Max Baucus

Mr. BAUCUS

Mr. BAUCUS. All the cloture votes can occur tomorrow.

Mr. BAUCUS

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I rise today to comment on the long overdue establishment of a continuing medical education program in Montana. The Northwest Research and Education Institute is a joint venture of St. Vincent Healthcare and Rocky Mountain Health Network, formed to serve the research and education needs of both the Montana Region of the Sisters of Charity of Leavenworth Health System which stretches from Butte to Miles City and the nearly 500 physicians and 7 hospitals associated with Rocky Mountain Health Network in Montana and Wyoming. As many know, for too long, Montana was the only state in the US without a continuing medical education accrediting entity. The other 49 States have been able to provide immediate continuing education programs. Montana's medical community had to go hundreds of miles out of State to further their education. The people of my great State deserve the best health care possible, and it is imperative that medical practitioners are able to continue their education. Our physicians, nurses, and pharmacists have been asking for more effective medical education services, and I am pleased to say that now they have it. I am proud to have secured the initial $250,000 to assist the Northwest Research and Education Institute to complete the accreditation process. Securing this funding for me was a top priority as Montanans medical practioners shouldn't have to travel hundreds, if not thousands, of miles to receive their required training. Continuing medical education programs provide education to physicians, nurses, pharmacists, therapists, and other health care professionals to keep them up to date with the latest in medicine. This, of course, translates to better health care for patients. Rural healthcare providers have special needs for continuing education because they practice so far from each other and from centers of education. Now that education can be obtained by a health care provider in Montana. I am particularly proud that the Northwest Research and Education Institute recently completed their application and received their accreditation. The accreditation is a stamp of quality approval that puts the Northwest Research and Education Institute in a league with medical schools, professional societies and other organizations which offer the highest standards of continuing medical education. I am proud of the accomplishments of the Institute already and I am confident that the Institute will continue to accomplish its goals of providing quality continuing medical education programs to Montana's medical community.

Mr. BAUCUS

Mr. BAUCUS. Yes, I agree. In applying the unique limit of Internal Revenue Code section 664(g)(7), the valuation should be determined upon allocation to the participant's account.

Mr. BAUCUS

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I am here to introduce bill to provide a 6-month extension of the Nation's largely successful welfare program. It is known as the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families Program, or TANF. Congress enacted the TANF program in 1996, to help welfare recipients gain work skills and to help low-income families become economically self-sufficient. Welfare reform has mostly succeeded. States have adopted creative policies to support low-income families making the transition from welfare to work. Millions have moved to self-sufficiency. But the TANF law expired in 2002. And Congress has failed to reauthorize it. Instead, Congress has extended TANF on a short-term basis, 12 times. The latest short-term extension expires in just over 2 weeks. This bill is a simple extension of the current welfare program. It would provide stability for the States to operate their welfare programs. And it would continue our successful partnership with the States in supporting needy families as they move from welfare to work. Earlier this week, the Senate voted 64-27 to keep the welfare program out of the budget cutting reconciliation bill that the House has passed. The Senate voted instead to build on the bipartisan Finance Committee bill that Chairman Grassley and I worked diligently on this year. That bill is called the Personal Responsibility Individual Development for Everyone or PRIDE Act. The Finance Committee reported it out in March with near unanimous support. The PRIDE Act has been awaiting full Senate consideration since then. Despite broad support in the Finance Committee, the Senate has not taken this measure up for debate. Despite the broad support of governors, the Senate has not taken this measure up for debate. The Republican Governors Association said that TANF reauthorization ``is too important to leave to the limitations of the reconciliation process.'' But the Senate has not taken this measure up for debate. This vote was a vote to debate this bill on the Senate floor. It was a vote to build on the broadly-supported bill from the Finance Committee. We are going to need some time to complete that debate. The 6-month extension that I offer this afternoon will keep the welfare program operating. The 6-month extension will allow us the time to debate, pass, and go to conference on a fully considered PRIDE Act. I urge my colleagues to do the responsible thing. I urge my colleagues to support this extension. I urge my colleagues to keep this important safety net program operating.

Mr. BAUCUS

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I am here to introduce bill to provide a 6-month extension of the Nation's largely successful welfare program. It is known as the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families Program, or TANF. Congress enacted the TANF program in 1996, to help welfare recipients gain work skills and to help low-income families become economically self-sufficient. Welfare reform has mostly succeeded. States have adopted creative policies to support low-income families making the transition from welfare to work. Millions have moved to self-sufficiency. But the TANF law expired in 2002. And Congress has failed to reauthorize it. Instead, Congress has extended TANF on a short-term basis, 12 times. The latest short-term extension expires in just over 2 weeks. This bill is a simple extension of the current welfare program. It would provide stability for the States to operate their welfare programs. And it would continue our successful partnership with the States in supporting needy families as they move from welfare to work. Earlier this week, the Senate voted 64-27 to keep the welfare program out of the budget cutting reconciliation bill that the House has passed. The Senate voted instead to build on the bipartisan Finance Committee bill that Chairman Grassley and I worked diligently on this year. That bill is called the Personal Responsibility Individual Development for Everyone or PRIDE Act. The Finance Committee reported it out in March with near unanimous support. The PRIDE Act has been awaiting full Senate consideration since then. Despite broad support in the Finance Committee, the Senate has not taken this measure up for debate. Despite the broad support of governors, the Senate has not taken this measure up for debate. The Republican Governors Association said that TANF reauthorization ``is too important to leave to the limitations of the reconciliation process.'' But the Senate has not taken this measure up for debate. This vote was a vote to debate this bill on the Senate floor. It was a vote to build on the broadly-supported bill from the Finance Committee. We are going to need some time to complete that debate. The 6-month extension that I offer this afternoon will keep the welfare program operating. The 6-month extension will allow us the time to debate, pass, and go to conference on a fully considered PRIDE Act. I urge my colleagues to do the responsible thing. I urge my colleagues to support this extension. I urge my colleagues to keep this important safety net program operating.

