Barbara Boxer

Mrs. BOXER

Mrs. BOXER. Madam President, I understand I have 2\1/2\ minutes, followed by Senators Inouye and Stevens, and then there will be a motion to table my amendment. I hope to convince colleagues who may be listening to this debate to vote no on the motion to table. I think this amendment deserves to be heard. It doesn't deserve to be shut down. The amendment is my modified amendment, which I sent to the desk. It basically says there can be no more waivers granted for folks who want to join the military who have been convicted of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, arson, a hate crime, sexual misconduct, threatening a terror attack, kidnapping or abducting a child, or indecent acts with a minor. If we can show you this chart, right now, it is against the military policy to allow any of the people into the military who have been convicted of a felony. But there is a waiver process. What has happened is--and we all agree that there are occasions when there ought to be a waiver now and then--we have seen an alarming increase in these waivers because the Army, in particular, is having a hard time meeting its recruitment goals. We see in 2004 that the Army granted 3 of the 60 waivers to recruits who had felonies on their record. In 2005, they granted 571. In 2006, they granted 901 waivers. That is a 59-percent increase over the 2005 number. It is a 150-percent increase over the 2004 figure. So what we have seen is an alarming increase in the number of waivers. What my amendment simply says is: Enough of this for seven felonies. Again, the seven felonies are aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, which is someone who has been convicted, perhaps, of putting a gun to someone's head and threatening them with bodily harm; arson, someone who obviously has started a fire and put other people's lives in danger; hate crimes, and we discussed that at length. As a matter of fact, we have a fine amendment that Senator Kennedy offered and that is now on the Defense authorization bill, which would say that people have a right to be free of hate crimes because of the fact that they may be different than the next person. Here you send people like this into the military, and this is one of the most diverse institutions we have. In conclusion, we are saying, please, don't table this amendment. The others are sexual misconduct, terrorist threatening, indecent acts with a minor, and kidnapping or indecent acts with a child. You don't want somebody like that next to your son or daughter who is serving honorably in the military. I hope you vote no on the motion to table. I yield the floor.

Mrs. BOXER. I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mrs. BOXER

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I support the resolution offered by Senator Kerry on the current crisis in Burma. In his April 16, 1963, letter from a jail cell in Birmingham, AL, Dr. King wrote that ``freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor, it must be demanded by the oppressed.'' The people of Burma, are demanding freedom. They are peacefully marching in the streets to demand freedom from an oppressor that is one of the world's worst human rights abusers. They are demanding freedom from a government that restricts the basic freedoms of speech and assembly, engages in human trafficking, discriminates against women and ethnic minorities, uses children as soldiers and laborers, imprisons arbitrarily, abuses prisoners and detainees, and rapes and tortures. This military junta is now engaged in an attempt to violently suppress the Burmese people who refuse to be silenced anymore. Those who have taken to the streets are doing so at great personal risk. Thousands were killed in a similar uprising in the summer of 1988. This brutal regime is responsible for the destruction of 3,000 villages and the displacement of 2 million people. The people of Burma are saying enough is enough. Dr. King also wrote from his jail cell that ``injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.'' That is why this resolution is so important and why I am so proud to be a cosponsor. It sends a strong message to those marching in the streets of Rangoon and Mandalay that the United States is witness to what is happening. It also says that the United States is working to rally the international community behind the Burmese people as they strive for justice after years of oppression. This resolution recognizes that we can all play a positive role in bringing justice and peace to Burma, and that we must work with the international community to pressure the Burmese Government to lift restrictions on humanitarian aid. It also calls on the United Nations to play a unique role in furthering dialogue toward reconciliation and concurs with the Association of Southeast Asian Nations decision to demand an end to the violence, the release of all political prisoners, and a political solution to the crisis. Finally, this resolution rightly urges that China end its military assistance to the Burmese regime, and that it no longer block the efforts of the United Nations Security Council to condemn the oppressive action of the Burmese junta. I want to end with a quote from the icon of freedom in Burma, Aung San Suu Kyi: ``We will prevail because our cause is right, because our cause is just . . . History is on our side. Time is on our side.'' We must continue to stand beside the people of Burma in that cause.

