Jeff Bingaman

Mr. BINGAMAN

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I would like to announce for the information of the Senate and the public that a hearing has been scheduled before the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. The hearing will take place on Tuesday, July 16, at 9:30 a.m. in room 366 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building in Washington, D.C. The purpose of the hearing is to receive testimony on the Administration's plans to request additional funds for wildland firefighting and forest restoration as well as ongoing implementation of the National Fire Plan. Because of the limited time available for the hearing, witnesses may testify by invitation only. However, those wishing to submit written testimony for the hearing record should send two copies of their testimony to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, United States Senate, 312 Dirksen Senate Office Building, Washington, DC 20510. For further information, please contact Kira Finkler of the committee staff at 202/224-8164.

Mr. BINGAMAN

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, today I am pleased to introduce the Albuquerque Biological Park Title Clarification Act. This bill would assist the City of Albuquerque, NM by clearing its title to two parcels of land located along the Rio Grande. More specifically, it would allow the city to move forward with its plans to improve the properties as part of a Biological Park Project, a city funded initiative to create a premier environmental educational center for its citizens and the entire State of New Mexico. The Biological Park Project has been in the works since 1987 when the city began to develop an aquarium and botanic garden along the banks of the Rio Grande. The facilities constitutes just a portion of the overall project. In pursuit of the balance of the project, the city, in 1997, purchased two properties from the Middle Rio Grande Conservancy District, MRGCD, for $3,875,000. The first property, Tingley Beach, had been leased by the city from MRGCD since 1931 and used for public park purposes. The second property, San Gabriel Park, had been leased by the city sine 1963, and also used for public park purposes. In the year 2000, the city's plan were interrupted when the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation claimed that in 1953 it had acquired ownership of all of MRGCD's property that is associated with the Middle Rio Grande Project. The United States' assertion called into question the validity of the 1997 transaction between the city and MRGCD. Both MRGCD and the city dispute the United States' claim of ownership. This dispute is delaying the city's progress in developing the Biological Park Project. If the matter is simply left to litigation, the delay will be both indefinite and unnecessary. Reclamation has already determined that the two properties are surplus to the needs of the Middle Rio Grande Project. Moreover, this history of this issue indicates that Reclamation had once considered releasing its interest in the properties for $1.00 each. Obviously, the Federal interest in these properties is low while the local interest is very high. Moreover, this bill would address only the status of the two properties at issue. The general dispute concerning title to project works is left for the courts to decide. I hope my colleagues will work with me to help resolve this issue which is important to the citizens of my state. While much of what we do here in the Congress is complex and time-consuming work, we should also have the ability to move quickly when necessary and appropriate to solve local problems caused by federal actions. I therefore urge my colleagues to support this legislation. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. BINGAMAN

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, today I am pleased to introduce the Albuquerque Biological Park Title Clarification Act. This bill would assist the City of Albuquerque, NM by clearing its title to two parcels of land located along the Rio Grande. More specifically, it would allow the city to move forward with its plans to improve the properties as part of a Biological Park Project, a city funded initiative to create a premier environmental educational center for its citizens and the entire State of New Mexico. The Biological Park Project has been in the works since 1987 when the city began to develop an aquarium and botanic garden along the banks of the Rio Grande. The facilities constitutes just a portion of the overall project. In pursuit of the balance of the project, the city, in 1997, purchased two properties from the Middle Rio Grande Conservancy District, MRGCD, for $3,875,000. The first property, Tingley Beach, had been leased by the city from MRGCD since 1931 and used for public park purposes. The second property, San Gabriel Park, had been leased by the city sine 1963, and also used for public park purposes. In the year 2000, the city's plan were interrupted when the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation claimed that in 1953 it had acquired ownership of all of MRGCD's property that is associated with the Middle Rio Grande Project. The United States' assertion called into question the validity of the 1997 transaction between the city and MRGCD. Both MRGCD and the city dispute the United States' claim of ownership. This dispute is delaying the city's progress in developing the Biological Park Project. If the matter is simply left to litigation, the delay will be both indefinite and unnecessary. Reclamation has already determined that the two properties are surplus to the needs of the Middle Rio Grande Project. Moreover, this history of this issue indicates that Reclamation had once considered releasing its interest in the properties for $1.00 each. Obviously, the Federal interest in these properties is low while the local interest is very high. Moreover, this bill would address only the status of the two properties at issue. The general dispute concerning title to project works is left for the courts to decide. I hope my colleagues will work with me to help resolve this issue which is important to the citizens of my state. While much of what we do here in the Congress is complex and time-consuming work, we should also have the ability to move quickly when necessary and appropriate to solve local problems caused by federal actions. I therefore urge my colleagues to support this legislation. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. BINGAMAN

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I would like to announce for the information of the Senate and the public that an oversight hearing has been scheduled before the Subcommittee on Water and Power of the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. The hearing will take place on Wednesday, July 10, beginning at 9:30 a.m. in room 366 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building in Washington, DC. The purpose of the hearing is to receive testimony on water resource management issues on the Missouri River. Because of the limited time available for the hearing, witnesses may testify by invitation only. Those wishing to submit written testimony for the hearing record should e-mail it to Malini__Sekhar@energy.senate.gov or fax it to 202-224-4340. For further information, please contact Patty Beneke (202) 224-5451 or Mike Connor (202) 224-5479 of the committee staff.