Mr. BAUCUS

Mr. BAUCUS. I thank the Chairman and join in his recommendations to the IRS.

Mr. BAUCUS. As we consider this legislation to provide tax relief to respond to Katrina, it is particularly important that we recognize the impact of the hurricane on those struggling working families who are eligible for the earned income tax credit and the child tax credit. I am particularly concerned that the disruptions and displacement affecting these families in both their jobs and their homes may make it more difficult for them to receive these critical tax credits to which they are legally entitled--credits which they need more than ever. Some families will become eligible for these credits for the first time, yet may not be aware of these programs let alone how to apply for them. In addition, we have seen a tremendous outpouring of support for those hit by Katrina from families and friends of the victims, often at great cost. These relatives and friends may also qualify for assistance but find it more difficult to meet all the normal requirements. For example, there are many families who have taken in nonrelative children displaced by the hurricane. They are essentially foster parents but may not be considered as such under current law. Due to the need to act quickly in response to Katrina, these foster children will not have been formally placed by an authorized agency but under current rules, such individuals could not claim these children for the EITC or the child tax credit. This would be true even if they continued to care for the children for more than 6 months in 2006 and thus meet the qualifying child residency requirement. The only potential relief such individuals have is the $500 additional exemption in 2005 for housing a Katrina survivor more than 60 days provided in the Hurricane Katrina Emergency Tax Relief Act, HKTRA. However, this is a minimal support for a family taking in a child as a member of the family. In addition, the exemption is unavailable to low-income families with no income tax liability. Taxpayers caring for such children may ultimately seek to formalize the arrangement with an authorized agency during 2006, but a placement decision may not be reached until later in the year. If only the time in residence with a child after the placement decision is considered for the purposes of meeting the residency test, the taxpayer may be unable to meet that test for the EITC and CTC. Some low-income taxpayers, unaware of the EITC or CTC rules, may simply continue to care for the child in their family and not pursue a formal arrangement until a later point and yet may be counting on the income from these credits. Clearly the IRS needs to address this problem.

Mr. BAUCUS. I wholeheartedly agree with my friend from Iowa. I would like to raise another concern regarding these tax credits and the Katrina families. As we approach the next filing season, there are so many families affected by the hurricane who previously received the EITC and the CTC but now face significant confusion about whether they will get the credit and how much they will receive. And, of course, some of the normal sources of taxpayer assistance in the gulf are not available now. Accordingly, it is exceedingly important the IRS do everything it can to maximize information and assistance provided to the public to help those eligible secure these credits. While we wrote section 406 and section 407 of the Hurricane Tax relief bill to help eligible hurricane survivors receive the benefits of the EITC and CTC, it is really up to the IRS to effectively inform taxpayers and the tax preparation community of how the provisions are being implemented. In particular, section 407 provides that the IRS ``. . . may make such adjustments in the application of the internal revenue laws as may be necessary to ensure that taxpayers do not lose any deduction or credit or experience a change of filing status by reason of temporary relocations by reason of Hurricane Katrina.'' I understand that the IRS is working to decide how this ``adjustment authority'' will be implemented and is preparing a new Publication 4492. However, low-income taxpayers and those who assist them in the preparation of their 2005 tax returns will need to understand the nature and limits of the adjustments IRS is willing to make so that returns are prepared properly. It will take a very thorough and comprehensive public education program to make sure that nontechnical information is made available through various means to help educate the public and those who help prepare tax returns. I am very concerned that the IRS take every possible step it can to make sure eligible low- income working families affected by Katrina know about special temporary adjustments to these credits and what they need to do to ensure they receive these credits.

