Kit Bond

Mr. BOND

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, today I would like to commend Mr. Harry T. Corbett, Postmaster of the Wentzville Post Office, for his 38- year tenure with the United States Postal Service. Mr. Corbett will retire from the U.S. Postal Service on March 3, 2005. Mr. Corbett began his career with the Postal Service in March of 1967 as a substitute city carrier for the Saint Ann, Missouri Post Office. In 1980, he was named Postmaster of the Wentzville Post Office. In the 38 years between being a substitute city carrier and Postmaster, Mr. Corbett held several positions within the postal system. In 1968, he became a full-time city carrier and was later promoted to the position of Window Distribution Clerk in Saint Ann, Missouri. Three years later, he was reassigned to the Florissant post office as a substitute carrier, then to full-time carrier and then to Distribution Clerk Letter Sorting Machines. In 1974, Mr. Corbett was reassigned to the Saint Louis Mail Processing Plant as a Mail Sorting Machine Clerk. Mr. Corbett obtained his first position of leadership when he was promoted to Foreman Mails EAS Level 15 in December of 1974. Three years later, he was promoted to Supervisor Mails Multi-Position LSM EAS 16. The following year he was promoted to General Foreman Mails EAS 17. Mr. Corbett became Postmaster EAS 18 of the Wentzville, Missouri, Post Office on June 14, 1980. In March 1988, he reached EAS 20 level. Mr. Corbett is involved in several area organizations and charitable causes, such as the National Association of Postmasters of the United States, the Wentzville Rotary Club, and the Wentzville Chamber of Commerce. He is a member of St. Patrick Church and sits of the Developmental Disability Resource Board of St. Charles County. In addition, he is actively involved in the Crossroads Regional Medical Center Charitable Foundation. Mr. Corbett has been married to Nancy K. Scott Corbett for 32 years and he has two sons, Bret and Jeff Corbett. Bret is married to Courtney Carrothers Corbett. Mr. Corbett has been blessed with four grandchildren: Mackenzie, Abigail, Emma, and Kaiya. Following his retirement from the United States Postal Service, Mr. Corbett looks forward to golfing, fishing, camping, and traveling. He also plans to spend quality time with his family.

Mr. BOND

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I rise today to join with my colleague Senator McConnell in introducing the Voter Protection Act of 2005. This legislation builds upon the progress made by the Help America Vote Act toward our goal of making it easier to vote and harder to cheat, while addressing some additional issues that came to light during the previous election. This legislation will clarify the intent of our previous bill and try to alleviate some of the administrative burdens and misguided policies placed on dedicated, hard-working election workers by previous congressional intrusions into the State functioning of running elections. Make no mistake about it, record numbers of Americans went to the polls in 2004. The overwhelming number of Americans were greeted by informed, dedicated, and properly trained election workers and were able to cast their ballot in a timely manner and in a secure environment. In Missouri, my home State, the elections were extremely well run. Large numbers of voters were accommodated at the polls in a timely fashion, and very few questions have been raised about administration or integrity. I believe our recent enactment of HAVA, the Help American Vote Act, helped make it easier for States and localities to administer their elections. I might add that once again Missouri voters voted on punch cards. Contrary to the bogeyman of hanging chads and other problems we heard about in the past, punch cards have served the voters of Missouri well, proving that trained poll workers, coupled with informed voters, can participate in clean and fair elections using punchcard voting machines. I live in Audrain County, MO, which is a rural county with a wide diversity. It is very average and representative, although I think it is an outstanding county. I asked the county clerk: How many problems have you had with these punchcard voters? We have the whole range of voters, a very wide diversity. She told me in her memory and the memory of those in the county clerk's office, they had never had a single problem with hanging chads or punchcard machines. Some people are saying the Help America Vote Act required getting rid of punchcard machines. It did not do that. Let's be clear, that is not required by the Help America Vote Act. The smoothness leading up to the elections in Missouri was not the case everywhere. I continue to have concerns about the registration process and voter registration lists. Election officials are still laboring under an unnecessarily burdensome system heaped upon them by the motor voter bill. Motor voter required States to accept anonymous mail registration cards without supporting documents and voter registration cards from election drives. Motor voter prohibited authentication of registrations, making it extremely difficult for names to be removed from voter rolls, such as Mickey Mouse, the deceased, or those who had left the State years before. That is why to many of us, motor voter had become auto-fraudo, and we took steps in the Help America Vote Act to change that. The evidence is still overwhelming that this poor policy continues to result in tremendous administrative burdens on our election officials, with registration lists being bloated and inaccurate but limited recourse for election officials to address the situation. All this makes it more difficult to run clean, fair, and accurate elections. The Help America Vote Act required minimum identification for first- time voters who take advantage of the mail-in voter registration procedures. While the law is clear, some States chose to find ways around this reasonable requirement. This bill makes it clear that voters who do not register before a government official in person will have to provide the ID requirement. We heard reports of partisan election workers who brought in bundles of voter registration cards, and when they told the governmental election officials they had seen the voter ID, those cards were accepted. Anybody who would accept that ought to be buying the 14th Street bridge. To say somebody who is not a government official and is partisan is going to fulfill the governmental requirements is a stretch too far. Furthermore, in some Federal elections, I think it is past time to go to a full ID provision. So this legislation requires voters in Federal elections to present identification at the polls while creating a program to ensure that all voters have access to an ID if they cannot afford one. We now ask our citizens to provide a photo ID for so many tasks of everyday life. To provide it once more for election officials on election day seems a small request in order to help ensure our elections are fair and accurate. If a person does not have a photo ID and cannot afford to procure one, our bill provides the requirement and the resources to ensure that one is provided. Let's make sure every legal vote gets counted, and only the legal votes and only one vote per person, only one vote per human. No dogs, please. The practice of dropping off registration cards in bulk at the registration deadline continues. It is proving to be a huge burden on election officials. The practice of submitting cards for fictitious people, deceased, and ineligible voters is alive and well, so to speak. Also, a troubling practice by some voter registration groups has come to light--registrations not being delivered to the election authorities. Whether intentional, through oversight or neglect, this is simply unacceptable. Would-be voters place their faith in those conducting registration drives, and the States accept the registration drives will be conducted on the level. Sloppy practices can only result in people being denied the right to vote. So there must be oversight. This legislation will bring some accountability to voter registration drives while relieving some of the burdens on election authorities by mass dumping of registrations. I call on our law enforcement officials, the Department of Justice, and our U.S. attorneys to review the process and look at those areas where fraud has been suggested to find out if it is prosecutable, if Federal criminal procedure is required and warranted. I can tell you that we will pass all the laws in the world, but until we see some voter fraud proponents going to jail, spending time in the cells, we are not going to have the effect this bill and our previous bill anticipated. We need to clean up the registration process by permitting States to use Social Security numbers. I think this bill brings some sense to voter rules by clarifying the provision in motor voter for name removal. The bill also includes a provision for dealing in a reasonable manner with registration cards that are incomplete. We found in the past, if you did not specifically indicate you were a U.S. citizen, the courts refused to prosecute those knowing they were not eligible to vote because they were not citizens; they could not be prosecuted. Now there is a specific requirement that you indicate you are a U.S. citizen, eligible to vote. If you do not do that, the card should not be accepted, and if you falsely certify you are a U.S. citizen, you ought to be prosecuted. As we expressed throughout the debates on Help America Vote Act, minimum standard requirements for elections are to be implemented by the State. On provisional voting, the language is explicit. Questions on the implementation of provisional balloting are for State legislators and election officials to decide. But as is too often the case in this country, what cannot be achieved through legislation will be pursued in the courtroom. Some 65 lawsuits were pursued to overturn decisions to preserve the precinct system used at the State level. This was a conscious effort to screw up the elections. Fortunately, the courts got it right. They overruled them 65 times. But there will be more litigation. Therefore, this legislation clarifies further the clear language of HAVA that the decision on the precinct system and decision on the proper polling place for voters is a State question. The goal of the lawsuits, as I said, seemed to introduce complete chaos which would have ensued were voters allowed simply to vote anywhere they wanted. Additionally, those voters would not have been able to vote in local elections and balloting initiatives. The purpose of the suits did not make sense, but they were filed anyhow. The arguments for throwing out State law made less sense. It is simply the height of illogic to argue on one hand that States should permissively allow voters to cast ballots from anywhere in the State they chose, only to complain later that the number of election machines at a polling place was inadequate. Many people lodging this complaint also complained it rained on election day. Sorry, we cannot change that by law. So their concerns must be evaluated accordingly. Among other things, the precinct system allows election officials to plan for election day, assign voters to voting places in manageable numbers, and dispatch the proper level of resources. Once again, after election day, the newspapers were filled with stories pointing out irregularities on election day. The election day problems have grown out of bloated and inaccurate voting lists and sloppy registration procedures. The stories clearly establish that sloppy laws, poor lists, and chaos at the polls invite efforts to cheat on election day. That is unacceptable to voters and to candidates and people who depend upon a free, fair system of democracy. If a voter has his or her vote canceled by a vote that should never have been cast, whether cast by fraud or ineligible voter, he or she has lost the civil right to be heard and to have the vote counted. It is a disenfranchisement of the voter. It also is a grave offense to the candidates who spend countless amounts of their time and their supporters' resources on elections. Our goal should be elections that are free of suspicion, doubt, and cynicism about the results. There are steps that remain to be taken to ensure that elections are conducted in a sound and secure manner so that the integrity of the ballot box remains beyond doubt. These simple steps will begin to clean up the mess created in the registration process, while taking away the remains of enticements to game the system. I look forward to the debate on the floor about these reasonable measures. I commend our deputy majority leader for his work on this effort, and look forward to discussing this and pursuing it with our colleagues. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. BOND