Mr. BINGAMAN

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I would like to announce for the information of the Senate and the public that a hearing has been scheduled before the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources on the Department of Energy's, DOE's, Environmental Management, EM, Program. The hearing will explore DOE's progress in implementing its accelerated cleanup initiative and the changes DOE has proposed to the EM science and technology program. The hearing will be held on Thursday, July 11, at 10 a.m. in room 366 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building in Washington, DC. Because of the limited time available for the hearing, witnesses may testify by invitation only. However, those wishing to submit written testimony for the hearing record should e-mail it to amanda__goldman@energy.senate.gov or fax it to 202-224-9026. For further information, please contact Jonathan Epstein at 202-224- 3357 or John Kotek at 202-224-6385.

Mr. BINGAMAN

Mr. BINGAMAN. I appreciate the Chair's information. While it is not conclusive, it does indicate that if Hispanic workers do have jobs where the employers offer some type of plan, they tend to participate. Unfortunately, the data indicates that Hispanics tend to work for employers who do not offer retirement plans. What we need to do is get more employers to offer retirement plans, particularly small employers. That is what the legislation we are developing right now is intended to do. I will be proposing that later. I urge my colleagues to look at this issue seriously. I hope we can introduce a bill before the week is out.

Mr. BINGAMAN. Madam President, the retirement system in this country leaves a great deal to be desired. We have many people who do not have adequate income when they reach the age of retirement. We have some charts that make that case. These charts are based on the 1999 U.S. census current population survey. They make the case fairly strongly. This first chart is titled ``Private Workers Who Participate in an Employer Sponsored Plan,'' and breaks down the population by race and ethnicity. When we look at all workers as of 1999, there were 44 percent of the private workers who participated in the employer- sponsored plan, looking at the entire population. Among white, non- Hispanic workers, there were 47 percent or nearly half of the population that had some sort of employer-sponsored plan. That means a little over half did not. This chart does not include the public-sector employees or the self-employed workers. For other minority groups the numbers are substantially less. For black, non-Hispanic, it is 41 percent; for Asian Pacific islanders and other non-Hispanic, 38 percent; for other minority non-Hispanic, 35 percent; and among Hispanic workers, it is 27 percent. Therefore, 27 percent, slightly more than one fourth of the private-sector Hispanic workers in the country, have an employer-sponsored plan. That is important in my State because we have a large Hispanic population. When you look around the country and ask, where is the problem the worst as far as inadequate retirement coverage, my State is No. 1 in the Nation for the number of private-sector workers that do not have coverage. The second chart demonstrates the percentage of private-sector workers who work at companies that provide after retirement or a pension plan. This chart talks of the companies employing these workers. Madam President, 58 percent of all employees work for employers that provide some kind of plan. But then the numbers decline. Among white non-Hispanic, it is higher, and 62 percent of those employees work for companies that provide some kind of retirement plan; among Hispanic workers, only 40 percent of Hispanic workers nationwide work for companies that provide some kind of retirement plan. So this is a significant concern and a significant part of the problem as well. The third chart illustrates the percentage of employees who participate in an employer-sponsored plan when the employer actually offers the plan. This is an assessment of how many people actually take advantage of this plan, in these different groups, once they have the opportunity. Among all workers, 75 percent nationwide will participate and have participated in an employer-sponsored plan if it is offered. Again, it is a little higher for white, non-Hispanic workers--up to 77 percent. Among Hispanics, it is 68 percent. The interesting aspect about this is it is much less of a spread between the average, the ``all worker'' category, 75 percent, and the Hispanic, which is 68 percent, which makes the obvious case that Hispanic participation is not significantly different from that of the rest of the population when they are offered a plan. The final chart pulls all this data together, puts it all in one place so we can understand it.

Mr. BINGAMAN

Mr. BINGAMAN. Madam President, again, in response to the question, I think it is easy for us to believe, when we are sitting here in a nice air-conditioned Senate Chamber, that there is no urgency and think these are all sort of theoretical problems out there and there is no urgency in getting about trying to deal with them. I think the reality is very different for a lot of the women to whom my friend in Nevada is referring. The reality is they have to either have assistance now or live with the consequences of not having the assistance. For that reason, I think it is very important we move ahead immediately.