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, shortly, we will complete legislative business and adjourn for the year. Senators will leave to spend the holidays with our families. Senators will travel to the comfort of our homes. But there are still those in the gulf region who do not have homes. Hurricane Katrina struck almost 4 months ago. We cannot, in good conscience, conclude our action for the year without passing tax relief for the gulf region. The legislation before us today is a good bill. We must pass it today. In September, I was pleased that Congress could come together and quickly pass emergency tax relief for victims of Hurricane Katrina. Prior to passing that legislation, I promised that I would work with my colleagues to draft a long-term tax relief package. And that is what we did. We worked to create legislation that would help rebuild homes and businesses. We worked to create legislation that would pump money into local economies. And we worked to create legislation that would help distressed working families. We must come together again. We must pass this legislation today. On November 18th, the Senate passed the tax reconciliation bill. We included Hurricane tax relief. We included Alternative Minimum Tax relief. And we included more than a dozen important tax provisions that expire on December 31st, including the Work Opportunity Tax Credit and the Research and Development Tax Credit. With the help of many, Chairman Grassley and I fit all of that legislation within the constraints of the budget resolution's instructions. But the House did not take up our bill. Instead, the House passed hurricane relief and Alternative Minimum Tax relief outside of the budget reconciliation process. Then the next day, the House passed a tax reconciliation bill. Why did the House need three bills to achieve what the Senate succeeded in passing in one bill? The reason is simple. The reason is the capital gains and dividends tax cut. I am disappointed in the House. I am disappointed that Congress could not pass all the important tax relief that the Senate did in one bill. And that is why we have the legislation before us today, the House hurricane tax relief bill. The amendment that Chairman Grassley and I have crafted to this bill recognizes that to revitalize the gulf region, the region must have a strong economy. We must encourage individuals to return. And that means that there must be jobs for them to return to. This legislation gives businesses help to create those jobs. We would provide bonus depreciation. We would increase small business expensing limits. We would also provide new authority for tax-favored private activity and mortgage bonds. We would also extend to victims of Hurricanes Rita and Wilma some of the tax relief that we provided to victims of Hurricane Katrina in September. This includes penalty-free early tax-free withdrawals from pensions and IRAs. We would allow victims to fully deduct casualty losses. And we would remove the cap on allowable corporate charitable contributions made in response to the hurricanes. And thanks to the hard work and persistence of the good Senators from Florida and Texas, we have been able to forge an agreement to provide extra low-income housing benefits for the Rita and Wilma hurricane zones. My good friend from Florida, Senator Nelson, has made the convincing case that these devastated areas need more assistance with low-income housing, and I am pleased to say this bill will be providing that very help. The substitute that Senator Grassley and I offer today provides $8 billion in tax relief for the gulf region. We take the House bill, but we provide additional tax relief for employers and students to encourage people to return to the gulf region. One item of particular importance to me is tax relief to employers who continued to pay their workers after the hurricanes struck. Employers located in the Katrina, Rita, and Wilma disaster zones will be able to take up to a $2,400 tax credit on wages paid to employees during the period the business was shut down. These business owners have tapped into their savings to help out their workers. They deserve tax relief. We provided this relief in our first bill, but it was limited to small employers. I have always felt and argued strongly that any employer that helps out their workers while the business is shut down deserves this assistance. I am very pleased that we were able to eliminate this cap, and extend this relief for the Rita and Wilma zones as well. Another priority item for me is a provision to encourage students to return to the gulf region. Many colleges and universities were forced to shut down after Hurricane Katrina and students have been scattered across the country. To encourage these students, and new students as well, to come back to the gulf region, we double the Hope Scholarship and Lifetime Learning tax credits. Students from around the country would be able to take a credit up to $4,000 for tuition, room and board, books, and fees for attending college in the areas affected by Hurricane Katrina. I was very pleased that we could include this benefit in our Senate version and that we have retained it in this substitute. I think it will be extremely valuable to the colleges and universities who have really suffered from this hurricane. One further priority item for me is the additional $1 billion in new markets tax credit authority for the Katrina zone. I fought to get this credit in our Senate version because I am convinced this program works. The program provides access to capital for small businesses through established community development entities. Entities with a significant mission of rebuilding in the hurricane zone may access these additional tax credits in order to help these struggling businesses rebuild. These businesses may not be able to utilize some of the other tax benefits in the bill, but access to capital will help many of them stay in business and stay in the zone. One last item that I would like to highlight is an employer credit for providing housing for workers and their families. My good friend from Louisiana, Senator Landrieu, offered this provision during our floor debate last month. And if I could just take a moment to point out to our colleagues the tremendous work she has done on this bill. She has truly been our compass during these negotiations and has been essential in conveying the true plight of her constituents. She has told me about the many hurricane victims who still do not have housing in the gulf region. Under her provision, workers and their families receiving housing from their employers could exclude up to $600 a month from their income for tax purposes, plus the business can receive a partial credit for this expense. Business leaders have told us that they simply cannot get back to work unless their workers have housing. The Landrieu housing provision helps them immensely. Finally, this bill provides that soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan may include combat pay when calculating their earned income tax credit. This has been a priority item for our friend from Arkansas, Senator Pryor, who championed this fix for our military families serving in combat last year. We extend the benefit for another year in this substitute and I commend Senator Pryor for his tireless work on behalf of military families. We have a good bill before us. It has been nearly 4 months. We are set to adjourn the Senate for the year. We need to come together and help those most in need. I urge my colleagues to pass this legislation today. animal racing

Mr. BAUCUS

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I rise today to speak about the Combat Meth Act. I am proud to be a cosponsor of the Combat Meth Act because it addresses a problem that impacts every aspect of our society. I was excited when the Combat Meth Act was included as part of the Commerce, Justice, State Appropriation bill this year, and I was extremely disappointed that it wasn't included in the final conference report. Though Senator Leahy requested that the Combat Methamphetamine Epidemic Act be presented to the Senate as a freestanding bill, it is unfortunately included at the end of the PATRIOT Act. So much has been said on the PATRIOT Act's civil liberty provisions, yet little has been said about the very important section of the conference report, the Combat Meth Act. The methamphetamine problem in this country needs attention. Methamphetamine abuse has increased dramatically in recent years, reaching all comers of the United States. It is a very large problem in the State of Montana. That is why I was pleased when the Senate gave methamphetamine the attention it deserved. And we worked together to produce a bipartisan bill. The Senate Combat Meth Act provided greater regulations for methamphetamine, just what law enforcement officers asked us for. The Senate bill focused on regulation, monitoring, treatment, and prevention. The conference report does not provide the same provisions we negotiated in the Senate for the Combat Meth Act. Though I support the ideas behind many sections of the conference report, including the restrictions on the allowable quantity purchasable, the requirement for over-the-counter medicines containing pseudoephedrine to be sold by a licensed pharmacist, and the establishment of a log book for these products, I still do not believe we have done enough to solve the methamphetamine problem. In addition, the conference report changed the drug kingpin statute and lowered the eligibility thresholds for death sentences and mandatory life sentences. This is not what we need most. We need to work more on prevention. Though I voted to oppose cloture on the PATRIOT Act, I support the Combat Meth Act and the need for legislation on this important issue. We must help solve the methamphetamine problem. Law enforcement officers depend on us. Methamphetamine addicts depend on us. And children of methamphetamine users depend on us to work together to bring this piece of legislation to the floor again. I will work with my colleagues to make sure methamphetamine is a high priority issue when we come back after the New Year.