Mrs. BOXER

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I rise today to continue my support for the reauthorization of the Children's Health Insurance Program--an essential effort to ensure the health of our Nation's children. Since the inception of this program, I have agreed with the goals of this program and strongly believe that it is necessary to meet our responsibilities and fulfill our commitment to children. Although I wholeheartedly support the compromise agreement on the reauthorization of this program, it is exactly that: a compromise. For the past 10 years, the Children's Health Insurance Program has helped provide health care for millions of children from working families that do not qualify for Medicaid, but can't afford private insurance. These are the children of working families whose companies do not offer health insurance to their employees. As the cost of health insurance rises and an increasing number of employers are unable or unwilling to provide health insurance to their employees and their families, the number of families who do not have health insurance has continued to rise. While the number of the uninsured continues to rise, the percentage of low-income children without health insurance has dropped more than one-third since the creation of the Children's Health Insurance Program. Currently the Children's Health Insurance Program provides coverage for 6.6 million children nationwide. This reauthorization would provide health care coverage for an additional 3.2 million children who are uninsured today. In California, an estimated 250,000 children will be added. The Children's Health Insurance Program has always enjoyed the bipartisan support of our Congress, our Governors, and our President-- and the legislation we are voting on today reflects that spirit of cooperation. I am glad to see that we have worked with many of our Republican colleagues on an issue so critical to the health of children across this Nation. This bipartisan, bicameral agreement is largely based on the legislation passed by the Senate in July, which would fund outreach and enrollment efforts, allow States to use information from food stamp programs and other initiatives for low-income families to find and enroll eligible children, and give States the option to cover pregnant women for prenatal care vital to healthy newborn children. In desperation and defiance, opponents of the Children's Health Insurance Program have made outrageous allegations maligning the effectiveness and success of this program. Critics have claimed that this program extends to eligibility to wealthy families in America--this could not be further from the truth. In my own State of California, the average family income of children covered by this program is just 163 percent of the Federal poverty level--less than $34,000 a year for a family of four. There have been claims that Children's Health Insurance funding goes to illegal immigrants--this is completely false. The reality is that undocumented immigrants have never been eligible for Medicaid or the Children's Health Insurance Program. Actually, there are restrictions within this program which deny health insurance to low-income children who are legal immigrants. The President is spending $10 billion each month in Iraq, but has threatened to veto a bill that will provide 10 million children with access to health care. Under the President's proposal, he is willing to fund the Children's Health Insurance Program with an increase of $1 billion a year--the cost of 3 days in Iraq. If we fail to renew this program or if the President vetoes this bill as he has threatened to do, it is the children who will pay the price. As we near the September 30 deadline to reauthorize this program, I strongly urge and implore that the President reconsider his position on this bill. The need of children knows no partisan or political barriers, and should not have to overcome the obstacles created by the President. There is not a man or woman in this chamber who wouldn't do everything within their power to ensure the health of their own children--we should do no less for the children of our Nation. The Members of this Congress have overwhelmingly expressed a commitment to children's health. Earlier this year, we passed a budget resolution which set aside $50 billion for the Children's Health Insurance Program, reaffirming our commitment to the continued success of this program. We can still do more and we will, but this bill is a step forward in the right direction. I would like to thank Senators Baucus and Rockefeller, Senators Grassley and Hatch and the members of the Finance Committee who worked so tirelessly to bring this legislation forward in a bipartisan way, and keep the focus of this bill where it should be--on the children.