Mr. BINGAMAN. Madam President, in response, that is certainly my information. My information is that the money was appropriated, and that it was appropriated last December when we passed the foreign operations appropriations bill. There is no reason that money should not be released for the intended use. That is what the law requires. I hope very much that the administration will move ahead. We are fast approaching the date when we are going to do another foreign operations appropriations bill. I don't think we serve the intended purpose by just delaying and delaying the use of these funds.

Mr. BINGAMAN. Madam President, again, in response to the question, I believe there is a record of success with many of these programs, and with many of the efforts that have been made to this population fund. I think it makes good sense for the United States as the largest, most prosperous country in the world to participate with other countries-- with our friends and allies around the world--in supporting this effort. That is all we are trying to do. Our support is not overwhelming as compared to a lot of countries. But it is important, and we should provide it.

Mr. BINGAMAN. Madam President, in response to that question, that is clearly my understanding of the main goal of international family planning. It is a worthwhile goal. I think clearly we do not want desperately poor families and desperately poor women to find themselves with unwanted pregnancies because of lack of information. What we are trying to do is get assistance to this population fund so that we can provide good information and assistance to these desperately poor women.

Mr. BINGAMAN. Madam President, my response to that question is the Senator from Nevada is exactly right. I think there is important assistance that the overwhelming majority of the House and Senate would like to see provided worldwide to these poor women who need assistance to deal with their very real issues of giving birth and planning their families for the future. We have appropriated money. That money has been appropriated now for 7 or 8 months, and it is sitting at the Department of the Treasury. I don't understand why they can't go ahead and spend that money as it was intended. I hope very much that happens in the very near future.

Mr. BINGAMAN. Madam President, in response to that, we are trying to figure out what can be done in this regard. We essentially do not think Government should be dictating at what level companies compensate workers. But we do think the various laws we pass in Congress should be written in such a way that we don't provide additional benefits for extremely lavish compensation to high officials and inadequate compensation to people who are working every day in the bowels of these companies.

Mr. BINGAMAN. Madam President, in response to the question, it certainly is something that is a great concern in my State. I think people tend to lump all these issues together, understandably, because they are all part of a very much larger problem. One is the inadequate protection of the retirement savings of workers. Another issue is the inequity in compensation between the top officials of some of these corporations and the average worker. A third is the very unfair severance package arrangements that are made when some of these companies go bankrupt. How does it happen that the top officials wind up getting severance packages, in spite of the financial difficulties of the company, while the people at the very bottom get virtually nothing?

Mr. BINGAMAN. Madam President, in response to the question of my friend from Nevada, that is exactly right. I think the entire country was appalled to see what happened to the pension savings, the retirement savings of various Enron employees when that company collapsed. Accordingly, we have spent a lot of time discussing how to ensure that these funds that are in a pension fund for a worker can be safeguarded so we can avoid this situation in the future. That part of the problem has gotten a lot of rhetorical attention, at least. We have still not taken the necessary actions to solve it. I hope we are able to do that in the next few weeks as we consider the legislation that has come out of the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, and also legislation that is, I understand, going to be marked up in the Finance Committee.

Mr. BINGAMAN. Madam President, now I will focus on the U.N. population fund. Last year I voted for the Foreign Operations conference report. I thought the funds provided there were inadequate to meet our pressing needs as we talked about them, but I recognized that the roughly $15 billion would provide help to millions of desperately poor people around the world and at the same time help improve the short-term and long-term security of our own country. I voted for that bill. Here we are 7 months later and some of the most important funding provided in that bill, the $34 million provided for the U.N. population fund, is still sitting at the Department of Treasury. It is not helping poor people. It is not helping to make America more secure. It is just sitting at the Treasury Department. The United Nations population fund works in over 150 countries, where it helps give women around the world access to reproductive health care and family planning services as well as services to ensure safe pregnancy and delivery. This population fund, the U.N. population fund, plays a critical role in helping prevent the further spread of AIDS. The withholding of U.S. funds, which is what we as a country are engaged in right now, only exacerbates the general inadequate health of poor women worldwide. It leads to more unwanted pregnancies and to deaths of more and more women during childbirth. Last fall, the Bush administration provided an extra $600,000 to the U.N. population fund to help women in Afghanistan, and these funds were very welcome and were certainly used, substantially to provide safe birthing kits, which are very important. They were also used to open and upgrade maternity hospitals, which is very important. I want to make clear that the population fund does not perform abortions. It does not support the performing of abortions in any way. Anyone who suggests that they do has not studied the situation in depth. The House of Representatives passed a conference report on the fiscal year Foreign Operations bill which included $34 million for this purpose. It was an overwhelming vote. The Senate approved $40 million for this purpose, also with a lopsided vote. But now, because of hearsay, because of unsubstantiated allegations that have been disproved many times, the administration is holding up this critically important funding. It is the most desperate women in the world who are adversely affected by this action; it is not the United Nations itself. The women who would benefit from this funding are the most adversely affected. I believe very strongly that the administration has been willing to follow the law and speed the appropriation of funds for these purposes in the past. I cannot understand why we are not moving ahead this year. The emergency supplemental appropriations bill that is presently being conferenced provides an excellent opportunity for us to resolve this issue. I urge the Senate conferees to ensure that language included in the supplemental passed in the Senate be included in the conference report. That language requires that this money, the $34 million that was appropriated last December, be released unless the President certifies by July 10 that doing so would violate U.S. law. This is fair. More important, it is the intent of Congress. It is the law of the land. I urge the administration to follow through in the conference. I will be glad to yield to my colleague, but I believe my time has expired.