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

Mr. BAUCUS

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, today I am introducing legislation to help families bear the dramatic increase in cost for home heating bills this winter. The bill, the Household Energy and Taxpayer Assistance Act of 2005, appropriates enough money to fully fund the Low Income Energy Assistance Program at its authorized level and provides for a tax credit up to $300 per family to offset home heating bills. I cannot overstate the urgency of this legislation. This week, natural gas prices hit record highs. On the New York Mercantile Exchange, January futures rose to $15.78 per million BTUs. Prices have more than doubled since last year. What does that mean for the consumer? The Energy Information Administration predicts that the average household heating with natural gas his winter will pay $281 more for fuel this winter than they did last winter. That is a 38 percent increase. Households using home heating oil can expect to pay $255 more, and propane users could see a $167 increase. Those heating with electricity will likely see a $46 increase in the cost to heat a home. The bill that I am proposing includes two proposals that Congress should enact immediately to mitigate these price spikes for households. First and foremost, my legislation fully funds the Federal Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program, or LIHEAP. Despite projections for astronomical energy costs, the conference agreement for the Labor, HHS, Education appropriations bill funds this essential home heating program at less than 50 percent of its authorized level. And today the Senate will be considering that conference report. The current funding level for LIHEAP is unacceptable. As energy prices continue to skyrocket, we should not be shortchanging this vital program. In recent years, a growing need for help with home heating bills has consistently outstripped available funding, which has remained flat. That is why Congress responded by increasing the authorization for the program to $5.1 billion in the recently enacted energy bill. But Congress hasn't appropriated anywhere near as much for this program as it could. Current appropriations legislation provides only about $2.2 billion in 2006. My bill would appropriate an additional $2.9 billion for the LIHEAP program. Funding for heating assistance in my home State of Montana would be at least $35 million, about $20 million more than last year. Montanans and other hard-working families should not have to choose between their home energy bills and affording other basic necessities. Energy is a basic need, and without LIHEAP assistance, many Montanans wouldn't be able to heat their homes. That's why I'm working to help ease the burden of high heating costs. In addition, this bill establishes a temporary tax credit to help all taxpayers to defray a portion of their heating bills this winter. That means families can add up their home energy bills, and when tax time comes around they can get 20 percent of that expense back, for heating fuel or utility costs. That credit will provide as much as $200 for an individual or $300 for a family. The credit is also refundable. Low-income Americans who don't owe any Federal income taxes would still get that rebate against their heating bills. Americans can't wait until spring for this assistance. In its current edition, U.S. News & World Report introduces us to Mervalene Eastman, an unemployed woman on the Crow Indian Reservation. Month-to-month, $100 jumps in her heating bills last year put her behind in her bills. Medical problems forced her to leave her job as an emergency dispatcher, and then she lost natural gas service. Things are so tough she sometimes needed to use her electric oven for heat, especially on cold nights. I am deeply troubled by the thought that more Americans will go without heat this winter. I am concerned families will face a choice between food on their table or heat during the night. They should not have to make that decision. We should pass this legislation and give millions of families an early present this holiday. Now is the time to act, and I urge my colleagues to join me helping to provide this much needed relief.

Mr. BAUCUS

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I thank the Senators from Oklahoma and Idaho for their courtesy. There were three of us scheduled to speak at the same time. Obviously, that is very difficult to do. These two Senators graciously allowed me to go ahead. I thank them both.

Mr. BAUCUS. I thank the Chair (The remarks of Mr. Baucus pertaining to the introduction of S. 2107 are located in today's Record under ``Statements on Introduced Bills and Joint Resolutions.'')

Mr. BAUCUS

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, today I am introducing legislation to help families bear the dramatic increase in cost for home heating bills this winter. The bill, the Household Energy and Taxpayer Assistance Act of 2005, appropriates enough money to fully fund the Low Income Energy Assistance Program at its authorized level and provides for a tax credit up to $300 per family to offset home heating bills. I cannot overstate the urgency of this legislation. This week, natural gas prices hit record highs. On the New York Mercantile Exchange, January futures rose to $15.78 per million BTUs. Prices have more than doubled since last year. What does that mean for the consumer? The Energy Information Administration predicts that the average household heating with natural gas his winter will pay $281 more for fuel this winter than they did last winter. That is a 38 percent increase. Households using home heating oil can expect to pay $255 more, and propane users could see a $167 increase. Those heating with electricity will likely see a $46 increase in the cost to heat a home. The bill that I am proposing includes two proposals that Congress should enact immediately to mitigate these price spikes for households. First and foremost, my legislation fully funds the Federal Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program, or LIHEAP. Despite projections for astronomical energy costs, the conference agreement for the Labor, HHS, Education appropriations bill funds this essential home heating program at less than 50 percent of its authorized level. And today the Senate will be considering that conference report. The current funding level for LIHEAP is unacceptable. As energy prices continue to skyrocket, we should not be shortchanging this vital program. In recent years, a growing need for help with home heating bills has consistently outstripped available funding, which has remained flat. That is why Congress responded by increasing the authorization for the program to $5.1 billion in the recently enacted energy bill. But Congress hasn't appropriated anywhere near as much for this program as it could. Current appropriations legislation provides only about $2.2 billion in 2006. My bill would appropriate an additional $2.9 billion for the LIHEAP program. Funding for heating assistance in my home State of Montana would be at least $35 million, about $20 million more than last year. Montanans and other hard-working families should not have to choose between their home energy bills and affording other basic necessities. Energy is a basic need, and without LIHEAP assistance, many Montanans wouldn't be able to heat their homes. That's why I'm working to help ease the burden of high heating costs. In addition, this bill establishes a temporary tax credit to help all taxpayers to defray a portion of their heating bills this winter. That means families can add up their home energy bills, and when tax time comes around they can get 20 percent of that expense back, for heating fuel or utility costs. That credit will provide as much as $200 for an individual or $300 for a family. The credit is also refundable. Low-income Americans who don't owe any Federal income taxes would still get that rebate against their heating bills. Americans can't wait until spring for this assistance. In its current edition, U.S. News & World Report introduces us to Mervalene Eastman, an unemployed woman on the Crow Indian Reservation. Month-to-month, $100 jumps in her heating bills last year put her behind in her bills. Medical problems forced her to leave her job as an emergency dispatcher, and then she lost natural gas service. Things are so tough she sometimes needed to use her electric oven for heat, especially on cold nights. I am deeply troubled by the thought that more Americans will go without heat this winter. I am concerned families will face a choice between food on their table or heat during the night. They should not have to make that decision. We should pass this legislation and give millions of families an early present this holiday. Now is the time to act, and I urge my colleagues to join me helping to provide this much needed relief.