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I rise today to join with my colleague Senator McConnell in introducing the Voter Protection Act of 2005. This legislation builds upon the progress made by the Help America Vote Act toward our goal of making it easier to vote and harder to cheat, while addressing some additional issues that came to light during the previous election. This legislation will clarify the intent of our previous bill and try to alleviate some of the administrative burdens and misguided policies placed on dedicated, hard-working election workers by previous congressional intrusions into the State functioning of running elections. Make no mistake about it, record numbers of Americans went to the polls in 2004. The overwhelming number of Americans were greeted by informed, dedicated, and properly trained election workers and were able to cast their ballot in a timely manner and in a secure environment. In Missouri, my home State, the elections were extremely well run. Large numbers of voters were accommodated at the polls in a timely fashion, and very few questions have been raised about administration or integrity. I believe our recent enactment of HAVA, the Help American Vote Act, helped make it easier for States and localities to administer their elections. I might add that once again Missouri voters voted on punch cards. Contrary to the bogeyman of hanging chads and other problems we heard about in the past, punch cards have served the voters of Missouri well, proving that trained poll workers, coupled with informed voters, can participate in clean and fair elections using punchcard voting machines. I live in Audrain County, MO, which is a rural county with a wide diversity. It is very average and representative, although I think it is an outstanding county. I asked the county clerk: How many problems have you had with these punchcard voters? We have the whole range of voters, a very wide diversity. She told me in her memory and the memory of those in the county clerk's office, they had never had a single problem with hanging chads or punchcard machines. Some people are saying the Help America Vote Act required getting rid of punchcard machines. It did not do that. Let's be clear, that is not required by the Help America Vote Act. The smoothness leading up to the elections in Missouri was not the case everywhere. I continue to have concerns about the registration process and voter registration lists. Election officials are still laboring under an unnecessarily burdensome system heaped upon them by the motor voter bill. Motor voter required States to accept anonymous mail registration cards without supporting documents and voter registration cards from election drives. Motor voter prohibited authentication of registrations, making it extremely difficult for names to be removed from voter rolls, such as Mickey Mouse, the deceased, or those who had left the State years before. That is why to many of us, motor voter had become auto-fraudo, and we took steps in the Help America Vote Act to change that. The evidence is still overwhelming that this poor policy continues to result in tremendous administrative burdens on our election officials, with registration lists being bloated and inaccurate but limited recourse for election officials to address the situation. All this makes it more difficult to run clean, fair, and accurate elections. The Help America Vote Act required minimum identification for first- time voters who take advantage of the mail-in voter registration procedures. While the law is clear, some States chose to find ways around this reasonable requirement. This bill makes it clear that voters who do not register before a government official in person will have to provide the ID requirement. We heard reports of partisan election workers who brought in bundles of voter registration cards, and when they told the governmental election officials they had seen the voter ID, those cards were accepted. Anybody who would accept that ought to be buying the 14th Street bridge. To say somebody who is not a government official and is partisan is going to fulfill the governmental requirements is a stretch too far. Furthermore, in some Federal elections, I think it is past time to go to a full ID provision. So this legislation requires voters in Federal elections to present identification at the polls while creating a program to ensure that all voters have access to an ID if they cannot afford one. We now ask our citizens to provide a photo ID for so many tasks of everyday life. To provide it once more for election officials on election day seems a small request in order to help ensure our elections are fair and accurate. If a person does not have a photo ID and cannot afford to procure one, our bill provides the requirement and the resources to ensure that one is provided. Let's make sure every legal vote gets counted, and only the legal votes and only one vote per person, only one vote per human. No dogs, please. The practice of dropping off registration cards in bulk at the registration deadline continues. It is proving to be a huge burden on election officials. The practice of submitting cards for fictitious people, deceased, and ineligible voters is alive and well, so to speak. Also, a troubling practice by some voter registration groups has come to light--registrations not being delivered to the election authorities. Whether intentional, through oversight or neglect, this is simply unacceptable. Would-be voters place their faith in those conducting registration drives, and the States accept the registration drives will be conducted on the level. Sloppy practices can only result in people being denied the right to vote. So there must be oversight. This legislation will bring some accountability to voter registration drives while relieving some of the burdens on election authorities by mass dumping of registrations. I call on our law enforcement officials, the Department of Justice, and our U.S. attorneys to review the process and look at those areas where fraud has been suggested to find out if it is prosecutable, if Federal criminal procedure is required and warranted. I can tell you that we will pass all the laws in the world, but until we see some voter fraud proponents going to jail, spending time in the cells, we are not going to have the effect this bill and our previous bill anticipated. We need to clean up the registration process by permitting States to use Social Security numbers. I think this bill brings some sense to voter rules by clarifying the provision in motor voter for name removal. The bill also includes a provision for dealing in a reasonable manner with registration cards that are incomplete. We found in the past, if you did not specifically indicate you were a U.S. citizen, the courts refused to prosecute those knowing they were not eligible to vote because they were not citizens; they could not be prosecuted. Now there is a specific requirement that you indicate you are a U.S. citizen, eligible to vote. If you do not do that, the card should not be accepted, and if you falsely certify you are a U.S. citizen, you ought to be prosecuted. As we expressed throughout the debates on Help America Vote Act, minimum standard requirements for elections are to be implemented by the State. On provisional voting, the language is explicit. Questions on the implementation of provisional balloting are for State legislators and election officials to decide. But as is too often the case in this country, what cannot be achieved through legislation will be pursued in the courtroom. Some 65 lawsuits were pursued to overturn decisions to preserve the precinct system used at the State level. This was a conscious effort to screw up the elections. Fortunately, the courts got it right. They overruled them 65 times. But there will be more litigation. Therefore, this legislation clarifies further the clear language of HAVA that the decision on the precinct system and decision on the proper polling place for voters is a State question. The goal of the lawsuits, as I said, seemed to introduce complete chaos which would have ensued were voters allowed simply to vote anywhere they wanted. Additionally, those voters would not have been able to vote in local elections and balloting initiatives. The purpose of the suits did not make sense, but they were filed anyhow. The arguments for throwing out State law made less sense. It is simply the height of illogic to argue on one hand that States should permissively allow voters to cast ballots from anywhere in the State they chose, only to complain later that the number of election machines at a polling place was inadequate. Many people lodging this complaint also complained it rained on election day. Sorry, we cannot change that by law. So their concerns must be evaluated accordingly. Among other things, the precinct system allows election officials to plan for election day, assign voters to voting places in manageable numbers, and dispatch the proper level of resources. Once again, after election day, the newspapers were filled with stories pointing out irregularities on election day. The election day problems have grown out of bloated and inaccurate voting lists and sloppy registration procedures. The stories clearly establish that sloppy laws, poor lists, and chaos at the polls invite efforts to cheat on election day. That is unacceptable to voters and to candidates and people who depend upon a free, fair system of democracy. If a voter has his or her vote canceled by a vote that should never have been cast, whether cast by fraud or ineligible voter, he or she has lost the civil right to be heard and to have the vote counted. It is a disenfranchisement of the voter. It also is a grave offense to the candidates who spend countless amounts of their time and their supporters' resources on elections. Our goal should be elections that are free of suspicion, doubt, and cynicism about the results. There are steps that remain to be taken to ensure that elections are conducted in a sound and secure manner so that the integrity of the ballot box remains beyond doubt. These simple steps will begin to clean up the mess created in the registration process, while taking away the remains of enticements to game the system. I look forward to the debate on the floor about these reasonable measures. I commend our deputy majority leader for his work on this effort, and look forward to discussing this and pursuing it with our colleagues. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. BOND

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, with approximately 45 million uninsured Americans, expanding access to quality, affordable health care should be a top priority for the Senate. We hear about the cost explosion that insurance companies are imposing on small businesses and how small business owners are now finding it virtually impossible to provide the health insurance coverage that they, as well as their employees, need. No one is harder hit by large premium increases than small business-- studies indicate more than 60 percent of these uninsured Americans either work for a small business or are dependent upon someone who does. As health care costs skyrocket and place more and more small business employees in jeopardy of losing their health benefits, it becomes more important that Congress turn its attention to the uninsured and act in a swift and bipartisan manner to address this problem. Today we are here to offer hope to the millions of uninsured. Today we are here to talk about a solution that can help millions of small business employees access the same type of health care that their counterparts in large corporations and unions already enjoy. The solution to this problem is to allow small businesses across the country to pool together and access health insurance through their membership with a bona fide trade or professional organization. This will provide small businesses the same opportunities as other large insurance purchasers. These Association Health Plans, AHPs, would reduce costs through greater economies of scale to spread costs and risk, increase group bargaining power with large insurance companies, and generate more insurance options for small businesses. AHPs are not a new idea. They have been talked about, bandied about, argued about and compromised about for almost a decade. And during that period, what was once thought to be a manageable problem--became the crisis that we have today. Had we passed AHP legislation, we would not be seeing the problems we see today for small business. The principle underpinning AHPs is simple. This is the same principle that makes it cheaper to buy your soda by the case instead of by individual cans. Bulk purchasing is why large companies and unions can get better rates for their employees than small businesses and it is about time that we bring Fortune 500 style health benefits to the Nation's Main Street small businesses and their employees. In the words of President Bush, ``It makes no sense in America, to isolate small businesses as little health care islands unto themselves.'' AHPs will mean more coverage for the employees of these companies, especially their families and children. It is time that we take control and find a way to curtail the explosive costs of health care. Small businesses deserve a chance to channel these funds toward other needs, such as expanding and creating more jobs for the economy. Association Health Plans will level the playing field and break down the barriers that prevent small businesses from providing health insurance. I commend Senator Snowe for taking the lead on this critical issue and for using her position as chairwomen of the Small Business Committee to advance the number one health care priority of the small business community. With the support of President Bush, the Department of Labor, the Small Business Administration, and a broad and diverse coalition of over 100 groups, I hope that this bill will more quickly. For the sake of small businesses throughout this country, their employees, and their families we must pass AHP legislation. We must bring fortune 500 health care to small business. The time to act is now. I thank Senators Snowe and Talent for their leadership, dedication and commitment on behalf of small business, and I look forward to working with them to pass Association Health Plans legislation in the Senate.