Mr. BINGAMAN

Mr. BINGAMAN. I have asked permission to speak for up to 10 minutes as in morning business.

Mr. BINGAMAN. Madam President, I will speak on two subjects. First, the pension issue that I have talked about several times on the Senate floor in recent weeks. We have some information that I will share with Members about the extent of that problem. We hope before the end of this week we will have some legislation to propose to begin addressing that problem. The other subject is the U.N. population fund. I ask that the Chair please advise me when 5 of my 10 minutes have been consumed.

Mr. BINGAMAN

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, would like to announce for the information of the Senate and the public that the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources has scheduled a field hearing in Albuquerque, NM, to examine the impacts of drought on Reclamation projects in New Mexico, particularly the Rio Grande and Pecos River basins. The hearing will take place on Tuesday, July 2, at 2:00 p.m. at a location to be announced. Those wishing to submit written statements on the subject matter of this hearing should address them to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, United States Senate, Washington, DC 20510. For further information, please call Mike Connor at 202-224-5479. committee on Indian affairs

Mr. BINGAMAN

Mr. BINGAMAN. Madam President, today I am introducing legislation to authorize a coordinated, consistent, community-based program to restore and maintain the ecological integrity of degraded National Forest System and public lands watersheds. I am pleased to be introducing this legislation with Senator Craig. He has been a true champion for rural, natural resource-dependent communities. Two years ago, residents of Los Alamos were evacuated to escape the Cerro Grande fire. Many ultimately lost their homes. While the devastation that resulted from the fire will not soon be forgotten, this event also was significant because it finally focused our attention on a problem that has been brewing for a long time, increasing fire risk due to the degraded condition of our national forests and public lands. Unfortunately, the problem continues as this year's fires continue to threaten numerous communities. Increasing threats to people and homes as a result of forest fires is only one symptom of the current condition of our national forests and public lands. Water quality, water flows, animal and plant habitats are all adversely affected. Moreover, the health of adjacent communities is at risk when our national forests and public lands are in a degraded condition. Restoration is desperately needed. Three years ago, I introduced the Community Forest Restoration Act, a bill to establish a cooperative forest restoration program in New Mexico to begin addressing this problem in a collaborative way. Ultimately, the legislation was enacted into law. Implementation has been very successful to date. Through my work on the Community Forest Restoration Act and other similar efforts, it has become clear to me that new and creative approaches to the management of our forests is critical to ensure a meaningful future for both our federal lands and the communities that depend on these lands. A major, multi-year investment in restoration work on our national forests and Federal lands is a critical component of achieving our desired result. Senator Craig and I, as well as other Members, have worked to secure increased funding for such an investment. The additional funding that Congress has approved for the last few years for hazardous fuels reduction near communities is one example of our success. However, an investment alone is not enough. An investment in our natural resources must occur in a way that benefits the rural communities located within and adjacent to our national forests and public lands. I grew up in Silver City, New Mexico, a forested community adjacent to the Gila National Forest. I learned firsthand that if the forest is in good shape, the community is in good shape. The Federal land managers need to respect local and traditional knowledge by including it in project planning. Community forestry represents a way to integrate local knowledge and science in order to make the best decisions about how to take care of the land. Communities are coming together to restore the ecological integrity and resiliency of our public lands. In New Mexico, groups such as Las Humanas Cooperative, the Truchas Land Grant, the Catron County Citizens Group, and the Rocky Mountain Youth Corps are working to restore watersheds and build a high-skill, high-wage workforce in rural communities. In the Pacific Northwest, groups such as Sustainable Northwest, Wallowa Resources, and Partners for a Sustainable Methow are seeking ways to increase the stewardship role of local communities in the maintenance and restoration of ecosystem integrity and biodiversity. In California, the Watershed Research & Training Center is striving tirelessly to include communities in the Forest Service's planning, restoration projects, and follow up monitoring of restoration. At the national level, American Forests and the National Network for Forest Practitioners are important partners that are seeking changes in policy to ensure that community benefits are an integral component of national forests and public land management. The legislation that Senator Craig and I are introducing today is meant to help facilitate these types of approaches nationwide. Communities cannot create collaboratively restore our national forests and public lands alone. The Federal government is an important partner in this effort and this legislation will provide much needed new authority and programs to assist communities. A few years ago, representatives from the Forest Service's Forest Product Laboratory visited my State to make recommendations on how to find new markets for products created from small trees that need to be removed to reduce fire threat. They noted that a lack of entrepreneurs and micro-businesses was a barrier to increasing the number of natural resource-based economic opportunities in rural communities. New Mexico needs these stimuli in the private sector, as do communities across the West, and this legislation will help create rural economies that depend on maintaining the ecological resiliency of the National Forest System and public lands. Finally, I want to emphasize that, because what we are talking about is new and in many ways untested, we all will need to closely monitor implementation. Everyone now agrees that past policies, such as systematically suppressing all wildfires, were misguided and contributed to the problems we face today. But how do we avoid repeating similar mistakes? Meaningful and open monitoring processes using ecological and social indicators will help to ensure that the right policies are in place for both the land and the communities. I would like to thank all of the individuals and groups who provided data, input, and comments on earlier drafts of this bill. Senator Craig and I sought to ensure that this bill was a comprehensive approach to the issue and we received a lot of assistance from many communities across the country in this endeavor. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill, as well as letters of support we have received for the bill, be printed in the Record.