Mr. BAUCUS

Mr. BAUCUS. Madam President, what is the regular order?

Mr. BAUCUS. Madam President, I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. BAUCUS. Madam President, this motion instructs the Senate conferees on the pending reconciliation bill not to bring back a conference report that hurts Medicaid beneficiaries. In fact, these changes amount to a tax on our poorest citizens. They also burden doctors, hospitals, other providers who will pass on the costs to them. More poor people will pay more, but they will get less. It does not make sense. We are cutting Medicaid to take it out of the hide of the poorest people of our country, and that is Medicaid recipients. May I also say I am supported by a strong letter from a number of Senators on the other side of the aisle. This letter asks the same; that we do not adopt these harsh House Medicaid cuts. I ask unanimous consent it be printed in the Record.

Mr. BAUCUS. Madam President, the Senate is not in order.

Mr. BAUCUS. Madam President, this motion instructs the Senate conferees on the spending reconciliation bill not to bring back a conference report that hurts Medicaid beneficiaries. Last month, the House passed a spending reconciliation bill that would increase health costs and cut benefits for millions of seniors and lower-income Americans who depend on Medicaid. According to the Congressional Budget Office, three-quarters of the Medicaid savings in the House bill came from the these cuts. The bill would increase costs for 17 million people, cut benefits for 5 million people, and force tens of thousands off of Medicaid. We know the damage that increasing health costs can cause. We have seen it happen. Oregon imposed just a nominal premium for some on Medicaid--from $6 to $20 a month. Within 10 months, nearly half of the people forced to pay had been dropped from coverage. Three-quarters of those who were dropped became uninsured. These changes impose a tax on our poorest citizens. And these changes also burden doctors, hospitals, and clinics that treat Medicaid patients. States will deduct the fees regardless of whether providers ever get paid. Healthcare providers will pass these uncompensated costs along through higher rates for all patients in the private market. Many poor people will pay more, but get less. The House bill allows States to cut Medicaid benefits. Although the bill would protect the poorest children, millions of children would no longer get the medical care that they need. People with disabilities and chronic conditions would also be at risk. Some say we need to look at Medicaid's rising costs, and I agree. We need to get a handle on spending and make this program sustainable. But shifting costs and cutting benefits for our poorest and least able to pay is not the smart way to do it. This motion instructs Senate conferees on the reconciliation bill to reject the House changes to Medicaid that would hurt Medicaid beneficiaries or undermine Medicaid's guarantee. The Senate must take a stand in support of the neediest among us. Let us ensure that we do no harm to the vulnerable people whom Medicaid serves.

Mr. BAUCUS. Madam President, I call up a motion to instruct which is at the desk.

Mr. BAUCUS. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent to speak for 2 minutes.

Mr. BAUCUS. The Senate is not in order.