Mrs. BOXER

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, today, I am proud to introduce the California Desert and Mountain Heritage Act. This bipartisan legislation will protect nearly 200,000 acres of pristine and ecologically sensitive lands in Riverside County as Wilderness or Potential Wilderness, the highest level of protection and conservation for Federal public lands in American law. Over the past year, I worked with my colleague, Representative Mary Bono, who represents the areas protected in this bill. Together, we worked to reach consensus with local officials, environmentalists, businesses, sportsmen, and Indian tribes. The result is this bipartisan, bicameral bill. Riverside County contains some of California's, indeed, America's, most spectacular desert and mountain vistas and landscapes. The breathtaking lands protected in this bill also provide habitat for threatened bighorn sheep and the desert tortoise, as well as many other species such as mule deer, mountain quail, and bald eagles. Specifically, the bill protects 150,531 acres of lands as wilderness, highest level of protection and conservation for Federal public lands in American law. Another 41,100 acres of land would be designated as potential wilderness. Once the final inholding claims are settled by the National Park Service, these lands will become ``wilderness'' without the necessity of an additional act of Congress. In the meantime, these lands will be managed by the Park Service as ``wilderness.'' The bill also designates 31 miles of river as wild and scenic on four California Rivers: North Fork San Jacinto River, Fuller Mill Creek, Palm Canyon Creek, and Bautista Creek. These rivers are biologically important watersheds in this dry part of my State. Many of these lands were included in my statewide wilderness bill, the California Wild Heritage Act, which I reintroduced in February. The bill has broad, local support including from Riverside County supervisors, municipalities, chambers of commerce, environmentalists, sportsmen, and businesses. The bill includes important provisions clarifying that Federal agencies could use all the tools necessary to fight and prevent wildfires. The wilderness boundaries were drawn in consultation with local communities and tribes. I look forward to working with local interests and all of my colleagues to see this important legislation enacted.

Mrs. BOXER

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, today, I am proud to introduce the California Desert and Mountain Heritage Act. This bipartisan legislation will protect nearly 200,000 acres of pristine and ecologically sensitive lands in Riverside County as Wilderness or Potential Wilderness, the highest level of protection and conservation for Federal public lands in American law. Over the past year, I worked with my colleague, Representative Mary Bono, who represents the areas protected in this bill. Together, we worked to reach consensus with local officials, environmentalists, businesses, sportsmen, and Indian tribes. The result is this bipartisan, bicameral bill. Riverside County contains some of California's, indeed, America's, most spectacular desert and mountain vistas and landscapes. The breathtaking lands protected in this bill also provide habitat for threatened bighorn sheep and the desert tortoise, as well as many other species such as mule deer, mountain quail, and bald eagles. Specifically, the bill protects 150,531 acres of lands as wilderness, highest level of protection and conservation for Federal public lands in American law. Another 41,100 acres of land would be designated as potential wilderness. Once the final inholding claims are settled by the National Park Service, these lands will become ``wilderness'' without the necessity of an additional act of Congress. In the meantime, these lands will be managed by the Park Service as ``wilderness.'' The bill also designates 31 miles of river as wild and scenic on four California Rivers: North Fork San Jacinto River, Fuller Mill Creek, Palm Canyon Creek, and Bautista Creek. These rivers are biologically important watersheds in this dry part of my State. Many of these lands were included in my statewide wilderness bill, the California Wild Heritage Act, which I reintroduced in February. The bill has broad, local support including from Riverside County supervisors, municipalities, chambers of commerce, environmentalists, sportsmen, and businesses. The bill includes important provisions clarifying that Federal agencies could use all the tools necessary to fight and prevent wildfires. The wilderness boundaries were drawn in consultation with local communities and tribes. I look forward to working with local interests and all of my colleagues to see this important legislation enacted.

Mrs. BOXER

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, are we awaiting, hopefully, an agreement at this point? We are speaking on the bill in general? Is that where we are?

