received is from a company in Yorktown. Yorktown is a very famous tourism area. Stephen C. Barrs, the president of C.A. Barrs Contractor, Inc., wrote: While our company recruits U.S. workers, our company and our industry as a whole have been unable to find American workers. We have presented evidence to the Department of Labor that there are no U.S. workers available to fill our vacant positions. Our company employs approximately 100 people, and we specialize in road construction. The H-2B program provides foreign employees who have proven tremendous employees. We have relied on the H-2B program for 6 years and find this program invaluable. Once our season ends, our H- 2B workers return home. This is more a small business issue than an immigration issue. We fear this program is in jeopardy, and if it is cut in any way, our small businesses will sustain a very damaging loss. These are two of hundreds of letters I have received from small businesses all across Virginia, asking for our immediate help. Our amendment does that. It provides an immediate legislative remedy that helps these businesses get part-time seasonal workers. Before I get into the details of what this amendment does, I want to clearly outline what this amendment does not do. I first want to stress that this amendment in no way changes the existing requirements for applying for an H-2B visa. U.S. employers must demonstrate to State and Federal departments of labor that there are no available U.S. workers to fill vacant seasonal positions. Subsequently, they must obtain an approved labor certification from the U.S. Department of Labor, file a visa petition application with the Citizenship and Immigration Service for H-2B workers, and obtain approved H-2B visas for workers in their home countries. With that understanding, I would like to outline what this amendment does effectuate. Specifically, our amendment would exempt temporary seasonal workers who have participated in the H-2B visa program, and have completely followed the law during the past 3 fiscal years from counting toward the statutory cap of 66,000. Second, this amendment has a number of new antifraud provisions. One such provision requires employers to pay an additional fee of $150 on each H-2B petition, and those fees are placed into the fraud and prevention detection account of the U.S. Treasury. Third, this amendment creates new sanctions for those who misrepresent facts on a petition of an H-2B visa. This provision is designed to further strengthen the Department of Homeland Security's enforcement power to sanction those who violate our Nation's immigration laws. If an employer violates this section, the Department of Homeland Security will have the power to fine the individual employer and/or not approve, of course, their H-2B petitions. Fourth, moreover, the amendment divides the cap more equitably, giving half of the visas to fall and winter businesses and half to spring and summer businesses. So you do not get into this whole gaming situation of when do the applications get in, and end up with a frustrating disruption at the end of the year. Finally, this amendment adds some simple, commonsense reporting requirements that will allow Congress to get more information on the H- 2B program users as we in Congress move toward a more comprehensive, long-term solution to this problem. Our amendment provides the needed temporary addressing and the fix that is needed to a problem that, if left unresolved, will ultimately harm our economy. Jobs will be lost, whether they are in landscaping, whether they are in seafood, whether they are in contracting, whether they are in tourism. These are all small businesses. They are good, law-abiding citizens. They are trying to use and will use this program lawfully, but we need to bring some common sense into this program. We need to act as soon as possible. Many of these businesses are family businesses, and they need to stay in operation. They provide services which their customers and the people in their communities desire. I strongly and respectfully urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this amendment. It is not solely an immigration issue. As my friend and constituent from Yorktown said, this is a small business issue as well. I thank the Chair. I yield the floor.