Mr. BINGAMAN

Mr. BINGAMAN. Madam President, today I am introducing legislation to authorize a coordinated, consistent, community-based program to restore and maintain the ecological integrity of degraded National Forest System and public lands watersheds. I am pleased to be introducing this legislation with Senator Craig. He has been a true champion for rural, natural resource-dependent communities. Two years ago, residents of Los Alamos were evacuated to escape the Cerro Grande fire. Many ultimately lost their homes. While the devastation that resulted from the fire will not soon be forgotten, this event also was significant because it finally focused our attention on a problem that has been brewing for a long time, increasing fire risk due to the degraded condition of our national forests and public lands. Unfortunately, the problem continues as this year's fires continue to threaten numerous communities. Increasing threats to people and homes as a result of forest fires is only one symptom of the current condition of our national forests and public lands. Water quality, water flows, animal and plant habitats are all adversely affected. Moreover, the health of adjacent communities is at risk when our national forests and public lands are in a degraded condition. Restoration is desperately needed. Three years ago, I introduced the Community Forest Restoration Act, a bill to establish a cooperative forest restoration program in New Mexico to begin addressing this problem in a collaborative way. Ultimately, the legislation was enacted into law. Implementation has been very successful to date. Through my work on the Community Forest Restoration Act and other similar efforts, it has become clear to me that new and creative approaches to the management of our forests is critical to ensure a meaningful future for both our federal lands and the communities that depend on these lands. A major, multi-year investment in restoration work on our national forests and Federal lands is a critical component of achieving our desired result. Senator Craig and I, as well as other Members, have worked to secure increased funding for such an investment. The additional funding that Congress has approved for the last few years for hazardous fuels reduction near communities is one example of our success. However, an investment alone is not enough. An investment in our natural resources must occur in a way that benefits the rural communities located within and adjacent to our national forests and public lands. I grew up in Silver City, New Mexico, a forested community adjacent to the Gila National Forest. I learned firsthand that if the forest is in good shape, the community is in good shape. The Federal land managers need to respect local and traditional knowledge by including it in project planning. Community forestry represents a way to integrate local knowledge and science in order to make the best decisions about how to take care of the land. Communities are coming together to restore the ecological integrity and resiliency of our public lands. In New Mexico, groups such as Las Humanas Cooperative, the Truchas Land Grant, the Catron County Citizens Group, and the Rocky Mountain Youth Corps are working to restore watersheds and build a high-skill, high-wage workforce in rural communities. In the Pacific Northwest, groups such as Sustainable Northwest, Wallowa Resources, and Partners for a Sustainable Methow are seeking ways to increase the stewardship role of local communities in the maintenance and restoration of ecosystem integrity and biodiversity. In California, the Watershed Research & Training Center is striving tirelessly to include communities in the Forest Service's planning, restoration projects, and follow up monitoring of restoration. At the national level, American Forests and the National Network for Forest Practitioners are important partners that are seeking changes in policy to ensure that community benefits are an integral component of national forests and public land management. The legislation that Senator Craig and I are introducing today is meant to help facilitate these types of approaches nationwide. Communities cannot create collaboratively restore our national forests and public lands alone. The Federal government is an important partner in this effort and this legislation will provide much needed new authority and programs to assist communities. A few years ago, representatives from the Forest Service's Forest Product Laboratory visited my State to make recommendations on how to find new markets for products created from small trees that need to be removed to reduce fire threat. They noted that a lack of entrepreneurs and micro-businesses was a barrier to increasing the number of natural resource-based economic opportunities in rural communities. New Mexico needs these stimuli in the private sector, as do communities across the West, and this legislation will help create rural economies that depend on maintaining the ecological resiliency of the National Forest System and public lands. Finally, I want to emphasize that, because what we are talking about is new and in many ways untested, we all will need to closely monitor implementation. Everyone now agrees that past policies, such as systematically suppressing all wildfires, were misguided and contributed to the problems we face today. But how do we avoid repeating similar mistakes? Meaningful and open monitoring processes using ecological and social indicators will help to ensure that the right policies are in place for both the land and the communities. I would like to thank all of the individuals and groups who provided data, input, and comments on earlier drafts of this bill. Senator Craig and I sought to ensure that this bill was a comprehensive approach to the issue and we received a lot of assistance from many communities across the country in this endeavor. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill, as well as letters of support we have received for the bill, be printed in the Record.