Mr. BAUCUS

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, Libby, MT, is a special place. Libby is a city of more than 2,600 people in Lincoln County, in the northwest corner of Montana. It rests in a valley high in the Rocky Mountains, on the green Kootenai River between the Cabinet and Percell Mountains. Libby is not a rich city. In 2000, the median family income in Libby was just under $30,000. That compares with just over $40,000 in all of Montana, and just over $50,000 in all of America. Across the river, and 9 miles northeast of the town, rises a mountain that they call Zonolite Mountain. Until 1990, the W.R. Grace Company used to mine vermiculite there in the mountain. Vermiculite is shiny mineral. Heat it, and it pops like popcorn. People used to pop vermiculite to make building insulation. They called the popped vermiculite ``Zonolite.'' The layers of rock where people found the vermiculite contained harmful asbestos. And the vermiculite outside Libby is laced with a especially dangerous type of asbestos, called tremolite. Tremolite is the most toxic form of asbestos. Termolite has long fibers that are barbed like fishhooks. These fibers work their way into soft lung tissue. These fibers do not come out. Until the mid-1970s, W.R. Grace processed the vermiculite mined in Libby in a nearby mill. The mill was so dusty that workers often could not see their hands on their brooms. Dust was everywhere. Mill workers swept dust outside. They dumped it down the mountainside. I remember seeing employees come out of the mine off the bus so caked with dust I wondered what in the world is going on here. I never knew any working conditions to be so dusty. The mill's ventilation stack spewed the dust into the air. The ventilation stack released 5,000 pounds of asbestos every day. When the wind blew from the east, a deadly white dust would cover the town. For decades, 24 hours a day, the dust fell all over Libby. Dust fell on Libby's gardens. Dust fell on Libby's homes. Dust fell on Libby's high school track. Dust fell on Libby's playgrounds. Some of the vermiculite went downtown to a plant, right next to the baseball diamonds. The plant popped the vermiculite into Zonolite. Batches of Zonolite spilled all around the plant. Kids played in the Zonolite. People brought home bags of Zonolite to pour into the attics. People put Zonolite in their walls. People put Zonolite in their gardens. People put vermiculite and ore in road beds. People used vermiculite and ore as aggregate in their driveways. An article in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives would later conclude: Given the ubiquitous nature of vermiculite contamination in Libby, along with historical evidence of elevated asbestos concentrations in the air, it would be difficult to find participants who could be characterized as unexposed. Every day, men from the valley went to the mountain to work in the mine and the mill. Every day, these men came home, covered with the fine, deadly white powder. The powder got into their clothes. The powder got into their curtains. The powder covered their floors. The fine fibers of tremolite asbestos are easy to inhale. Miners inhaled fibers in the mine. Workers inhaled fibers at the mill. Wives inhaled fibers when they washed their husband's clothes. Children inhaled fibers when they played on the carpet. And those fibers caused respiratory disease. Those fibers caused a serious lung disease called asbestosis. And those fibers caused a serious form of cancer, mesothelioma, which plagues the chest and abdominal cavities. Tremolite asbestos causes unique diseases. These diseases are highly progressive and deceptive. These diseases often result in severe impairment or death, without the typical warning markers that show up on x-rays. Without the usual medical signals, the people of Libby often went undiagnosed. The Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry found that people from Libby suffer from asbestos-related disease at a rate 40-to- 60 times the national average. People from Libby suffer from the asbestos cancer mesothelioma at a rate 100 times the national average. Because of the W.R. Grace mine and the mill, hundreds of people in Libby died from asbestos-related diseases. And hundreds of current and former area residents are now ill. The people in Libby will be plagued by asbestos for years to come. These diseases can take 40 years to appear. Hundreds more will fall victim to these diseases in the future. Now, the people of Libby must watch their neighbors struggle to tend their gardens. They must watch their neighbors struggle to walk to the cafe. They must watch their neighbors struggle to provide a future for their children. And they must wonder if they, too, will fall ill. Hundreds of people live in discomfort. Hundreds of people live in pain. ``It took my mother 17 months to slowly suffocate,'' said Gayla Benefield. After Gayla's mother died in 1996, Gayla and her sister sued W.R. Grace. They brought only the second such lawsuit to be decided by a jury in Libby. W.R. Grace had quietly settled dozens of other claims with agreements of secrecy. In 1999, the Environmental Protection Agency started to investigate. The EPA found tremolite contamination in the air around the nursery. They found it near the ball fields. They found it inside homes. The EPA started cleaning up. The entire community of Libby was designated a Superfund site. Libby was listed on the EPA's National Priorities List. The EPA concluded: The occurrence of non-occupational asbestos-related disease that has been observed among Libby residents is extremely unusual, and has not been associated with asbestos mines elsewhere, suggesting either very high and prolonged environmental exposures and/or increased toxicity of this form of amphibole asbestos. The EPA has worked hard. The EPA has shown a good response and solid clean-up work. And the EPA is committed to finishing the job. I commend them. I made many visits to Libby--many, many times. I talked with EPA officials over the years, and I think they have done a pretty good job. The EPA has identified more than a thousand properties in Libby that still need cleaning up. The agency has pushed back the timeframe for cleaning up the town from 2004 to 2008. After having been in Libby for 3 years, the agency had completed only 10 percent of the cleanup work needed to give the town a clean bill of health. The EPA must keep Libby a priority. In 1999, I was the first high-ranking elected official to visit Libby. Since the winter of 1999, I have gone to Libby 16 times. I have worked heard to get funds to help with cleanup, health care, and economic development. I have looked into the eyes of people in Libby. I have seen mothers and fathers, sister and brothers, husbands and wives. I have listened to their troubling stories. In Libby, I heard many concerns of residents who cannot afford their health care. People are sick. Many are getting sicker. They are dying up there. Health care is one of the most pressing needs facing Libby. In 2000, I helped to establish the Center for Asbestos Related Diseases, or CARD. The CARD clinic has done a tremendous job providing health care and screening for Libby residents. CARD needs additional Federal dollars to provide more and better care. The healthcare costs of treating asbestos-related disease can be devastating. Simple, routine procedures to help a person breathe more easily can cost more than $30,000. Those costs continue to add up. They are crippling a community that is struggling to get back on its feet. The people of Libby face a health care crisis. This crisis was caused by alarming rates of tremolite asbestos-related disease. Treating the sick people in Libby will cost hundreds of millions of dollars. It was caused by no fault of their own, but, I might add, by a company that knew it was damaging and killing the people in that community. Libby is working to overcome years of asbestos exposure from the W.R. Grace mine. They have been through enough. They did not ask for this lot. Affording quality health care remains one of the biggest hurdles for the town to move forward. That is why I fought to make sure that asbestos bills working through the Senate addressed the needs of the people of Libby. When, in May of this year, the Judiciary Committee voted to report S. 852, the Fairness in Asbestos Injury Resolution Act, the committee included appropriate language. The good people of Libby need our help. They are dying up there. They cannot afford health care. I am dedicated to getting them the healthcare treatment that they need and deserve. I made a commitment to the people of Libby and I intend to work together with my colleagues to see that commitment honored. Asbestos disease has devastated many communities across the country But tremolite asbestos hit Libby hardest of all. Libby is unique. The type of asbestos at Libby is unique. The duration of exposure at Libby is unique. The manner in which asbestos disease manifests itself in Libby is unique. And the community-wide exposure in Libby was unique. That is why the tailored solution that the Judiciary Committee has proposed makes sense. I want my colleagues to know that I will fight to defend the Libby provisions in the asbestos bill. Libby is extremely important to me. If the Congress takes out the Libby provisions from the bill, they will lose my vote. People in Libby are dying from tremolite asbestos exposure. The town has risen mightily to the challenges that it has faced. But they need our help. They deserve our help. The people in Libby are working hard to revitalize their economy and their community. They are rightly proud of their resilience and their ability to land on their feet. They deserve all the help that we can give them to make their town whole again. I urge my colleagues to support the Libby provisions in the asbestos bill. Help us to right this terrible wrong. Help these hundreds of suffering people to get health care and help save the life of this town. Mr. President, I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. BAUCUS