Mr. ALLEN

Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, I rise to share with my colleagues my observations and urgings on two issues: One, following on the eloquent remarks of the Senator from Georgia, Saxby Chambliss, on the importance of judges and actions in the Senate; and the second has to do with our National Guard and Reserves who are being called up for duty and what the Federal Government can do to be helpful to them. Judges First, on judges, I look at four pillars as being essential for a free and just society: freedom of religion, freedom of expression, private ownership of property, and fourth, the rule of law. The rule of law is where judges come in, where you have fair adjudication of disputes, as well as the protection of our God-given rights. It is absolutely essential we have judges on the bench at the Federal level, and at all levels, who understand their role is to adjudicate disputes, to apply the facts and evidence of the case to the laws, laws made by elected Representatives. We are a representative democracy. That means the judges ought to apply the law, not invent the law, not serve as a superlegislature, not to use their own opinions as to what the law should be but rather apply it. That is absolutely essential for the rule of law, for the credibility and stability one would want to be able to rely on in our representative democracy for investments and, as we advance freedom, to try to have the people of other countries around the world put into place these four pillars of a free and just society. What we have seen is a break of precedent in the Senate. For 200 years judicial nominees from the President, when they were put forward, were examined by the Judiciary Committee very closely, as they should be, as to their temperament, philosophy, and scholarship. If they received a favorable recommendation from the committee, they would come to the floor and Senators would vote for them or against them. In the last 2 or 3 years, what we have seen is unprecedented obstruction, a requirement, in effect, of a 60-vote margin for judges, particularly at the appellate level. The most egregious in recent years, in my view, was Miguel Estrada. He is an outstanding individual, completely qualified--great scholarship, great experience--a modern-day Horatio Alger story, having come to this country from Central America, applying himself, doing well. Indeed, the American Bar Association unanimously gave him their highest recommendation and endorsement. That went on for a year. Then it went on for another year. It went on for over 2 years, and he finally had to withdraw, notwithstanding the fact that a vast majority of Senators were actually for Miguel Estrada. It is not unique to him. It has happened to roughly 10 or so appellate judges, including those nominated for the Ninth Circuit, which is the circuit where you have adventurous, activist judges who ignore the will of the people. For example, the recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance in schools, which they struck down because they are concerned about the words ``under God.'' That is the sort of activist judiciary that is ignoring the will of the people, who are the owners of this Government. People say: What do we need to do, and they up come with this term, ``nuclear option.'' It is a constitutional option. It shows how out of touch people are in calling this a nuclear option, when all it is is the question of whether it is a majority vote to give advice and consent or to dissent on a particular judicial nomination. It is my view, in the event the minority party continues with the approach of obstructing the opportunity of a nominee to have fair consideration, then this constitutional option must be utilized. We should not be timid. We should not cower. I believe the obstructionist approaches are preventing me from exercising my duty and responsibility to the people of the Commonwealth of Virginia to advise and consent on these judicial nominations. I hope my colleagues will not continue this obstructionist approach. In the event they do, then we have to use the constitutional option. I do not think it is too much to ask Senators to get off their haunches and show the backbone or spine to vote yes or no, but vote, and then explain to their constituents why they voted the way they did on any particular man or woman who has been nominated to a particular judicial position. I am hopeful we do not have to use it, but if we do, go for it. Do not cower. Do not be timid. The people, as my colleague from Georgia said, all across this country, whether they are down in Cajun country in Louisiana, whether they are in Florida, whether they are in the Black Hills of South Dakota, or whether they are in the Shenandoah Valley of Virginia, expect action on judges. As much as people care about less taxation and energy security for this country and wanting us to be leaders in innovation, they really expect the Senate to act on judges. It is a values issue. It is a good government issue. It is a responsibility-in- governing issue that needs to be addressed. Amendment No. 356 I would like to turn my attention to the amendment pending on the supplemental, one submitted by Senators Durbin, Mikulski, and me. This amendment will eliminate the pay gap that many of our Federal employees who serve in either the National Guard or the Reserves suffer when they are called up for active duty. We need to do everything we can within reason to recruit and retain those who serve in the Guard and Reserves. We, as a Federal Government, and I, as a Senator, encourage private businesses to make up that pay gap. Many times, when people get called up, their Active-Duty pay is less than they would be getting in the primary job. That is what the pay gap is. It is one of the key factors, top five factors in people not re- upping. It does have an impact on their families. On average, the pay- gap loss is about $368 a month. They still have housing payments, they still have food. Many of those who serve in the Guard and Reserve have families, and those expenses go on. Out of the 1.2 million members of the National Guard and Reserves, 120,000 are also employees of the Federal Government. As of January 2005, 43,000 Federal employees have been activated since September 11, 2001, and are serving courageously and beneficially for our freedom and our security. Right now there are more than 17,000 on active duty. There are those firms in the private sector who have made up this pay gap. There are over 900 companies, such as IBM, Sears, General Motors, UPS, Ford, that make up the pay differential. In fact, 23 States have enacted similar legislation to make up the pay difference. I am proud to say one of them is the Commonwealth of Virginia. The Senate has supported this in the past. I think it makes a great deal of sense that we support not only the members of the Guard and Reserves who are called up to active duty who serve in the Federal Government, but also support their families. I think this amendment, which I am sponsoring along with Senators Durbin and Mikulski, makes a great deal of sense. It is one I hope, when we get to voting on it sometime today, will enjoy the support of all the Members of the Senate. It is very important we do what we can, within reason, to help in the recruitment and retention of those who are serving our country, who are disrupting their lives and, in fact, are being called up more frequently and for longer duration than ever before. I hope we will see that agreed to on the supplemental some time today. I also hope we will get back to the 200-year history of the Senate on consideration, treatment, and actual voting on outstanding judicial nominees who have come out of the Judiciary Committee with a favorable recommendation. I yield the floor.