Mr. BOND

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, with approximately 45 million uninsured Americans, expanding access to quality, affordable health care should be a top priority for the Senate. We hear about the cost explosion that insurance companies are imposing on small businesses and how small business owners are now finding it virtually impossible to provide the health insurance coverage that they, as well as their employees, need. No one is harder hit by large premium increases than small business-- studies indicate more than 60 percent of these uninsured Americans either work for a small business or are dependent upon someone who does. As health care costs skyrocket and place more and more small business employees in jeopardy of losing their health benefits, it becomes more important that Congress turn its attention to the uninsured and act in a swift and bipartisan manner to address this problem. Today we are here to offer hope to the millions of uninsured. Today we are here to talk about a solution that can help millions of small business employees access the same type of health care that their counterparts in large corporations and unions already enjoy. The solution to this problem is to allow small businesses across the country to pool together and access health insurance through their membership with a bona fide trade or professional organization. This will provide small businesses the same opportunities as other large insurance purchasers. These Association Health Plans, AHPs, would reduce costs through greater economies of scale to spread costs and risk, increase group bargaining power with large insurance companies, and generate more insurance options for small businesses. AHPs are not a new idea. They have been talked about, bandied about, argued about and compromised about for almost a decade. And during that period, what was once thought to be a manageable problem--became the crisis that we have today. Had we passed AHP legislation, we would not be seeing the problems we see today for small business. The principle underpinning AHPs is simple. This is the same principle that makes it cheaper to buy your soda by the case instead of by individual cans. Bulk purchasing is why large companies and unions can get better rates for their employees than small businesses and it is about time that we bring Fortune 500 style health benefits to the Nation's Main Street small businesses and their employees. In the words of President Bush, ``It makes no sense in America, to isolate small businesses as little health care islands unto themselves.'' AHPs will mean more coverage for the employees of these companies, especially their families and children. It is time that we take control and find a way to curtail the explosive costs of health care. Small businesses deserve a chance to channel these funds toward other needs, such as expanding and creating more jobs for the economy. Association Health Plans will level the playing field and break down the barriers that prevent small businesses from providing health insurance. I commend Senator Snowe for taking the lead on this critical issue and for using her position as chairwomen of the Small Business Committee to advance the number one health care priority of the small business community. With the support of President Bush, the Department of Labor, the Small Business Administration, and a broad and diverse coalition of over 100 groups, I hope that this bill will more quickly. For the sake of small businesses throughout this country, their employees, and their families we must pass AHP legislation. We must bring fortune 500 health care to small business. The time to act is now. I thank Senators Snowe and Talent for their leadership, dedication and commitment on behalf of small business, and I look forward to working with them to pass Association Health Plans legislation in the Senate.

Mr. BOND

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

Mr. BOND. I am agreeable. Amendment No. 2

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent I may be permitted to speak as in morning business for up to 10 minutes.

Mr. BOND

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, 2 weeks ago when I talked about relief for the victims of the tsunami in Indonesia and what we are doing there, I said there was much more I wanted to call to the attention of my colleagues and the people of the United States. One area that is extremely important is the enormous effort that is underway in Indonesia's mainstream, moderate Muslim population to promote a moderate, pluralistic, democratic Islam, both in Indonesia and throughout the region. Unlike the Middle East, in Indonesia and Southeast Asia, Islam and Muslim organizations have been at the forefront of the country's struggle for a democratic society. And Muslim groups and leaders in Indonesia have been among the world's pioneers in driving inter-faith dialogues. During my recent visit to Indonesia, I met Yenny Zannuba Wahid, one of the latest leaders in this movement. Yenny is the daughter of His Excellency Abdurraham Wahid; a Muslim cleric, a leader in promoting religious tolerance in Indonesia and one of Indonesia's first democratically elected presidents. Yenny has founded the Wahid Institute, an organization dedicated ``to bringing justice and peace to the world by espousing a moderate and tolerant view of Islam and working for the welfare of all.'' As Yenny noted in a recent speech, Islamist parties gained a sizable vote in the 1999 and 2004 Indonesian elections; these developments present the question of what role Islamic forces will play in setting the direction of social and political evolution in today's Indonesia. Will Indonesia, a democracy with Muslim population of over 200 million, remain on the path of a moderate, pluralistic democracy or will a small but increasingly influential minority of fundamentalistic Islamists steadily gain ground with the masses? Through the creation of the Wahid Institute, Yenny has chosen not to allow these currents to flow without resistence. To be precise, the goal of the WI is to expand on the intellectual principles of Gus Dur to development of moderate Islamic thought that will promote democratic reform, religious pluralism, multiculturalism and tolerance amongst Muslims both in Indonesia and around the world. The institute has set out to create a dialogue between the highest spiritual and political leaders in the West and Muslim world. The Wahid Institute has embarked on an impressive agenda of programs, including an effort to facilitate communication between Muslim and non- Muslim scholars on Islam and Muslim society and on the subjects of Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism and Buddhism; through conferences, discussions, publications and its website--wahidinstitute.org. The Wahid Institute has plans to build a Muslim library, to serve scholars, researchers, activists, built on the library and life work of President Wahid. It is also planning to link Muslim NGOs and committed individuals to build a network of individuals and groups dedicated to promoting these ideals. Just an importantly, the Wahid Institute will focus on the education of young people, supporting opportunities for promising young men and women in Indonesia to focus on progressive and tolerant Muslim thinking. But the Wahid Institute is the latest of the groups committed to promoting moderate Islam. The Liberal Islam Network and International Center for Islam and Pluralism have been hard at work at promoting a peaceful and progressive Islam for sometime. I encourage all to become familiar with these groups. In neighboring Malaysia, a country with a majority Muslim population of 18 million Muslims, recently elected Prime Minister, Abdullah Badawi, has emerged as a strong voice in promoting ethnic and religious tolerance and equality for women. His own country struggled through times of violent race riots and has made ethnic and religious tolerance an objective. Malaysia has been an economic success story and U.S. businesses consider it a great place to invest and do business. But the growing strains of fundamentalist Islam have emerged as a challenge. The new Prime Minister has confronted them. As noted in an excellent opinion piece in the Asian Wall Street Journal written by Diana Lady Dougan, ``with senior positions held by women in his government and a strong personal commitment to religious and ethnic tolerance, . . . Prime Minister Abdullah walks the talk. If he can combine his strong and vocal advocacy of Islam Hadhari with continued progress in Malaysia's economic development based on a rule- of-law government and market-based economies, he is well positioned to become an inspiration far beyond the borders of Malaysia''. I ask unanimous consent that a copy of Ambassador Dougan's op-ed be printed in the Record at the end of my speech.