Mr. BINGAMAN

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, both the Department of Energy and the Department of State have made important announcements this week relating to the so-called ``Russian HEU Agreement.'' This agreement is not widely known, but it is enormously important to our national security, and I would like to take this opportunity to call it to the attention of the Senate. Under the HEU Agreement, the Russian Federation is converting 500 metric tons of highly enriched uranium from dismantled nuclear weapons into low-enriched uranium fuel for nuclear power plants. The United States then buys the low-enriched uranium for nuclear power plants in this country to use to generate electricity. The benefits of this program, which is sometimes called the ``megatons to megawatts program,'' are obvious. Nuclear weapons scrapped under the program can never be used against us. Weapons-grade uranium blended down and consumed in power plants can never fall into the hands of terrorists or rogue states. The United States and Russia entered into the HEU Agreement in 1993. The program will neutralize the equivalent of 20,000 nuclear warheads over its 20-year life. More than 150 metric tons of highly enriched uranium, the equivalent of nearly 6,000 nuclear warheads, have already been converted into low-enriched reactor fuel. Another 350 metric tons, the equivalent of 14,000 more warheads, are slated to be converted over the remaining 12 years. Although the Russian HEU Agreement is a government-to-government agreement, it is being implemented for the Russian Federation by Tenex and for the United States by USEC Inc. USEC was originally established by the Energy Policy Act of 1992 to run the Department of Energy's uranium enrichment plants as a business. When the Russian HEU Agreement was first executed, USEC was wholly owned by the United States Government and it was tapped to implement the agreement as the Government's ``executive agent.'' In 1998, the Government sold USEC to private investors pursuant to the USEC Privatization Act, but retained the private company as its executive agent for the Russian HEU program. Remarkably, USEC is able to conduct the Russian HEU program without cost to the Government. USEC pays the Russians for the uranium, and recovers its costs when it resells the uranium to nuclear utilities. The price paid by USEC was originally set in the HEU Agreement and has since been subject to negotiation between the parties. Some time ago, USEC and Tenex reached an agreement on a new market- based mechanism for determining the price USEC will pay Russia for future deliveries. Yesterday, the State Department announced that the Governments of the United States and the Russian Federation have approved the new pricing mechanism. The new pricing mechanism puts the program on a more commercial basis. It does away with the need for the two governments to renegotiate the price periodically. By basing the price on market conditions, the new mechanism provides a more stable and predictable procedure for determining future prices and should help ensure the long-term success of the program. In addition, this past Tuesday, the Department of Energy announced that it had signed an agreement with USEC that resolves a number of issues between them. Earlier, there had been talk of the Government replacing USEC as its executive agent under the Russian HEU deal or appointing multiple agents. Under the accord announced on Tuesday, the Department of Energy agreed to recommend that USEC continue to serve as the Government's sole executive agent, and USEC committed to meeting the annual delivery schedules in the Russian HEU agreement over the remaining years of the agreement. The Russian HEU Agreement serves us well. Each Russian warhead that is dismantled and each ton of weapons-grade uranium that is converted to commercial reactor fuel reduces the risk of nuclear proliferation and enhances our security. USEC has made great progress implementing the program over the past 8 years. The two announcements made this week give us hope for further progress in the years ahead.