Mr. ALLEN

Mr. ALLEN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent to yield myself such time as I may consume on this amendment by the Senator from North Dakota.

Mr. ALLEN. Madam President, I rise to urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment and continue to support our country's investment in television broadcasting into Cuba. Otherwise known as TV Marti. The Senator from North Dakota may be exaggerating, and folks get carried away as well. He will say that this is not needed. This is needed. There may be a question as to how effective the TV Marti signal is getting in to Cuba. Because we are talking about signals and broadcasts, let's make sure we are sending the right signal here. Whether it is my good friend from Oregon or whether my friend from North Dakota, we all, I would hope, want to make sure we are standing strong on the ability of people who are repressed and under the tyranny of Castro, to get information. There are questions as to whether all the ways that we are trying to get around the jamming and scrambling of signals by Castro's regime are effective or not; however, it is a matter of our national interest that we try to get information, objective information, to the people of Cuba. It doesn't matter one's culture. All human beings, no matter their background or culture, if given the choice, the opportunity, will choose freedom. We have seen it with the Afghan people. We have seen it with the people in Iraq. We are seeing it with the Lebanese rising up to get the Syrian troops out. We have seen it with the Palestinians, with the death of the corrupt terrorist Arafat. The same applies to the people of Cuba, or anywhere else in the world. The Cuban people share the desire that all human beings have, and that is a need to have information and an opportunity to determine their own destiny. I believe that Radio Marti and TV Marti can help promote freedom and justice in Cuba. We all know the United States has sponsored television and radio broadcasting in Cuba for almost 20 years. The effect of all of that--and we can all try to find measurements. It is not as if you can go around Cuba and do surveys. This is not allowed. Remember, this is Castro's regime. If I want some evidence of a probative witness, I am going to listen to the Senator from Florida, Mr. Martinez, who made history, standing here as the first person ever born in Cuba to be elected to serve in the U.S. Senate. He understands the impact of our message to Cuba better than anybody or any statistics one would want to put forth. So while we understand it is very difficult to get into Cuba and make sure of the effectiveness of TV or radio broadcasts, it is well known that Radio Marti--and to the extent we can get TV Marti in--is looked upon as an authoritative and reliable source of accurate, objective, and comprehensive news for the Cuban people. If this Congress were to eliminate TV Marti, we would be sending the wrong message to the Cuban people. At a time when freedom is on the march around the world, eliminating TV Marti would tell the Cuban people--I suspect Castro would be getting his minions and fellow thugs of that regime out to say the United States isn't going to bother. We succeeded with jamming or scrambling the signals, saying the United States doesn't want to worry about this. It would be a signal for him to say that the United States is not committed to the cause of freedom in Cuba. Of course, with his long history of repressing free speech and the free flow of information and ideas in Cuba, this plays right into Castro's hands. Thomas Jefferson once said: A free people [claim] their rights as derived from the laws of nature, and not as a gift of their chief magistrate. The sharing of information and free flow of ideas, and the foundation of any free country is not to be something that is given or taken away by the machinations of a dictator like Castro. In my view, there are four pillars of a free and just society. This is how I measure freedom myself for people if they are living in a free and just society. The first pillar is freedom of religion, where people's rights are not enhanced or diminished because of religious beliefs; second, freedom of expression; third, private ownership of property; fourth, the rule of law, where disputes are adjudicated fairly and God-given rights are protected. The second pillar, freedom of expression, is absolutely essential, where people are allowed to get information and to think for themselves. To communicate not in a way that is harmful, but the God-given rights of expression being protected. We have to support the opportunity of the people of Cuba to get information. They are not going to get it from their Government. People will say, gosh, we are having to use airplanes. There are different ways you have to get at it. You cannot use balloons or a dirigible; you cannot do it off of broadcasting. Why can't we use it the way everybody else sees TV? It is because of that regime. Sometimes you have to be more clever than some of the reptilian cutthroats that we are dealing with. In my view, we ought to stand for the concept of freedom of expression. We have seen it work and we have seen it on Radio Marti. I hate wasting money, but there are certain things we need to do. This is actually a less expensive way of advocating freedom, by using technology--using extraordinary means, but still getting the message to the people of Cuba, regardless of the obstacles that are established by Castro's regime. I think we need to be providing news, commentary, and promoting the open exchange of information and ideas in Cuba and elsewhere to promote the cause of freedom. To be effective in further opening communications and the sharing of ideas throughout Cuba, Radio and TV Marti must continue to be broadcast and should receive our country's support. I sincerely urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment and stand with the Senator from Florida, Mr. Martinez, but, most importantly, stand for the advancement of freedom. I yield the floor.