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, in fact, the Prime Minister speaks eloquently about Hadhari Islam, meaning ``civilisation Islam,'' meaning religion should be directed toward good, toward progress and toward development--all consistent with the Tenets of Islam. The Prime Minister recently took this message in a powerful address before the World Council of Churches. I will quote a couple of topics in his speech. He said: Islam Hadhari is an approach that emphasises development, consistent with the tenets of Islam, and focuses on enhancing the quality of life. It aims to achieve this via the mastery of knowledge; the development of the individual and the nation; the implementation of a dynamic economic, trading and financial system; and the pursuit of integrated and balanced development to develop pious and capable people, with care for the environment and protection of the weak and disadvantaged. Further, he said: Malaysia's experience and our promotion of Islam Hadhari also clearly demonstrate a progressive attitude towards relations with non-Muslim minorities and between gender. Our approach does not threaten the rights of non-Muslims. In fact, we celebrate the diversity of our respective cultures and heritage. Those of other faiths in Malaysia, although a minority, have never been persecuted and there is no tolerance in my administration for discrimination and prejudice against any religious group. I am a Muslim, but I am also a leader of all Malaysians--whatever their faith. Similarly, we have tried to ensure that the rights of women are protected and that they fulfil their potential without having to face artificial barriers constructed in the name of Islam. We know Islam to be just and fair, and that it honours the position and rights of women. But there are clear instances of prejudices being cloaked in religious teachings in the Muslim world, aimed at passing off gender discrimination as the accepted norm. This will simply not do. Finally, Singapore, which lies between two great nations with majority Muslim populations, should be commended for the valuable role is has assumed in promoting a continental dialogue over these critical issues. Singapore Senior Minister, Goh Chok Tong, is leading the way to the creation of the Asia-Middle East Dialogue. Bourne out of an extensive trip to the Middle East, where he observed in many Middle East countries a mainstream society both diverse and inclusive, the first Asia-Middle East Dialogue, AMED, will be held June 2005 in Singapore. An event of great ambition, AMED will bring together officials, academics, religious leaders and opinion makers for some 50 countries in the Middle East and Asia. As was noted to me, this is not a government-to-government meeting, this is a meeting best described as people to people. Among many the goals: forging closer political, economic, and security ties; a critical one is to improve the socio-cultural relations between the peoples of the two regions. The platform will provide a framework for the two regions to engage, to highlight to reformist elements and give a voice to the changes taking place in the Middle East. The growth in economic engagement and the inter-regional linkages will hopefully yield economic opportunities to push further the reform and liberalization of the economies of the Middle East. I think there is value in that approach. Above all, AMED will provide a platform for moderate Muslim countries to speak up and challenge the extremist strain of Islam. The threat presented by global terrorism stems from a militant, extremist ideology that uses religion to foment divisions between and within societies, to foster terrorist acts and murders of innocent civilians, government officials, and other leaders. The forum, among others, will elevate elements to counter this movement. In an encouraging sign, the Egyptian Government has offered to host the next AMED. I commend the Senior Minister. I commend Prime Minister Abdullah. I commend Yenny Zannuba Wahid, as well as the people of Singapore, for this important effort, which will have, I think, long- range benefits not only for the people of Islam and the people of Islamic countries, but all of us who are concerned about the rise of religious fanaticism misusing the peaceful religion of Islam. I thank the Chair and my colleagues. I yield the floor. Exhibit 1 [From the Asian Wall Street Journal, Nov. 19, 2004] Malaysia's Shadow Is Lifting (By Diana Lady Dougan) This week's very public reunion between Malaysia's new Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi and former Deputy Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim may be cause for cautious celebration. It is now six years since then Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad sacked Mr. Anwar at the height of the Asian financial crisis, replacing him with Mr. Abdullah. Six years in which the headlines generated by the controversial legal process surrounding Mr. Anwar's conviction for corruption and sodomy have cast a shadow over Malaysia's reputation as a rising star among industrializing nations. Now that shadow is starting to lift. The first step came in September, when Malaysia's Federal Court overturned Mr. Anwar's sodomy conviction, a step viewed by many as a signal that Malaysia is back on the all-too-short list of ``rule of law'' countries in the Islamic world. This week saw another highly symbolic step. Mr. Anwar joined the head table of a high-profile banquet hosted by Mr. Abdullah to celebrate the end of Ramadan, the first meeting between the two men since his jailing six years ago. This signaled Mr. Abdullah's emergence from Mr. Mahathir's shadow. Mr. Abdullah is secure in his position as prime minister of one of the largest secular Islamic countries. A leader of particular importance to the West because of his unequivocal denouncement of terrorism and the hate mongering of Islamic fundamentalists. Despite many years in Mr. Mahathir's cabinet, including five as deputy prime minister, Mr. Abdullah was a largely unknown quantity when he quietly stepped into the departing prime minister's shoes last year. When he assumed the role in Oct. 2003, Mr. Abdullah did not wait long to lay the groundwork for governmental reforms. Initially, his efforts to tackle corruption, liberalize Malaysia's capital market and increase business transparency were dismissed in some quarters as predictable political posturing. But in the year since Mr. Abdullah became prime minister, even Moodys and Standard & Poor's have acknowledged Malaysia's efforts to improve its economic fundamentals. Malaysia has jumped to 15th place this year from 23rd place in 2003 in the ranking of attractive places for foreign direct investment among the 65 countries listed in the FDI Conference Index, according to a recent report from management consultants A.T. Kearney. Malaysia and its new prime minister have a lot going for them. The Malaysian Central Bank reports a 7.6% growth rate during the first half of this year, following growth of 5.2% in 2003. Its foreign reserves leapt to a record high of 221.1 billion ringgits ($58.2 billion) in October. Malaysla also has oil reserves. But unlike many oil producing countries in the Muslin world, Malaysia has a large and stable middle class. An enviable 82% of its population live above the poverty line. Nonethless Malaysia is often stigmatized as a Muslin society where Islam is constitutionally enshrined as the national religion. Although led by pragmatic and progressive leaders today, the country has historically had its share of radical Muslim activists. Indeed few Westerners recall that Mr. Anwar got his political start as a Muslim firebrand activist. And during his six years in jail, the former deputy prime minister has deftly orchestrated the creation of a new splinter party headed by Wan Azizah Wan Ismail, his conservatively shrouded ophthalmologist wife and mother of six. However since his September release, little had been seen of Mr. Anwar until this week. And it remains to be seen how much of the support for his political party will survive now that Mr. Anwar is no longer a folk hero in prison. Although not as colorful as Messrs. Mahathir or Anwar, Mr. Abdullah has long enjoyed a personal reputation untainted by scandal. He is a devout Muslim with a university degree in Islamic studies reinforced by a father who taught the Koran and a grandfather who ran a madrassa religious school. Ironically Mr. Abdullah's reputation as a respected scholar of the Koran has worked to Mr. Anwar's advantage in the past, and the two men have ties that go back far beyond this week's reunion. In 1980, when Mr. Anwar eloped to Thailand with his now wife, his father-in-law dramatically refused to acknowledge the marriage and disowned his daughter. The young couple recruited Mr. Abdullah as intermediary who was credited with using quotes from the Koran to successfully intercede on Mr. Anwar's behalf and convince his fundamentalist father-in-law to accept the marriage. Armed with ethnically Arab heritage as well as Arabic language fluency (the name ``Badawi'' means ``Bedouin'' in Arabic), Abdullah Badawi comes with a credibility in the terror-plagued Middle East that Asian Muslims seldom have. And as a well-respected expert on the Koran, he cannot easily be yanked around nor intimidated by fundamentalist zealots who are distorting the Islamic faith and the world view. Mr. Abdullah is starting to gain attention in the Arab world for his vocal and eloquent championing of ``Islam Hadhari.'' Roughly translated as ``Civilizational Islam,'' Islam Hadhari is not a new religion. Rather it is a rallying point for progressive Muslims in Malaysia. Islam Hadhari is committed to promoting ethnic and religious tolerance, equality for women, protecting the religious as well as political rights of minorities, and pursuing economic development based on education and fairness. With many senior positions held by women in his government and a strong personal commitment to religious and ethnic tolerance embedded in his Chinese, Arab and Malay heritage, Prime Minister Abdullah walks the talk. If he can combine his strong and vocal advocacy of Islam Hadhari with continued progress in Malaysia's economic development based on rule-of- law government and market-based economics, he is well positioned to become an inspiration far beyond the borders of Malaysia. As chair of both the 118 country Non Aligned Movement and the 57 country Organization of the Islamic Conference until 2006, Malaysia under Mr. Abdullah's leadership can command an international spotlight--especially in the Muslim world. Clearly no single person can single-handedly defeat the distorted logic and deadly forces being unleashed in the name of Allah around the world, much less the debilitating economics that plague much of the Muslim world. But Mr. Abdullah is clearly working to turn the tide in the most important battle we are facing. For all our sakes, let's hope both Malaysia and its new prime minister take advantage of their unique opportunities.

Mr. BOND

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I wish to recognize the 100th anniversary of Southwest Missouri State University. The university was founded March 17, 1905, in Springfield as Missouri State Normal School, Fourth District, and has ``Dared to Excel'' for the past 100 years. The Southwest Missouri State University System, including its campuses in West Plains and Mountain Grove, are celebrating their centennial year from July 1, 2004, through June 30, 2005. The ``Dare to Excel'' theme is most appropriate for this university that has never rested on its laurels. To quote SMS President John H. Kaiser, ``Over the first 100 years of its existence, the institution has changed dramatically. But one thing has remained the same: SMS has opened the door of opportunity for young people from Springfield, the region, the state, the nation and now, world. The Centennial year will be one of celebration, but it also will be one of reflection and re- dedication to that noble purpose. The result will be the new long-range plan, Daring to Excel, which will take the institution from 2005 to 2010.'' Southwest Missouri State University has ``opened the door of opportunity'' for students the past century. Its faculty, staff, and students have distinguished themselves in academics, in research, in public service, and in cocurricular activities. Offering more than 150 undergraduate and 43 graduate academic programs, SMS is committed to helping students succeed in their own lives and as active citizens. During its 100 years, the university has had four names--Missouri State Normal School, Fourth District; Southwest Missouri State Teachers College; Southwest Missouri State College; and Southwest Missouri State University--changed each time to more accurately reflect what the institution has become. There have been significant changes at the institution over the past 100 years. Since its founding, it has seen its student population grow from 173 to over 20,000. The full-time faculty has increased from 8 to 718, and the academic programs have grown from one to nearly 200. In 1006 there was one building, but now there are 61. Since 1995, Southwest Missouri State University has been further distinguished by its statewide public affairs mission and has had a profound effect on Springfield, southwest Missouri, the entire State, the Nation, and the world. It has contributed to the economic development of the region and the State, impacting the area economy by nearly $2 million per day. It is fitting that March 17, 2005, be proclaimed ``Southwest Missouri State University Founders Day,'' with sincere appreciation and appropriate celebration of the significant contributions the institution has made to the citizens of Missouri and the nation over the past 100 years. Southwest Missouri State University was founded March 17, 1905, in Springfield as Missouri State Normal School, Fourth District, and has ``Dared to Excel'' for the past 100 years. The Southwest Missouri State University System, including its campuses in West Plains and Mountain Grove, are celebrating the centennial year from July 1, 2004, through June 30, 2005; and During its 100 years, the institution has successfully operated under four names: Missouri State Normal School, Fourth District; Southwest Missouri State Teachers College; Southwest Missouri State College; and Southwest Missouri State University. The institution has ``opened the door of opportunity'' for students for the past century; and its faculty, staff, and students have distinguished themselves in academics, in research, in public service, and in cocurricular activities. Since 1995, SMS has been further distinguished by its statewide public affairs mission and has had a profound effect on Springfield, southwest Missouri, the entire State, the Nation, and the world. It has contributed to the economic development of the region and the State, impacting the area economy by nearly $2 million per day. Southwest Missouri State University has improved the quality of life for citizens in Springfield, the region, and the State and the future is bright for the 21st century. I am proud to request that Thursday, March 17, 2005, be proclaimed ``Southwest Missouri State University Founders Day,'' with sincere appreciation and appropriate celebration of the significant contributions the institution has made to the citizens of Missouri and the nation over the past 100 years.