Mr. BAUCUS. Toward the end of the 14th century, Emperor Manuel II Palaeologus ruled a waning Byzantine Empire. Looking across the Bosporus, he saw a growing threat from the Moslem Ottoman Turks. In 1390, he sent an embassy up the Adriatic Sea to Venice to build alliances. And to head the mission, he named the 35-year-old Manuel Chrysoloras. Although his embassy to Venice did not prosper, Chrysoloras' reputation did. And in 1396, the chancellor of the University of Florence invited him there to teach Greek. The chancellor wrote: ``[W]e firmly believe that both Greeks and Latins have always taken learning to a higher level by extending it to each other's literature.'' Chrysoloras accepted. But no one in Italy had studied Greek for 700 years. Chrysoloras began. He taught Greek in Florence, Bologna, Venice, and Rome. He translated Homer and Plato. He wrote the first basic Greek grammar in Western Europe. As the early renaissance poet Dante Alighieri wrote in The Divine Comedy, ``A great flame follows a little spark.'' The flame of learning spread through the rest of Europe, reconnecting the West with classical antiquity, experimentalism, and the desire to live well. Chrysoloras and scholars like him helped to begin the scientific revolution and artistic transformation that would become known as the Italian Renaissance. Europe emerged from the backwater. Commerce and exploration burst forth. The Modern Age began. Renaissance historian Matteo Palmieri exhorted a fellow Italian of the mid 15th century to ``[t]hank God that it has been permitted to him to be born in this new age, so full of hope and promise, which already rejoices in a greater array of nobly-gifted souls than the world has seen in the thousand years that have preceded it,'' With the Renaissance, Western Europe began its domination of the world economy. The West has held this power so long that it is easy-- especially for us here in the West--to take it for granted. But it need not have been so. In the century leading up to the year 1000, Moorish Spain could claim a far more advanced civilization than that of Christian Italy. Cordoba's streets were paved and lit. Cordoba had 300 public baths and 70 libraries. Cordoba's great central library alone held 400,000 books--more than all of France. The Arab postal service delivered regular mail as far as India. Arab civilization was internally creative. And Arab thinkers of the time were open to Persian and Indian science, as well. In the 12th century, an English scholar named Adelard of Bath traveled through the Islamic lands of Spain, North Africa, and Asia Minor. Adelard reported: ``The further south you go, the more they know. They know how to think.'' And Adelard carried back from the south a way of thinking. He said: ``Although man is not armed by nature, nor is naturally swiftest in flight, yet he has something better by far--reason.'' The advanced Moorish state suffered civil conflict and fell to the less-developed Christian states of Europe. Finally, on January 2, 1492, the leader of the last Muslim stronghold in Granada surrendered to armies of a resurgent, newly-united Christian Spain. The remaining Spanish Muslims were forced to leave Spain or convert to Christianity. At the end of the first millennium, Arab Spain had the most advanced science and economy of its day. But in the centuries that followed, it fell to a newly-emergent Western Europe. At the end of the first millennium, Western Europe slumbered in its Dark Ages. But in the next centuries, it emerged into the Renaissance. We here today inherit the legacy of the Italian Renaissance. We have absorbed the learning of the Arab Caliphates. And we inhabit the land made known to Europeans by another voyage of 1492. At the end of the second millennium, America has the most advanced science and economy of our day. But we cannot take that leadership for granted. In the centuries ahead, if America wishes to remain the most advanced economy of our day, we will need to create a new American renaissance. We need this new American renaissance, because leadership does not come from continuing to do what we do already. Smart people in China and India and around the globe are quickly learning how to do what we do now. And people in China and India and around the globe will be able to do it more cheaply. Instead, leadership comes from constant innovation. Leadership comes from rapidly adjusting what we do to what the market demands. And leadership comes from serving the customer. Fortunately, these are characteristics at which Americans excel. This is my eighth Senate floor statement this year on competitiveness. I began in June with a general statement on competitiveness and America's place in the world. In June, I also spoke of education and competitiveness. In July, I spoke of trade and competitiveness and health care and competitiveness. In September, I spoke of savings and competitiveness. In October, I spoke of energy and competitiveness. In November, I spoke of immigration and competitiveness. And today, I conclude this series of addresses with this discussion of the need for the new American renaissance. My message is this: To foster this continuing American renaissance, American government cannot stand idly by. Remaining economically competitive will require action. Let me summarize my six-step agenda for action. This is what we need to do: First, we must improve education. The Italian Renaissance relied on the learning of the Greeks that Manuel Chrysoloras helped to spread. The new American renaissance will rely on our having the best educated workforce of the centuries to come. We need to ensure that children come to school ready to learn. We need to ensure that children have modern and well-equipped schools. And we need to ensure that children have small classes. We should raise salaries for teachers in poor schools by 50 percent. We should raise the salaries of top-performing teachers and teachers in math, science, and languages by another 50 percent. We can ensure quality afterschool programs. We can lengthen the school year. We must support community colleges and link them more strongly to workforce opportunities. We must expand Pell Grants. We must improve, consolidate, and expand education tax incentives. We must expand and extend the deduction for tuition expenses. We must increase scholarships and loan forgiveness for science and engineering students. We must expand the Hope and Lifetime Learning credits. We need to make it possible for non-traditional students to obtain an education. We need