Mr. ALLEN

Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, today I would like to recognize Friendship Industries, of Harrisonburg, VA, for 40 years of service to persons with disabilities in Harrisonburg City and Rockingham County. Friendship Industries has been a pioneer in the community since its inception. The mission of the nonprofit social service agency is to develop and maintain employment and training opportunities for persons with disabilities. Clients of the agency begin with a program called Work Adjustment. This program assists trainees with disabilities in their adjustment to a real work environment occurring within a supportive and sheltered atmosphere. The individual learns appropriate work behaviors and skills while developing the highest productivity internally as a sheltered employee, and sometimes gets placed into competitive or supported jobs in the community. Friendship Industries started with 8 young men with mental retardation and has since grown to provide services for over 120 men and women with differing degrees of mental retardation, mental illness, and/or physical illness. The agency's financial contribution to the community has increased as well. Starting with a mere $20,000, the budget of Friendship Industries now approaches $4 million. It employs 20 staff to run the program, and contributes over $3.6 million to the Harrisonburg area through wages, contract services and job training and services. Mr. David Flick, president of Friendship Industries since 1976, has been instrumental in the growth and success of the program. With his leadership, the agency has expanded the access and breadth of the program by providing transportation to interested trainees and by forming a network of friendly area companies. I commend David for his unwavering support and passion for helping the disabled get back to work in the Shenandoah Valley. I congratulate Friendship Industries on 40 years of dedication to improving the lives of persons with disabilities, and wish them continued success for many more years.

Mr. ALLEN

Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Florida for his outstanding leadership on this extraordinary remedy for a woman who, when I observed her on videotapes, clearly is conscious and has the ability to feel. I believe in the sanctity of human life. I think most of us feel in good conscience we can't just sit by and allow this innocent woman to starve to death. Just because she has lost her ability to verbally communicate her feelings in no way means that she has lost her desire to live or her right to life. When in doubt, I think it is appropriate and, indeed, logical to presume that people want to live. I am proud of the Senate and Senator Martinez for his leadership in helping to protect Terri Schiavo's right to life.