Mr. BOND

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation concerning a critical issue that affects many States--disaster assistance. Last year was one of the worst hurricane seasons that Florida had seen in recent years. The Sunshine State was battered by four hurricanes in a six week period. Many residents of Florida had to evacuate more than three times during last year's hurricane season only to return home and find their homes leveled, their crops uprooted, their neighborhoods flooded, and their dreams shattered. In my home State of Missouri, we are no strangers to natural disasters. Located smack in the middle of Tornado Alley, Missouri has been hit by some of the largest storms in U.S. history. In May of 2003, a string of tornadoes ripped through the western part of the state causing major damage and devastation. With two big rivers--the Mississippi and the Missouri--we have also seen our fair share of flooding through the years, including flash flooding. I will never forget when the Mississippi River breached its banks in 1993--one of the most devastating floods in U.S. history. Of the nine Midwestern States affected, the State of Missouri was the hardest hit and State officials estimate that damages totaled $3 billion. One specific example of the benefits of disaster mitigation in flash- flood situations comes to mind when I think of the City of Union, located about 45 minutes from St. Louis, where many of the residents suffered tremendous damage from a severe flash flood in May of 2000. After the flood, the City of Union applied to the State of Missouri Emergency Management Agency to seek help in a demolition and acquisition project. With the mitigation grant money, 17 properties were acquired in residential areas with substantial damage. These properties are now deed restricted for ``open space,'' which will prevent future development and the potential for flash flood related deaths in that area because many of the homes and people will no longer be in harm's way. This is an excellent example of the value of disaster and mitigation money invested by the Federal, State and local governments. The disaster mitigation program has also been used to provide grant money to an individual, as opposed to a municipality. In some instances, these homeowners may be located in areas highly susceptible to tornadoes. Often times, disaster mitigation grants have been issued to individual homeowners enabling them to build storm shelters underneath their homes, ultimately saving lives. Over the years, the State of Missouri has worked with the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to build structures that prevent flooding and other damage from occurring when natural disasters strike. Time and time again, FEMA has come to the rescue by establishing funding for disaster relief and mitigation activities within the State of Missouri and in other states across the country. Having served as the Chairman of the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on VA, HUD, and Independent Agencies, which until recently oversaw FEMA, I know first hand the value of the agency's disaster mitigation grant programs--the Hazards Mitigation Grant Program (HGMP), the Pre-Disaster Mitigation program (PDM), and the Flood Mitigation Assistance (FMA) program. Designed to manage future emergencies, these programs have been essential to countless communities, and without them, thousands of lives would be in jeopardy. Last Congress, some very disturbing news was brought to my attention. According to a June 2004 legal memorandum issued by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), FEMA mitigation grants may be subject to income taxation. While some may argue that this is merely the IRS's interpretation of the statute, it is clearly the position the IRS intends to take against American taxpayers whose only recourse will be to fight the agency in court. Let me tell you what this means for the American taxpayer. In my example of Union, Missouri, it is the individuals whose homes have been purchased by the city who ultimately will be forced to pay taxes on the proceeds of the buyout. For the homeowner building a storm shelter with grant money, he or she might be taxed upon receipt of the grant. I must say that I am absolutely stunned by this determination by the IRS!! How in the world could the IRS possibly think that Congress intended to tax these types of grants to prevent natural disasters, especially when we went out of our way to ensure that disaster-relief payments to individuals recovering from a hurricane, flood, tornado or other natural disaster are not subject to income taxes? Today, I am offering a bill that will stop the IRS in its tracks and prevent the taxation of disaster mitigation grants. This language will ensure that any federal grants to construct or modify property to mitigate future disaster damage will not be deemed to be income by the IRS's tortured reasoning. This bill will ensure that any grants currently out there, especially in light of the current hurricanes that have happened, are not subject to tax. In addition, there should be no inference by this legislation that Congress intended such grants to be taxable prior to the effective date of this legislation. Why is this important? Why am I out here today? Because the Missouri and Mississippi Rivers rise, because tornadoes will ravage through the state once again, and because flash flooding can decimate an entire community. The last thing Americans who are working to prevent such potential destruction need is for government-grant funding to be subject to tax. My bill ensures that such taxes do not see the light of day. I thank the original cosponsors of this bill, Senators Talent, Inhofe, Vitter, Conrad, Landrieu, and Nelson, for their support, and I urge my other colleagues to join us. Finally, Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the bill and a letter from the Stafford Act Coalition be printed in the Record.

Mr. BOND

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation concerning a critical issue that affects many States--disaster assistance. Last year was one of the worst hurricane seasons that Florida had seen in recent years. The Sunshine State was battered by four hurricanes in a six week period. Many residents of Florida had to evacuate more than three times during last year's hurricane season only to return home and find their homes leveled, their crops uprooted, their neighborhoods flooded, and their dreams shattered. In my home State of Missouri, we are no strangers to natural disasters. Located smack in the middle of Tornado Alley, Missouri has been hit by some of the largest storms in U.S. history. In May of 2003, a string of tornadoes ripped through the western part of the state causing major damage and devastation. With two big rivers--the Mississippi and the Missouri--we have also seen our fair share of flooding through the years, including flash flooding. I will never forget when the Mississippi River breached its banks in 1993--one of the most devastating floods in U.S. history. Of the nine Midwestern States affected, the State of Missouri was the hardest hit and State officials estimate that damages totaled $3 billion. One specific example of the benefits of disaster mitigation in flash- flood situations comes to mind when I think of the City of Union, located about 45 minutes from St. Louis, where many of the residents suffered tremendous damage from a severe flash flood in May of 2000. After the flood, the City of Union applied to the State of Missouri Emergency Management Agency to seek help in a demolition and acquisition project. With the mitigation grant money, 17 properties were acquired in residential areas with substantial damage. These properties are now deed restricted for ``open space,'' which will prevent future development and the potential for flash flood related deaths in that area because many of the homes and people will no longer be in harm's way. This is an excellent example of the value of disaster and mitigation money invested by the Federal, State and local governments. The disaster mitigation program has also been used to provide grant money to an individual, as opposed to a municipality. In some instances, these homeowners may be located in areas highly susceptible to tornadoes. Often times, disaster mitigation grants have been issued to individual homeowners enabling them to build storm shelters underneath their homes, ultimately saving lives. Over the years, the State of Missouri has worked with the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to build structures that prevent flooding and other damage from occurring when natural disasters strike. Time and time again, FEMA has come to the rescue by establishing funding for disaster relief and mitigation activities within the State of Missouri and in other states across the country. Having served as the Chairman of the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on VA, HUD, and Independent Agencies, which until recently oversaw FEMA, I know first hand the value of the agency's disaster mitigation grant programs--the Hazards Mitigation Grant Program (HGMP), the Pre-Disaster Mitigation program (PDM), and the Flood Mitigation Assistance (FMA) program. Designed to manage future emergencies, these programs have been essential to countless communities, and without them, thousands of lives would be in jeopardy. Last Congress, some very disturbing news was brought to my attention. According to a June 2004 legal memorandum issued by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), FEMA mitigation grants may be subject to income taxation. While some may argue that this is merely the IRS's interpretation of the statute, it is clearly the position the IRS intends to take against American taxpayers whose only recourse will be to fight the agency in court. Let me tell you what this means for the American taxpayer. In my example of Union, Missouri, it is the individuals whose homes have been purchased by the city who ultimately will be forced to pay taxes on the proceeds of the buyout. For the homeowner building a storm shelter with grant money, he or she might be taxed upon receipt of the grant. I must say that I am absolutely stunned by this determination by the IRS!! How in the world could the IRS possibly think that Congress intended to tax these types of grants to prevent natural disasters, especially when we went out of our way to ensure that disaster-relief payments to individuals recovering from a hurricane, flood, tornado or other natural disaster are not subject to income taxes? Today, I am offering a bill that will stop the IRS in its tracks and prevent the taxation of disaster mitigation grants. This language will ensure that any federal grants to construct or modify property to mitigate future disaster damage will not be deemed to be income by the IRS's tortured reasoning. This bill will ensure that any grants currently out there, especially in light of the current hurricanes that have happened, are not subject to tax. In addition, there should be no inference by this legislation that Congress intended such grants to be taxable prior to the effective date of this legislation. Why is this important? Why am I out here today? Because the Missouri and Mississippi Rivers rise, because tornadoes will ravage through the state once again, and because flash flooding can decimate an entire community. The last thing Americans who are working to prevent such potential destruction need is for government-grant funding to be subject to tax. My bill ensures that such taxes do not see the light of day. I thank the original cosponsors of this bill, Senators Talent, Inhofe, Vitter, Conrad, Landrieu, and Nelson, for their support, and I urge my other colleagues to join us. Finally, Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the bill and a letter from the Stafford Act Coalition be printed in the Record.

Mr. BOND

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. BOND. Further, I ask unanimous consent that I may be able to speak in morning business for as such time as I may require.

Mr. BOND. I thank the Chair.