Mr. BINGAMAN

Mr. BINGAMAN. Madam President, today I recognize the impressive civic achievements of Roswell, NM. These civic achievements have not only bettered this New Mexico community, but have earned Roswell the national honor of receiving an All-American City Award. The All-America City Award is the oldest and most respected community recognition program in the Nation. This award recognizes communities, such as Roswell, whose citizens work together to identify and address community-wide challenges and achieve extraordinary goals. This year Roswell not only met, but exceeded the selection criteria of the contest through its enthusiastic public participation, its involvement of diverse perspectives in decisions, and its city accomplishments which have significantly improved community life. Roswell met the challenge of the All-America contest by identifying its largest community challenges and displaying how the community has worked together to make these challenges areas of success. The people of Roswell identified their biggest challenges as lack of access to health care and unemployment and then demonstrated how, as a community, they had worked to improve these areas over the past 3 years. The city of Roswell highlighted three admirable projects that impacted their areas of challenge including ``Incidentally Roswell,'' the Youth Dental Initiative and Dress for Success. Through the ``Incidentally Roswell'' project the community has successfully used the historical extraterrestrial phenomenon of Roswell to better its economy. The people of Roswell have worked to use its historical exposure to increase tourism thus creating more jobs and bringing more money into the community. In their presentation the Roswell representatives made light of the situation by cleverly centering their presentation around questions asked by E.T. Holmes, a space alien detective. Along with the economy the people of Roswell also rightly focus on bettering the lives of the children in their community. Through the Youth Dental Initiative Roswell is using Medicaid money to provide children with dental care. The program includes a dental clinic at which patients can be treated as well as a dental van that goes to schools to provide dental services to children. Since 1999 the Youth Dental Initiative the program has serviced a remarkable 4,000 children in Chavez County. Roswell's dedication to the well being of their children is both impressive and commendable. And finally, Roswell presented their Dress for Success program, which aids children and adults to dress in an appropriate manner to achieve success in their schools and work places. This program has shown especially good results in the Roswell school system through providing uniforms to the 86 percent of children who are in poverty in the area. Through eliminating the visual clothing differences among the students, Roswell is experiencing improved behavior, and increases in grade point averages, attendance and self-esteem. Equally impressive is the fact that this program is fueled by the generosity and concern of the community for their children. The Dress for Success program shows Roswell's great support of their children and their determination to help them succeed. These three projects that strive for civic betterment are only a glimpse of the efforts Roswell is making in order to make their city a noteworthy part of the Nation. It is a great honor for Roswell, as well as for the entire state of New Mexico, for this community to receive the All-America Award. Through their dedication, patriotism, and hard work the people of Roswell have shown that American citizens can indeed make a difference in their communities. Roswell is a community that has taken great strides to overcome its challenges. I commend the citizens of Roswell for striving to achieve a high quality of life and thus helping the State of New Mexico continue to be the land of enchantment. I would like to congratulate the city of Roswell on their great achievements and the well deserved recognition of their efforts.