Mr. ALLEN

Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, in the two matters that were listed, so we have this all straight, my amendment No. 197, which has not been acted on--we passed my amendment 198, which was a sense of the Senate insofar as aeronautics funding which has been adopted--I ask unanimous consent that amendment No. 197 be withdrawn.

Mr. ALLEN

Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, in listening to the debate, I will tell you what people in the real world care about and that is not process. What people care about, when you see them in the hallways, or anywhere across our country, they care about these high gasoline prices they are having to pay. I agree with the Senator from Washington, to some degree, that we do need to embrace a national energy policy that utilizes the advances of technology. We need more electricity being produced by clean coal technology, propulsion by fuel cell vehicles, and also we need to look at nuclear as a part of the mix, as opposed to natural gas for electricity base-load generation. Rather than talk about process, let's talk about reality. The Senator from Massachusetts is talking about process that no one in the real world cares about. But what I understand is my own experience. I have been to the North Slope, Prudhoe Bay in late November. It was like the dark side of the moon. I also studied this over the years and have seen that Prudhoe Bay has development. I think it is a magnificent engineering feat. In the summer, it is full of mosquitoes, and at other times there are herds of animals that have to be fairly hardy animals to live up there. So the argument ends up being, gosh, if there is a pipeline, there will be a gravel road. All of what happened in Prudhoe Bay has not had an adverse impact on the animals up there, or the mosquitoes, and if there is a gravel road in an area the size of Dulles Airport in a refuge the size of South Carolina, a few gravel roads won't have much impact. I know the occupant of the Chair, who is from South Carolina, knows that doesn't stop deer in his State. It certainly doesn't stop any other animals. The reality is we have high gas prices, gasoline, and natural gas. It is affecting our travel and people in their homes. There are three reasons this amendment needs to stay and we get this revenue from this production. No. 1, security. We are overly dependent upon foreign sources of energy. We are being jerked around and sitting here reading e-mails to see what OPEC is going to do. Are they going to increase production by a few hundred thousand barrels? What impact will that have? Yes, other countries, such as India and China, are taking coal and taking energy, such as oil. But the point is we should be less dependent and reliant for our own security on OPEC and Venezuela and all these different countries, primarily in the Middle East, for our own security. We are presently 58-percent dependent upon foreign oil. It is going to go up to 68 percent in the next 15 years. That is the estimate. Second, this is for jobs. Jobs will be created. Hundreds of thousands of jobs in everything from manufacturing, mining, trade, services, construction, and others. It is going to have an impact mostly on Alaska, but also across the country. That is good for our country as well. Talking about this being Yellowstone, I would not open up exploration at Yellowstone. Nobody is suggesting that. The west coast of Florida, the people there, if they want to have a reasonable distance from oil production that doesn't draw the line all the way to Mississippi and Louisiana, respect the will of the people of the west coast of Florida. If the people of Charleston, SC, don't want drilling off the coast of South Carolina, we ought to respect those people. In Alaska, having been chairman of the Republican Senatorial Committee, looking at poll after poll last year, it is amazing how uniform the support is among the people of Alaska--Democrats, Republicans, Indians, Eskimos, and even in the sub-categorized liberals; liberals in Alaska are in favor of this pipeline. They understand it can be done in an environmentally sound way. It means jobs, revenues. And for us outside of Alaska, the lower 48, and Hawaii, this means energy security. Finally, in addition to security and jobs, there is competitiveness. This country needs to have a reliable, affordable source of energy, whether that is oil or natural gas. Many fertilizer and chemical manufacturers, paper, plastic--even in Danville, VA, where they manufacture tires at a Goodyear plant, they are concerned about the skyrocketing costs of natural gas. Natural gas is available in other countries around the world at a more affordable price. They are competing to get Airbus airplane tires. They got the contract, but obviously tires can be made in Southeast Asia, or elsewhere in the world. It is important for our competitiveness that we have a more stable and affordable energy supply. So I ask you all, my colleagues, to do what is right for the security of this country and jobs for Americans and, most important, for the competitiveness of our country. Support what the Budget Committee has done. Let's use those resources on the North Slope of Alaska for American job security and competitiveness and do what is right by the people in the real world, who would like to see us act, as opposed to worrying about what people in OPEC say about our gas prices.

Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, I will be sending an amendment to the desk and will ask for its immediate consideration. But while a final modification is being made, I will speak on the amendment. Once its been modified, I will ask to call up for consideration. The amendment I am offering to the budget resolution this evening would provide additional funding for the Aeronautics Program at NASA. There has been much talk over the last 3 days about how Congress's budget is a representation of our Nation's priorities. If that is the case, I believe the priorities in this budget proposal are far out of place regarding our Nation's commitment to aeronautics research and development. Aeronautics is a very vital and important science to our country. It provides vital innovations and breakthroughs in military and commercial aviation. Our Nation, from the beginning of flight, from the Wright brothers until very recently, has been unrivaled in military aviation power because of the research and development we have undertaken in the field of aeronautics. My colleague from Virginia, Senator John Warner, and Senator DeWine of Ohio are joining me in offering this amendment, which will restore vitally needed funds for the NASA Aeronautics Program. The administration's 2006 budget proposes to cut over $700 million out of NASA's aeronautics budget over the next 5 years--$700 million over the next 5 years. That will reduce the effective levels of NASA's aeronautics investment to about half of the level that it is today. Today's level is about half the level that the funding, adjusted for inflation, was just a decade ago. So a decade ago there was an amount, that has been cut in half, and this proposal is to cut it in half again, which, in effect, means we have a quarter of the budget in research and development in aeronautics that we had just 10 years ago. In fact, the fiscal year 2006 budget calls for eliminating NASA's entire Vehicle Systems Program, the very initiative that over the last 5 decades has provided major technology advances that have been used on every major civilian and military aircraft over that period of time. The Vehicle Systems Program is a vitally important aspect of NASA, aeronautics, and our country. I am a competitive person. I think this country needs to be a leader in innovation and technology, whether that is nanotechnology, which is a key technology for the future in a variety of areas from life sciences to medical sciences to energy to microelectronics. Another key area for our country's competitiveness and our security in the future is aeronautics. The share of the United States of global commercial aviation sales has been declining for the better part of the last three decades, dropping from 90 percent of market share in 1940 to just over 45 percent last year. In fact, last year was the first time the United States was not first in sales of commercial aircraft. Despite this decline in market share, U.S. commercial aviation is one of the few areas of U.S. manufacturing where we actually have a positive balance of trade. The administration's proposal is shortsighted, and the kind of ``penny wise, pound foolish'' idea that will hinder the United States's economic growth and eliminate any chance that our commercial aviation industry will be able to regain market share against our global competitors. Make no mistake, the European Airbus consortium has a specific, targeted, and funded effort to achieve overwhelming dominance of the commercial aviation market by the year 2020. My amendment sends a message. The message is that as this year's budget process plays out, this Senator and my colleagues as well as colleagues from many parts of our country are going to fight the proposed unwise, harmful cuts to aeronautics research and development. I do not think Americans like losing in aeronautics. Our goal is not only to stop these cuts but also to build a national consensus towards investing even more in aeronautics at NASA. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have additional information printed in the Record on why aeronautics research is important to our Nation.

Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, this amendment would provide a relatively modest increase to the NASA program that has been proposed to be drastically cut in this budget. The Vehicle Systems Program conducts research on the feasibility of hypersonic flight. Hypersonic fight is speed beyond Mach 5, and also research on the development of zero emissions aircraft. The National Institute of Aeronautics is expected to release a report finding the need for increased aeronautics investment and specifically on greater focus on NASA's vehicle systems programs. The amendment I will be offering would meet these recommendations over the next 5 years. As I stated, the increases are relatively modest. For fiscal 2006, the amendment calls for an additional $207 million for the Vehicle Systems Program. This additional funding would be offset by reduction in funding for administrative services across all accounts. I urge my colleagues to consider the importance of aeronautics research, not only for the jobs and the commercial importance for our country but also for our continued national security. Aeronautics is important, because if you look at the R&D and the advancements that will be coming in aeronautics compared to what is going on with our European competitors, our aeronautics engineers are generally older. If we are going to have the next generation of young people involved in aeronautics engineering, we need to have this commitment to R&D. Moreover, it is essential that our men and women in the Armed Forces have the best aircraft. We currently have air superiority. The reason that we have it is because of the R&D over the past 5 decades. For this country to continue to protect the freedom that we enjoy here on the floor of the Senate and in this Congress we must be able to project our power into areas where precision, stealth, and speed are required. To continue being able to do that, aeronautics R&D is absolutely essential. I request that my colleagues to support this amendment. Amendment No. 197, As Modified

Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, I send the amendment to the desk with a modification.

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

Mr. ALLEN. Thank you, Mr. President. I ask for the yeas and nays on this amendment.

Mr. ALLEN. I yield the floor. Agriculture Mandatory Spending

Mr. ALLEN

Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, I am pleased today to recognize a group of Americans who are constantly seeking to improve upon their skills and pursue excellence in their passion and vocation. Beginning today, chefs, cooks, students and foodservice professionals from Southeastern America will gather in Roanoke, VA for a 4-day conference hosted by the American Culinary Federation's Southwestern Virginia Chapter. The event serves as an invaluable opportunity for these culinarians to share their immense skill and knowledge with others in their profession. It provides a chance for these culinary artists to create new relationships and foster old ones, and for senior and master chefs to inspire the aspiring junior chefs. The conference will honor a number of individuals for excellence in their trade, with the following distinctions being awarded: chef of the year award, pastry chef of the year award, and student member of the year award. These individuals will then compete at the national conference of the American Culinary Federation to receive the national award in each division. In addition to the work the American Culinary Federation does to promote the art of cooking and to enhance the dining experience for those who indulge in a meal prepared by these talented individuals, the ACF also works hard to fight childhood hunger across the nation by providing nutrition-based education programs to children in preschool through grade five. Chefs work to increase the awareness of childhood hunger and poverty, and help to train food-relief agencies. I am pleased that the Southwestern Virginia Chapter of the American Culinary Federation will host such a talented and compassionate group of Americans in the great town of Roanoke. I wish them continued success in their culinary endeavors.