Mr. BOND

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, today it is a real privilege for me to be able to report to my colleagues and the people of America on a magnificent relief effort underway in Indonesia, where the December 26, 2004, tsunami left over 115,000 confirmed deaths, with potentially tens of thousands more swept out to certain death in the sea, leaving no record of their disappearance, and hundreds of thousands of surviving victims left in precarious positions, with inadequate water and food, facing potentially life-threatening diseases. On Saturday, January 15, a week ago this past Saturday, I walked through the primitive conditions in the mud, in the heat and humidity of Banda Aceh Airport to talk to the relief teams and the military personnel, Asian and American, gathered in a common cause. Some of these American troops are shown here in this picture. It was an extremely diverse group of individuals. They shared in the common beads of sweat dripping off the end of the nose from the oppressive climate. They had a compelling commitment to relieve the tremendous suffering of the people of Aceh and Northern Sumatra and a cooperative spirit that resolved questions and differences of opinion with speed and good humor. The U.S. Navy and Marine helicopter crews, which had flown 600 missions delivering 2.3 million pounds of supplies to isolated locations cut off by the tsunami-destroyed roads and bridges, mingled with international relief agency personnel, personnel from other countries, Navy volunteers from the USS Abraham Lincoln who joined with marines from the Bonhomme Richard, loaded U.S. Agency for International Development rice and purified water from the carrier Lincoln onto the helicopters. The Indonesian military, through their Army, the TNI, provided security for relief forces against potential kidnapping and harassment by the free-Aceh movement, known as GAM, which apparently and fortunately was more interested in ensuring that people did not forget about them than in inflicting more casualties on the volunteers. Navy fixed-wing pilots from the Lincoln, who were not that day flying off the carrier, came to work in oppressively hot tents to provide logistics control and support. USAID workers, who were among the true heroes of the effort, organized food, water, and medical supplies as directed by Indonesian government officials, to be put on helicopters or sometimes Marine hovercraft, VCACs, which could gain access to isolated regions along the shores, once the debris and human remains had been removed from the shorelines. Even though the main work of removing bodies of victims in Banda Aceh had concluded days before, the State Department security official noted to me that each day debris from collapsed buildings was removed, a dozen or so body bags carried additional victims from beneath the rubble. One of the first people who met me was Pierre King, the French leader of a unit from the International Organization of Migration, IOM, a critically important group of workers who had been on the scene from the beginning. He asked me to tell the American people that American troop efforts and that of volunteers had been outstanding. This was the theme heard time and time again from many different sources. When I arrived at a concrete structure serving as the command center, Indonesia's coordinating minister in charge of relief efforts, Alwi Shihab, an old friend who had visited me in Washington, DC a week before the tsunami, expressed the profound gratitude of the people of Indonesia for the great work the Americans had done. He expressed his hope that the U.S. troops would stay in the country until Indonesian resources could take over the immediate relief effort. Later, the Indonesian Defense Minister, Juwono Sudarsono, told Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz that the United States had been the backbone of the relief effort. Secretary Paul Wolfowitz and I later met with Indonesian President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, often referred to, for obvious reasons, by his initials SBY. The President expressed his gratitude for the relief work of the United States military, and he said he hoped that Indonesia would be able to take over any further needed relief work within 3 months and probably sooner. This entire effort and the saving of untold lives was made possible by the outpouring of voluntary assistance as well as the work of troops assigned to the region. In Jakarta, the capital of Indonesia, later I learned that when the United States began loading our C-130s with vital relief needs, our embassy personnel, led by USAID workers, were joined by volunteers from the American Chamber of Commerce in Indonesia, spouses of American diplomats, and other American and international civilians living in the area who loaded the 20,000-pound pallets to be carried to Banda Aceh in the C-130s. It is clear that without their efforts the scope of the tragedy of the tsunami itself could have been magnified many times by starvation and disease, killing Indonesians in the impacted areas who had survived the disastrous wall of water brought in by the tsunami. Aid for severely injured victims in Indonesia was provided initially by United States naval doctors and corpsmen, and the most seriously injured were transferred to high-level care facilities on shipboard. Later field hospitals were provided by other countries, including Jordan, Spain, and France. The latter provided a 74-ton field hospital, which our heavy-lift Marine helicopters were able to transport to the disaster scene. Most of the severe injuries had been cared for by the time we arrived, and several of the field hospitals were preparing to return to their home countries because their mission had been fulfilled. I was told that one Marine hovercraft had blown a portion of a pallet into a resident, injuring him. He was treated by a Navy corpsman, taken home by the Marines who were there unloading the hovercraft. But the real challenge is to health, the lack of healthy water supply and sanitation, creating the danger of tetanus, typhoid, and other disease. One of the Philippine nurses in the IOM tent proudly showed me the tetanus, typhoid vaccines, and other medicines they were administering to protect survivors from disease. The need for clean water was addressed initially by U.S. Admiral Doug Crowder, commander of the Abraham Lincoln Strike Force deployed to the region on an emergency basis. The carrier was able to generate 90,000 gallons of purified water, in addition to its needs each day, to be delivered to the residents of the stricken region. Also we saw in Jakarta USAID personnel prepared large water jugs with water purification chemicals attached to them to enable purification of water on the ground for residents whose water supply had been severely compromised. In addition to the volunteer efforts I described, great work was done by our allies in the region. We need to make special reference to them. Singapore supplied helicopters for relief efforts. Australia brought in C-130s for heavy lift, as did New Zealand. Other countries in the region played valuable roles as well. Japan contributed. Thailand, which had over 5,000 deaths in its hotel and resort area of Phuket, was able to handle the disaster relief with its own forces and volunteers, not calling on other countries for assistance. In addition to dealing with the problem in his own country, Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra promptly offered the use of its airfield at Utapoah as a central U.S. staging point for airlift relief supplies going into northern Indonesia. The Government of Malaysia, led by its newly elected Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi, acted quickly to clear all necessary flight access for relief efforts and to permit our military aircraft to utilize vitally needed airports for operations into Indonesia. After meeting with government officials and volunteers on the ground on January 15, I joined our United States ambassador in Indonesia, R. Lynn Pascoe, and Deputy Secretary Wolfowitz on a helicopter tour of the devastated areas of northern Aceh. During my time as Governor, I saw devastation of areas hit by floods and tornadoes. I thought I had seen the worst. In addition, all of us in America who watched television saw stark pictures of the floods, the destruction, what was left after the tsunami struck. But what I saw from the helicopter was beyond anything I had ever seen before in both its extent and magnitude. The extent and magnitude were nothing short of cataclysmic. We saw from the air broad reaches of low-lying portions of what had obviously been a reasonably prosperous Asian community turned into piles of large matchsticks with buildings torn completely off their foundations. Remnants of fishing vessels perched hazardously against remnants of structures hundreds and hundreds of yards from shore. Small fires were burning where surviving residents were cleaning up debris and burning the trash. As we flew down the shoreline for a short way, we saw the sides of cliffs carved out where the tsunami wave had bulldozed huge sections of the cliffs. This slide from a helicopter window shows the new cliffs which have been carved out by the floodwaters as they hit in those areas. The only trees left standing were very young pine trees which apparently were slender and supple enough to avoid being broken off by the tsunami. Small towns along the way were identifiable only by foundations of buildings which may have been businesses, farms, or homes, but otherwise totally unrecognizable. In some areas, bridges were wiped out and in other areas the highways near the shore were covered in large expanses of sand. It was obvious that fields which had been cultivated were likely turned into barren salt and sand wastelands. In addition to the large swath of devastation cut across Banda Atjeh, the devastation continued on to the horizon along the shore where the tsunami had wiped out manmade and even natural structures. Later, I learned that the Navy operations to bring in relief had to await remapping of the shoreline because even the underwater structures had been so changed by the tsunami that the navigation charts were unreliable. From the helicopter, we obviously just had this bird's-eye view. But from the relief workers and news reports in the area, we gained a much more detailed understanding of what had transpired. In the January 15 edition of the International Herald Tribune, it was reported that the seashore town of Calang, with 7,300 people, had been left after the tsunami with nothing other than the skeleton of one house of a wealthy resident. There were no signs of shops, houses, restaurants, or a mosque which had been there. Of the 7,300 people thought to live in the town, 323 bodies were found, and 5,627 residents were listed as missing--more than 80 percent of the community. We could only assume that they and thousands of others in isolated regions were swept out to sea. The total loss of life may never be known. The IHT reported news of similar devastation along a coastal region where villages were flattened, leaving no roads, bridges, ports, or airstrips. It was reported that one swampy area had approximately 100 floating bodies, and nobody had been able to gain access to remove and bury the dead. In a subsequent report on January 18, IHT noted that the Red Cross had given up attempting to compile a list of those missing, and decided to pursue what tragically was a much smaller listing of those who survived. It was a publication called simply ``I Am Alive.'' The news story recorded a heartwarming and touching account of an 18-year-old boy who was able to find his 8-year-old brother who had been torn out of his arms in the waves. But the number of reunions had been tragically small, with only one or two other reunions recorded. Before I visited Banda Aceh, I had read and was concerned about reports indicating that the response to the tsunami had been slow. But as I learned more about the nature of the devastation, I gained a better understanding of why it was slow. Apparently, there had been a major sports celebration in Banda Aceh when the tsunami struck, and most of the town's leaders were in the low-lying areas as were a large number of the TNI military and its leaders, and most of the communication facilities in Banda Aceh. These were all