Mr. BINGAMAN

Mr. BINGAMAN. The bill I am introducing today establishes a six-year program in the Office of the Secretary of Transportation to complete the development of the advanced transportation simulation model. The program will also support early deployment of computer software and graphics packages to Federal agencies and States for national, regional, or statewide transportation planning. The bill authorizes a total of $50 million from the Highway Trust Fund for this effort. When completed, NATMAP will provide the nation a tool to help formulate and analyze critical transportation policy and investment options, including major infrastructure requirements and vulnerabilities within that infrastructure. Next year Congress will take up the reauthorization of TEA-21, the six-year transportation bill. I am introducing this bill today so my proposal can be fully considered by the Senate's Environment and Public Works Committee and by the Administration as the next authorization bill is being developed. I look forward to working with Senator Jeffords, the Chairman of EPW, and Senator Smith, the ranking member, as well as Senator Reid, the Chairman of the Transportation, Infrastructure, and Nuclear Safety Subcommittee and Senator Inhofe, the ranking member, to incorporate this bill in the reauthorization of TEA- 21. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation that I believe will go a long way in helping to reduce congestion and improve safety and security throughout the Nation's transportation network. Today I am introducing the National Transportation Modeling and Analysis Program Establishment Act, or NATMAP for short. The purpose of this bill is to authorize the Secretary of Transportation to complete an advanced computer model that will simulate, in a single integrated system, traffic flows over every major transportation mode, including highways, air traffic, railways, inland waterways, seaports, pipelines and other intermodal connections. The advanced model will simulate flows of both passenger and freight traffic. Our transportation network is a central component of our economy and fundamental to our freedom and quality of life. America's mobility is the engine of our free market system. The food we eat, the clothes we wear, the materials for our homes and offices, and the energy to heat our homes and power our businesses all come to us over the nation's vast transportation network. Originating with a producer in one region, materials and products may travel via any number of combinations of truck, rail, airplane and barge before reaching their final destinations. Today, the Internet connects the world electronically. But it is our transportation network that provides the vital interconnections for the movement of both people and goods domestically and around the world. According to the latest statistics, today our transportation industry carries over 11 billion tons of freight per year worth about $7 trillion. Of the 3.7 trillion ton-miles of freight carried in 1998, 1.4 trillion went by rail, 1 trillion by truck, 673 billion by domestic water transportation, 620 billion by pipeline, and 14 billion by air carrier. Individuals also depend on our transportation system, be it passenger rail, commercial airline, intercity bus, or the family car, for business travel or simply to enjoy a family vacation. Excluding public transit, passengers on our highways traveled a total of 4.2 trillion passenger-miles in 1998. Another 463 billion passenger-miles traveled by air carriers. Transit companies and rail lines carried another 50 billion. We are also interconnected to the world's transportation system, and, as I am sure every Senator well knows, foreign trade is an increasingly critical component of our economy. Our Nation's seaports, international airports, and border crossing with Canada and Mexico are the gateways through which passengers and cargo flow between America and the rest of the world. The smooth flow of trade, both imports and exports, would not be possible without a robust transportation network and the direct links it provides to our international ports of entry. It should be clear that one of keys to our continuing economic strength rests on a transportation system that is safe, secure and efficient. Today, we are fortunate to have one of the best transportation networks in the world, and I believe we need to keep it that way. However, we are starting to see signs that portions of the system are beginning to strain under a dramatic increase in traffic. For example, according to the Department of Transportation, from 1980 to 2000, highway travel alone increased a whopping 80 percent. Between 1993 and 1997, the total tons of freight activity grew by over 14 percent and truck activity grew by 21 percent. In the future, truck travel is expected to grow by more than 3 percent per year, nearly doubling by 2020. Meanwhile, the strong growth in foreign trade is putting increased pressure on ports, airports, and border crossings, as well as contributing to congestion throughout the transportation network. According to DoT, U.S. international trade more than doubled between 1990 and 2000, rising from $891 billion to $2.2 trillion. Congestion and delay inevitably result when traffic rates approach the capacity of a system to handle that traffic. I do believe increased congestion in our transportation system is a growing threat to the nation's economy. Delays in any part of the vast network lead to economic costs, wasted fuel, increased pollution, and a reduced quality of life. Moreover, in the future new security measures could also cause increased delays and disruptions in the flow of goods through our international gateways. To deal with the ever-increasing loading of our transportation network we will need to find ways to use the system more efficiently as well as to expand some critical elements of the system. However, in planning for any improvements, it is essential to examine the impact on the whole transportation system that would result from a change in one part of the system That's exactly the goal of the bill I am introducing today. By simulating the Nation's entire transportation infrastructure as a single, integrated system, the National Transportation Analysis and Modeling Program will allow policy makers at the state, regional and national levels to evaluate the implications of new transportation policies and actions. To ensure that all of the possible interrelated impacts are included, the model must simulate individual carriers and the transportation infrastructure used by each of the carriers in an interdependent and dynamic system. The advantage of this simulation of individual carriers and shipments is that the nation's transportation system can be examined at any level of detail, from the path of an individual truck to national multi-modal traffic flows. Some of the transportation issues and questions that could be addressed with NATMAP include: What infrastructure improvements result in the greatest gains to overall system security and efficiency? How would the network respond to shifts in population or trade flows? How would the system respond to major disruptions caused by a natural disaster or another unthinkable terrorist attack? What effect would delays in the system due to increased security measures have on traffic flow and congestion? Preliminary work on an advanced transportation model has been underway for several years at Los Alamos National Laboratory. As I'm sure most Senators know, Los Alamos has a long and impressive history in the development of computer simulations of complex systems, including the recent completion of the TRANSIMS model of transportation systems in metropolitan areas. The development of TRANSIMS for FHWA was originally authorized in TEA-21. The initial work at LANL on NATMAP, funded in part by DoT, DoD, and the lab's own internal research and development program, demonstrated the technical feasibility of building a nation-wide freight transportation model that can simulate the movement of millions of trucks across the nation's highway system. During this initial development phase, the model was called the National Transportation Network and Analysis Capability, or NTNAC for short. In 2001, with funding from the Federal Highway Administration, LANL further developed the model and completed an assessment of cargo flows resulting from trade between the U.S. and Latin America. These preliminary studies have clearly demonstrated the value to the nation of the NATMAP comprehensive modeling system. I do believe that the computer model represents a leap-ahead in transportation modeling and analysis capability. Indeed, Secretary of Transportation Norm Mineta, in a letter to me dated April 9 of this year, had this to say about the effort: ``The DOT agrees that NTNAC shows great promise of producing a tool that would be useful for analyzing the national transportation system as a single, integrated system. We agree that NTNAC would provide DOT with important new capabilities to assess and formulate critical policy and investment options and to help address homeland security and vulnerabilities in the nation's transportation network.'' I ask unanimous consent that a copy of Secretary Mineta's letter be printed in the Record.