Mr. ALLEN

Mr. ALLEN. Elizabeth A. ``Betsy'' Duke was recently chosen to be the chairwoman of the American Bankers Association. The ABA serves as the largest banking trade association in the country, representing most community banks, as well as virtually all large banks of our Nation. She will oversee the day-to-day leadership of the ABA, and all of its 330 employees. Ms. Duke's one-year term marks the first time that a woman has held this highly visible position, as well as the first since 1951 that the post has been held by a Virginian. I am confident that Betsy Duke's extensive background in the banking industry, including serving as former director of the Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond and former president of the Virginia Bankers Association has prepared her well for this new and challenging leadership role. After graduating from the University of North Carolina in 1974 with a degree in drama, Betsy moved back to her native Virginia Beach and found an acting job in a dinner theater. In order to support her dream of becoming an actress, Betsy went looking for a day job. After being turned down by a local dry cleaner, she finally found work as a part- time drive-up bank teller. The theatrical show in which Betsy was participating in ended about a year later, but by then she had come to a couple of conclusions: that her dream of becoming a great actress would never materialize, and that she really enjoyed her job as a teller. Betsy was soon able to secure a new-accounts job at Bank of Virginia Beach, which changed her life in more ways than one. It was there that she met her mentor, Burt Harrison, who served as the bank's CEO, and a young operations officer and her future husband, Larry Harcum. As Betsy began taking on more responsibility, she began taking banking courses and was named the bank's accounting officer, but things became complicated when she began dating Larry. The bank had a strict policy regarding this activity, so after a few months, Betsy left the bank to go work at a local car dealership, but was asked to return a few months later by her mentor and bank CEO, Burt Harrison. The very next day, however, Larry quit. Burt quickly caught on, but allowed the two to stay under the condition that they keep their budding romance quiet. About a year later, the two married, but not after receiving the board's approval for the two of them to be able to keep their jobs at the bank. One of the directors actually got confused and thought he was voting on whether or not the two should get married, and voted no. Betsy's friend, mentor, and boss Burt died suddenly of a heart attack in 1991, and Betsy, who by then had been named president, suddenly found herself thrust into the role of CEO. She and Larry ran the bank successfully for another 10 years until what was now referred to as the Bank of Tidewater was acquired by SouthTrust in 2001. Betsy served as executive vice president for community bank development at SouthTrust. It was around this time that Betsy Duke became vice-chairman of ABA. Prior to this, she had served as a member of ABA's board of directors. The following year, she was named chairwoman of the ABA. Betsy Duke is currently executive vice president, Merger Project Team, Wachovia Bank in Virginia Beach. As I previously mentioned, she was executive vice president for Community Bank Development at SouthTrust, but upon the bank's merger with Wachovia, she transferred to the merger integration team. Beyond her current role as chairman of ABA, her involvement with the organization spans two decades. She began as an instructor for ABA's National School of Bank Investments and has continued in this role to this day. In addition, she has been a member of the trade group's Community Bankers Council, Communication Council, and Grassroots Task Force. Finally she has led the ABA's Government Relations Task Force, and served on its board of directors. In addition to her bachelor's degree in fine arts from the University of North Carolina, she has a master's degree in business administration from Old Dominion University. Betsy Duke loves banking. She truly believes that the industry is one of the most important in this country. Betsy believes that no other association comes close to serving the banking industry as does the ABA. I am pleased that Betsy Duke is heading up this great group, not just because she is a Virginian, but because she brings the real life experience needed to continue the successful tradition of the ABA. Congratulations Betsy, you have made your friends, family, and Virginia proud.

Mr. ALLEN

Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, I am pleased today to recognize the success of the Central Intercollegiate Athletic Association as they tip off their 60th Men's Basketball Tournament this week. The Central Intercollegiate Athletic Association, CIAA, is an athletic conference consisting of 12 historically African-American institutions of higher education, including: Bowie State University, Elizabeth City State University, Fayetteville State University, Johnson C. Smith University, Livingstone College, North Carolina Central University, St. Augustine's College, St. Paul's College, Shaw University, Virginia State University, Virginia Union University and Winston-Salem State University. Established in 1912, the CIAA is the Nation's oldest black athletic conference, rich in history and heritage. The conference is entering its 85th year of athletic competition in which they have reaped continued success and recognition on the field and the court. The CIAA is a premiere member of the National Collegiate Athletic Association, NCAA, Division II and the reputation of their athletic programs, in conjunction with the academic success of their athletes, is a proud legacy for the conference. The CIAA basketball tournament began humbly in Washington, DC in 1946 and has grown into one of the largest, most prestigious and long- tenured sporting traditions in America, particularly in the South. Started by a group of visionaries led by legendary coach John McClendon, the tournament has come to showcase dynamic basketball that has produced the likes of past NBA stars Earl Monroe, Bobby Dandridge, Charles Oakley, Rick Mahorn and current NBA star Ronald Murray of the Seattle Supersonics. The weeklong affair draws a host of national celebrities and dignitaries for a variety of activities and events. The tournament festivities serve as a sort of homecoming for students, fans and alumni of the conference. In 2004, the tournament drew over 100,000 fans to Raleigh, NC, making it the third largest basketball tournament in the nation, regardless of division. As a former collegiate athlete, I understand the difficulties faced by institutions of higher education in planning and supporting athletic tournaments. I congratulate the Central Intercollegiate Athletic Association on its rich and sustained history of superb college athletics. The celebration of this 60th Anniversary Basketball Tournament represents a remarkable achievement for those who have worked tirelessly over the past decades to ensure its longevity. I wish the conference and its annual tournament continued success.