washed away--the citizens, the leaders, the local officials, and the communications facilities. It was many hours before aircraft flights over the area could discover the extent of the destruction. Despite the uncertainty and despite a lack of knowledge of the exact nature of the destruction, initial reports of the tsunami brought immediate proactive reactions from a lot of U.S. leadership--ADM Thomas Fargo, our Pacific military commander, and our Ambassador to Indonesia, R. Lynn Pascoe, as well as organizations like the American Red Cross, the International Organization for Migration, and the Governments of Singapore, Australia, and New Zealand. Ambassador Pascoe immediately made available $100,000 to the International Red Cross to purchase badly needed supplies and medication. He also tasked the IOM to mobilize truck convoys which enabled land relief with 80 trucks to reach Banda Aceh within some 5 days after the tsunami. Admiral Fargo's proactive order to turn the USS Abraham Lincoln around to the straits of Aceh, cancel shore leave and move it from Hong Kong to the straits of Aceh, brought in helicopter relief to isolated areas 6 days after the tragedy. It is obvious that this is a natural tragedy of historic proportions. The loss of life has truly been staggering, but the displaced and endangered people in the region are even a far larger number. Our relief efforts for the immediate needs have been generous and prompt, but there will be much more work to be done. Now, several misinterpretations of our efforts in Indonesia have appeared in the press and I need to address that. Many people interpreted the remarks of the Indonesian Vice President as ordering American forces out of Indonesia by March 26. In fact, our Ambassador and military officials agreed with the Indonesian Government that our troops--diverted to the country from scheduled and needed rest and relaxation--would stay only as long as absolutely needed and wanted by the country's government. All parties knew that the time of our troops' commitment would be, at the most, no more than 3 months. I believe the Vice President's announcement of departure by March 26 was a prediction of the schedule, not an ultimatum. Our mission in Indonesia was well described by Marine GEN Christian Cowdrey who, as commander of the Combined Support Group, told the Indonesians, ``We are here to support your efforts, at your direction, where you need it.'' He made it clear that we intended to stay as long as the Government of Indonesia requested our assistance, and as soon as our assistance was no longer required, he would return to the home base and station. There were 8,000 marines and sailors assisting in the relief effort, and the majority of them were based on ships to limit the number of people on shore who needed to be supplied. The short-term nature of our commitment was reinforced by an announcement by Admiral Fargo this past Friday that withdrawal of the troops would begin immediately, transferring relief operations to host nations and international organizations. He predicted that all 15,000 U.S. troops would be withdrawn within 60 days--well short of the predicted maximum of March 26--as the mission in Indonesia moved from the immediate relief phase to rehabilitation and reconstruction. Another press report suggested Indonesia had demanded that our aircraft carrier, the USS Abraham Lincoln, leave its waters. This report seemingly was based on sightings of the Lincoln heading to open waters. Well, I had the opportunity to ask ADM Doug Crowder, commander of the Lincoln Strike Force, about this report. He shook his head and smiled in dismay. He told me that he routinely had to conduct flight operations to keep his fixed-wing pilots current. He does not conduct these operations near shore and routinely goes out to blue water, 50 to 60 miles offshore. Even if he is in San Diego, he doesn't fly fixed wing off of his carrier on shore; he goes out to sea by that distance to blue water. In Indonesia, his practice had been to send off his helicopters with supplies and shore volunteers in the morning, located near shore. He then would move the carrier to blue water for fixed-wing flights and return in the evening to retrieve his choppers and personnel for overnight. Another story indicated that the U.S. Marines were prohibited from carrying any weapons while they were on Indonesian soil. As a father of a marine, this troubled me. I thought, are we sending marines in without protection? I inquired of Marine General Cowdrey if his troops were unprotected. He assured me that while marines engaged in humanitarian operations normally did not carry M-16 rifles, he never deployed his marines without adequate force and personal protection. Another thing the relief operations did was to bring into stark reality the unintended consequences of congressional restrictions placed on our assistance to Indonesia. This was done supposedly to deal with human rights abuses by the TNI--the Indonesian military--during the times of authoritarian rule in that country through the aftermath of the East Timor referendum. Those restrictions were first imposed in 1991 and have been tightened since. I have opposed continuation of these sanctions since Indonesia has chosen new leaders democratically, most recently this fall's 2004 election of President Yudhoyono; and the new leadership made a strong commitment to reform, to a recognition of human rights, and to fighting corruption. President Yudhoyono has shown he is a reformer; his permitting U.S. soldiers in Indonesia was opposed by hardliners in his Parliament. I believe we need to support him and his reform efforts, rather than strengthen the hand of anti-U.S. forces in his country. The main focus of the sanctions was to prohibit Indonesian participation in the International Military Education and Training Program, or the IMET Program, run by our military for our own officers and forces from friendly nations. IMET provides training in modern military operations, including adherence to the Code of Military Justice, civilian control of the military, respect for human rights, and proper treatment of civilian populations--precisely by the principles that should be instilled in military forces thought to have been involved in human rights abuses in the past. The major benefits of the program, however, are establishing relationships among our military leaders and commanders of friendly foreign forces to assure they understand how to conduct military or relief operations together. This principle is known as interoperability. The foreign officers learn English language skills so our allied officers can communicate. The failure to have such training in Indonesia almost resulted in a tragic midair collision of U.S. aircraft with a TNI helicopter operation. Our military leaders, Secretary Don Rumsfeld, Deputy Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, and our Secretary of State, Colin Powell, have told me personally how important these IMET programs are and how important it is not to deny them to Indonesia. If our forces are to participate in military or relief operations with those of friendly nations, we must train together. Also, as a result of U.S. policy, Indonesia was denied the ability to purchase necessary spare parts for its C-130 fleet, rendering its fleet of 24 planes largely inoperable. Had the Indonesian C-130s been available, relief and aid would have flowed much sooner and in greater quantity to Aceh. When Secretary of State Colin Powell learned about the limitation, he immediately responded by issuing a waiver to bring funding for spare parts and the parts themselves to Indonesia. Beginning this past week, American and Indonesian mechanics began the installation of the spare parts, and soon more of the fleet should be ready for flight operations. I look forward to working with my colleagues and the administration to reverse these unnecessarily restrictive policies at the earliest opportunity. I might also say it has been disheartening to read some press accounts that have attributed the U.S. response as a shallow move to win better public relations in Islamic countries. Some of this nonsense, regrettably, appeared in American publications. America is and always has been and always will be a force for social justice and humanitarian relief. It is notable that we are not challenged when we provide assistance for AIDS victims in Africa or elsewhere around the world, and I hope people will understand the genuine outpouring of American concern in this instance. At churches in Washington, DC, and in my hometown of Mexico, MO, as well as in comments and discussions with many Americans here and at home, I have heard nothing but genuine expressions of great concern, sympathy, and willingness to assist. Voluntary charitable contributions of individuals, corporations, and other organizations have been to date overwhelming. When I was in Kansas City and St. Louis on Monday of this week, I heard that the American Red Cross is seeking to raise $400 million, which is greater than the $350 million pledged by the U.S. Government for assistance. I believe the figures, when you take in the amount provided by many different avenues through matching grant programs from employers, corporations, to their employees, the number of dollars going voluntarily will significantly exceed the initial commitment of the U.S. Government aid. I might also add that the U.S. Government spends $5 million to $6 million a day in addition to that just operating its carriers in Indonesia. As far as expressions of aid and commitment and compassion, I can tell you the marines and soldiers laboring in the oppressive heat of Aceh to put rice and clean water on helicopters to deliver to suffering people were not doing it to gain better public relations for the United States. Neither were the USAID or the charitable organization workers who had to overcome tremendous obstacles to bring relief to people in isolated areas of Aceh and northern Sumatra. They were not worrying about anything more than coming to the aid of suffering human beings. With respect to the grievances of the Free Aceh Movement, President Yudhoyono, in his previous position in the Megawati administration, had begun negotiations with leaders in the region, but these negotiations were called off by then-President Megawati. Prior to the disaster, negotiations had been started by the Yudhoyono administration, and it is my understanding these negotiations are continuing in Sweden currently. President Yudhoyono appealed to the free Aceh rebels to respect the humanitarian weapons and disavow use of arms. Minister Shihab told me they had gone further and sent the message that his government wanted not just a cease-fire but a reconciliation. President Yudhoyono even met with Western diplomats to discuss ideas for finding a solution. Aceh is a rich region that has many resources, as well as a long tradition of antipathy toward Jakarta. But with the proper spirit on both sides, I have hopes that coming out of this tragedy in Aceh can arise a negotiated settlement that will recognize and respect the culture, views, and wishes of the Acehanese and keep them in the country of Indonesia. It is also my hope that the immediate emergency relief effort that will come to a close soon will not signal the end of American interest and commitment to the region. Truly, I hope that the attention that has been brought by the very extensive media coverage of the tsunami will keep more attention in this body and the American public at large on the importance of good relations with the people in Southeast Asia. There is much more that needs to be done over the long term to meet what I view as an exciting but challenging relationship in Southeast Asia. I will be addressing in the future the extent and the importance of this challenge in Southeast Asia, how it has importance--not just for the humanitarian interests which I described today but for political, economic, strategic, and national security concerns. The tragedy of the tsunami has brought an unparalleled opportunity to invite more Americans to pay attention to an area of the world where we have vital interests. I hope when the tsunami relief efforts have passed, our friends and neighbors will keep in mind the need to strengthen our relationships in a very critical area of the world. I thank the Chair and my colleagues. I yield the floor.