to retrain workers whose jobs are lost to trade and help them reenter the workforce. We should make it easier, consistent with the requirements of national security, for foreign students to study in America. We should make visa renewals during multiyear studies routine. And we should change visa renewal requirements policies that are now contingent on students' return to their home countries. Second, we must foster research. For it was discovery that helped bring about the renaissance. We need to reward innovation and risk-taking. We need to fully fund research support organizations like the- National Science Foundation, the National Institutes of Health, and the Office of Science at the Department of Energy. We need to simplify and make permanent the R&D tax credit. We should encourage talented foreign students to study, research, and innovate at American universities and research institutions. And we should simplify the permanent residence process for exceptional foreign students with advanced science degrees from American universities. Third, we have to advance international trade. Insularity characterized the Dark Ages. The Renaissance spread from an international spark. And the ensuing blaze of international commerce brought on the Modern Age. We must open new markets for American exports worldwide. We must improve enforcement of existing trade agreements. We must do more to defend American intellectual property rights. And we must prompt China to further loosen its currency. We should look more to Asia for bilateral agreements. We should advance regional trade agreements in Asia. We should seek out further sectoral agreements such as the WTO's Information Technology Agreement. And we should launch an initiative in the advanced medical equipment sector. We need to expand trade adjustment assistance to service workers. And we need to expand wage insurance. We can make it easier for major American companies to employ and train their overseas employees. And we can facilitate international participation in meetings and conferences and travel to trade shows. Fourth, we must address the burden that high health care costs place on American business. And we must help provide health insurance to those who do not have it. We can provide health insurance tax credits to small employers. We can fund employer-based group-purchasing pools. We can increase funding for high-risk pools. We can expand Medicaid and the State Children's Health Insurance Program. We can permit a Medicare buy-in for the near- elderly. We need to facilitate the use of health information technology. We need to use health IT to link medication administration to a patient's clinical information. We need to foster standards for the interoperability of health IT systems. We need to improve healthcare providers' ability to exchange clinical data. And we need to provide loans and grants to encourage the use of health IT. The Senate has passed legislation this session to further many of these health IT goals. The House must do it, too, and move quickly to provide higher Medicare reimbursements and work to improve quality of care, known as ``pay-for-performance.'' We should provide higher Medicare reimbursements to providers working to improve the quality of delivered care. And we should coordinate senior care to ensure adequate preventive care and chronic condition management. This year's Senate-passed spending reconciliation bill took the first steps toward pay-for-performance. Although there is much in that bill that gives me pause, we should enact those pay-for- performance changes. Fifth, we must increase national savings to finance the investment and innovation of the next renaissance. We need to plug the biggest leak in our national savings pool: the federal budget deficit. We need to truthfully report current and future Federal Government spending needs. We need to restore pay-as-you-go rules for both entitlement spending and tax cuts. We should reduce the annual tax gap. We should eliminate wasteful and unnecessary spending. We should eliminate wasteful and unfair tax breaks, such as abusive tax shelters and corporate tax loopholes. And we should slow the growth in healthcare costs. We can increase private savings. We can improve financial education. We can encourage automatic enrollment of eligible workers in retirement savings plans. We can bring payroll- deduction retirement savings to private sector workers lacking 401(k)s or similar plans. We can make incentives for saving more progressive. And we can extend the Savers' Credit and expand it to Americans with no income tax liability. Sixth, for a modern renaissance, we must address the need for sustainable and environmentally compatible sources of energy. We can launch a new ``Manhattan Project'' to develop clean alternative energies. We can foster the use of hydrogen and fuel cells. We can foster wind energy. We can make a clear commitment to the development of biomass and ethanol-based fuels. We should encourage energy R&D through research grants to industry and educational institutions and tax incentives for R&D. We should offer prizes to spur innovation. We need an investment tax credit for coal gasification technology. We need a tax credit for companies that generate fuel using an updated version of the F-T process. And we need a Federal loan guarantee so that companies can finance these capital investments. This year's energy and highway bills addressed some of these needs. Taken together, these policies form a bold agenda to advance American competitiveness. They can help maintain American economic leadership in the world. And they can help to preserve high-wage American jobs here at home. Beginning next month, I will introduce a comprehensive 2006 legislative package to strengthen America's competitiveness in a changing world. This package will encompass several bills that cover the many aspects of competitiveness. I invite my colleagues to join me in this effort. The early Renaissance poet, Dante Alighieri, embodied the spirit of his times when he wrote in The Divine Comedy that people ``were not born to live like brutes, but to follow virtue and knowledge.'' And from that grounding of virtue and knowledge flowed naturally Dante's description: ``And thence we came forth, to see again the stars.'' Let us follow virtue and knowledge and foster a new American renaissance. Let us strengthen America's competitiveness in a changing world. And let America again go forth, toward the stars. I yield the floor, and I suggest the absence of a quorum.