Mr. BOND

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

Mr. BOND

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, in 1878 a group of pioneering women led by Mrs. Appoline A. Blair had the innovative idea to open a hospital in St. Louis where children could receive the special care they needed and deserved. In 1879, St. Louis Children's Hospital opened its doors to children and families in downtown St. Louis, Missouri in a small, rented house with 15 beds. This year, St. Louis Children's Hospital, the first children's hospital west of the Mississippi River and the seventh oldest in the country, is proud to celebrate its 125th anniversary. Today, St. Louis Children's Hospital's clinical and community outreach programs touch more than 250,000 patients annually. Patients from all 50 States and nearly 50 countries around the world have passed through the doors and been served by this remarkable institution. The pioneering spirit with which this hospital was founded has continued through its long and distinguished history. St. Louis Children's Hospital, working in conjunction with Washington University School of Medicine, has consistently been at the forefront of pediatric care. From its earliest days St. Louis Children's Hospital has been home to critical pediatric advances. For example, from 1915 through the 1920s, Dr. Vilray Blair, known as the father of plastic surgery in America, perfected several important methods for correction of cleft palate and cleft lip. At about the same time, Dr. W. McKim Marriott, the hospital's pediatrician-in-chief from 1917 to 1936, revolutionized the artificial feeding of infants developing a formula using evaporated milk corn syrup and lactic acid supplemented with vitamins and iron. In 1922, for the first time anywhere, insulin was used to successfully treat an infant with diabetes. In 1927, Dr. James Barrett Brown performed the first homograft on a child resulting in the development of modern care for burns for children. In 1929, Dr. Alexis P. Hartmann developed the first practical treatment, Lactate Ringers Solution, for infants suffering from severe diarrhea and dehydration. Dr. Hartmann served as the hospital's pediatrician-in-chief from 1936 to 1964. St. Louis Children's Hospital pioneered developments in many other health areas, including diagnosis of congenital heart diseases. After the acquisition of a heart-lung machine in 1958, the hospital became one of the most active institutions in the country in the field of pediatric open heart surgery. David Goldring, MD, who formed the hospital's cardiology division in 1950 and remained its director until 1985, was a pioneer in pediatric open heart surgery. In another ``first,'' doctors oversaw the first complete exchange of blood in a tiny infant weighing less than 3 pounds. The first pediatric dialysis unit in the Midwest was set up at St. Louis Children's Hospital in 1974. Another innovation during the 1970s was the establishment of the Cleft Palate and Craniofacial Deformities Institute, the only one of its kind in the Midwest at the time. This unit works with many other areas of the hospital to reconstruct head and facial deformities in children. Dr. Thomas Spray, a cardiothoracic surgeon, performed his first successful Norwood procedure, an advanced surgical technique used to correct the fatal congenital heart defect known as hypoplastic left heart syndrome. Doctors at St. Louis Children's Hospital also performed the region's first cochlear implant, surgically implanting a device the helps children who are deaf to speak and comprehend language. In addition, St. Louis Children's Hospital established the first free-standing pediatric lung transplant program in the United States. Today, St. Louis Children's Hospital is home to the world's most active pediatric lung transplant program. The hospital is one of the nation's leaders in total pediatric organ transplants, offering kidney, liver, heart and bone marrow transplant programs as well. St. Louis Children's Hospital is recognized among America's best children's hospitals by Child magazine and US News & World Report, and its Neonatal Intensive Care Unit is distinguished nationally by Child magazine. Mr. President, please join with me in celebrating 125 years of excellence in pediatric care. The pioneering vision and spirit of St. Louis Children's Hospital has improved the lives of children and families in Missouri and around the globe.

Mr. BOND

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I rise today to honor Mrs. Marie Pringle who is retiring this month from the Department of Veterans Affairs, VA. Mrs. Pringle's retirement is well deserved after serving more than 30 years for the Federal Government, including over 20 years in the VA's Office of Budget. Mrs. Pringle epitomizes the best of public service in terms of her dedication, commitment, hard work, and professionalism. Mrs. Pringle began her Federal service in 1972 with the Department of Army as a clerk typist. She then moved on to the Department of Energy in 1978 to work as a budget analyst. After a 2-year period in the private sector, Mrs. Pringle returned to the Federal Government working for the VA's Office of Budget. At the VA, Mrs. Pringle worked diligently in analyzing the budgetary activities of the Department whose budget has grown to some $68 billion. As chairman of the VA, HUD, and Independent Agencies Appropriations Subcommittee, my staff and I have found Mrs. Pringle to be an invaluable resource for reliable and timely data that was critical in helping me make decisions impacting the millions of veterans who depend on the VA. Further, Mrs. Pringle provided my subcommittee with technical expertise that helped us develop our appropriations bills. Mrs. Pringle's departure is a great loss to the Department and my subcommittee and she will be missed. I commend Mrs. Pringle for her outstanding public service to the American Taxpayer and the millions of our veterans. I wish Mrs. Pringle and her husband Darian all the best.

Mr. BOND

Mr. BOND. Madam President, I begin today on a happy note to say, after a lot of hard work in the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, we have brought forth an excellent product. Thanks to the leadership of Senator Gregg and Senator Kennedy, we have produced a solid, bipartisan conference report which protects the educational rights of children with special needs while at the same time making the Individuals With Disabilities Education Act more workable for parents, teachers, school administrators, and school districts. While IDEA, as the bill is known, has helped to open the doors to many children with special needs since it was enacted in 1975, there is no question about problems existing. Over the last half dozen years, I have traveled around the State of Missouri and met, in over 50 different communities, with teachers, school principals, school board members, and parents to find out what the challenges are in education. No surprise that you would come to hear that it is not just that they want more Federal money, they want sense in the Federal regulations. They told me horror stories about the regulatory hurdles they had to overcome to administer some of the Federal programs, especially IDEA. The IDEA was more focused on complex rules than on producing the results that children with disabilities and their families deserve. I have heard story after story about frustrated special education teachers just throwing up their hands and saying: I can't take it anymore. I came to serve special needs children, not a bureaucracy, and not to be involved in litigation all the time. I have hared about crushing paperwork burdens, children misidentified for special education, that the Federal Government is not paying its fair share of the cost. The conference report we adopted yesterday is a very important step to address these concerns, to strengthen and improve IDEA for both children and the educational system. We believe it will strengthen the accountability and results for children with disabilities, reduce IDEA paperwork burdens, provide greater flexibility for school districts, reduce the number of children wrongly placed in special education classes, reduce litigation, and restore trust between parents and school districts. I am particularly pleased to tell you that many of the ideas contained in this legislation were developed in Missouri. When I heard the complaints of Missouri educators, I met and talked with the Missouri School Board Association, which put together a multimonth planning conference with representatives of the teachers, of the special needs community, and others to come up with specific ideas and reforms. The Missouri School Board Association's Special Education Advocacy Council and the Missouri Council of Administrators of Special Education came forward with proposals that I took to the committee, and the committee was able to include most, if not all, of those in the final legislation. So once again, the best ideas we get here come from home. I thank all of the committed education professionals and friends of special education who worked on it. I am particularly pleased with the significant reforms which will focus special education on educating children with special needs, not simply complying with a system composed of intricate and complex regulatory and mountainous paperwork burdens. Special education teachers, as I indicated, are leaving the profession out of frustration because of the unnecessary burden, and that is causing a chronic shortage. More time on paperwork means less time spent with students or preparing lessons for students. It is as simple as that. The numerous reforms in the bill will go a long way to free our time of special educators. Again, my thanks to Senator Gregg and Senator Kennedy, and on my on staff, Kara Vlasaty and Julie Jolly for helping us come up with an excellent product.

Mr. BOND

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, the other matter I need to speak to today is a very sad note. There is a funeral going on in my hometown of Mexico, MO, today, as we speak, for a very good friend of mine, Komninos ``Gus'' Karellas. There is a celebration of his life in a community which has mourned him in the last several days. You heard on the floor from my colleague, Senator Talent, words about Gus, a tremendous American success story. He was an immigrant from Greece. He came here with nothing 40 years ago. He started out working for others. He started out in California, came to Iowa, then Columbia, MO, and then moved with his wife to Mexico, MO, in 1970, to work in a steakhouse. A year later, they bought that steakhouse. For the last 33 years, Gus Karellas's G&D Steakhouse has been the place to go for good steaks. I know it because I have been one of the frequent visitors there. I came to know Gus as the community of Mexico, MO, came to know Gus. What a warm, genuine human being Gus Karellas was. He was a leader in his community. He helped charities like Boys Town. But he also did a wonderful thing in the community because he reached out to young people with difficulties, gave them opportunities as busboys and other jobs in his restaurant. Unfortunately, the allegation in the police report was that it was one of those, or maybe several of those, who murdered him several nights ago to take the receipts from his business. We do not know what was in their troubled minds, but I can tell you that the community has lost a man of great dedication, great service. Gus was a wonderful father. One of his sons, Nick Karellas, serves as a legislative assistant in my office. Another son, Andy, serves as a legislative assistant to Senator Talent. Jim Talent and I see every day the work ethic, the commitment, the dedication that Gus instilled in his children. He is a man who has left a very large mark on his community, and he has left a legacy that all of us can admire and recognize. In the Omnibus appropriations bill that we will be passing today, there is a grant for a trail at Lakeview Park in Missouri. I suggest that the city fathers of my hometown consider naming that in honor of Gus Karellas to recognize not only his accomplishments but his contributions to the community and to his family. I can only say that our thoughts and prayers are with the Karellas family. We join with the community in saluting his life, the great role model he was, the good he did for the community, and we will miss him sorely. They will also be in our thoughts and prayers. I yield the floor.

Mr. BOND

Mr. BOND. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent to speak as in morning business for up to 5 minutes.

Mr. BOND. I thank the President.

Mr. BOND. Madam President, I commend my colleagues from Louisiana and Idaho. It was a very touching story of the Senator from Louisiana which highlights the importance of adoption month. This is a wonderful effort that my two colleagues have launched. We are pleased to support them and the President's efforts and all those wonderful people who take adopted children into their home. (The remarks of Mr. Bond pertaining to the introduction of S. 3009 are located in today's Record under ``Statements on Introduced Bills and Joint Resolutions.'')