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I hope my colleagues will indulge me for about 5 or 6 minutes while I speak about the Biden-Brownback-Boxer- Specter, and many other colleagues on both sides of the aisle, amendment. I wish to say to my colleague from Delaware how much I appreciate what he has done. In the face of so much opposition, he has kept to this idea that we need to respect the Iraqis enough to understand the reality of their situation. I remember before we had the vote on whether to go to war, or give the President the authority to go to war, a friend of mine, former Congressman John Burton, called me and said: Barbara, I want you to read one book before you cast your vote, one book that I think explains what Iraq is about. That book is entitled ``The Reckoning,'' and it was written by someone named Sandra Mackey, a historian, in 2002. So I read the book before we voted on whether to give the President authority to go into Iraq. The book detailed how Saddam Hussein egregiously used his power as a brutal dictator and a strongman to hold that country together. She explains the history of Iraq and why the only way to hold it together, in her view, was by such a strongman and what a terrible reality she came to. She said that after World War I, Iraq was a young, fragile country, patched together by the victorious European powers. She wrote: Within its artificial boundaries, the Iraqis have lived for eight decades as a collection of competing families, tribes, regions, tongues, and faiths. This complex, multilayered mosaic of Arabs and nonArabs, Muslims, and Christians, is trisected by Iraq's three major population groups, each in possession of a distinct identity; each group dominates a region of Iraq--the Sunnis the center, the Shia the south, the Kurds the north. She goes on to conclude: Iraq is a state, not a nation. Over the 80 years of their common history, the Iraqis have engaged in the conflicted, and at times convoluted search for a common identity. But Iraqis as a whole have never reached consensus. What Senator Biden has understood for several years now, and why I was so interested in supporting him from the very start as a proud member of his Foreign Relations Committee, is we have to deal with the Iraq we have, not the Iraq we wish we had. If that sounds similar to someone--I understand that is a similar sentence. But we don't have an Iraq that we romantically wish we had. After all, as Senator Biden has said many times, for Iraq to survive and thrive, they have to want democracy as much as we want it for them. I think that quote by Senator Biden has been in my mind since the very start of this war that I did not vote for. So I see a light at the end of a very dark tunnel--a darkness that is impacting our Nation. It is impacting the Senate in a way where we are paralyzed. We can't get from A to B; we can't see this light. We can't grab it. We argue over military tactics such as a surge. Our military has done everything we have asked them to do. But every single military leader and political leader has told us there is only one solution, and it is a diplomatic one. In this very important amendment, what Senator Biden and the rest of us are doing is saying, there is a light at the end of the tunnel. Look at the Kurds. Look at the Kurdish area. Do my colleagues know, and thank God, we haven't lost one soldier in that area. Of the approximately 165,000 soldiers we have there, only 100 soldiers are there. The Kurds are running their own lives. They even fly the Kurdish flag. They make their own decisions. I think worth repeating is this solution we are putting before the Senate today--we hope it is today-- recognizes the Iraqis will decide this for themselves, that this idea is consistent with the Constitution, not outside their Constitution. Of course, they will be the ones who have to embrace this. But what this amendment does is it says to the world we are ready to move past a military solution. We understand we are not going to have lasting peace when all you have on the table is a gun and bullets. We have to put a diplomatic solution on the table. So I am very delighted to have this time now. I don't know if I will have any time later to speak, but I have said what I need to say. I think this is a golden moment for us. I think we could move this debate in a better direction, in a direction all of us want to move it, whether we are Republicans or Democrats, whether we voted for the war or not. We want to craft some type of political solution. We want a roadmap. The Senator from Delaware has given it to us. I am proud to be a part of this bipartisan group that has cosponsored this. I yield the floor.

Mrs. BOXER

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, will Senator Landrieu be amenable to taking 10 minutes at this time, and I will reserve time later for her in the debate?

Mrs. BOXER. I yield 10 minutes of my time to Senator Landrieu. I wish to say before she begins, she has been a mover behind this bill. She has worked her heart out to get this bill to the floor and, as a result of her working, of course, along with her colleague, Senator Vitter, who is on the committee, our committee came to Louisiana and held a very unique hearing. We had many colleagues--I see Senator Cardin is on the floor. He was there. We had a very good turnout, and Senator Landrieu was eloquent. She has been eloquent on the floor of the Senate in the past I look forward to hearing her remarks.

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I have a little UC to take care of the people on the floor right now. I ask unanimous consent that Senator Collins be allowed to speak for up to 5 minutes; Senator Nelson for up to 10 minutes, and Senator Baucus for up to 10 minutes.

Mrs. BOXER. Yes. And, for now, this will be it, but I will do a second UC to include Senator Landrieu for another 10 at a later time.

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, before my friend begins, I wanted to get the parliamentary situation, if he will yield for a minute?

Mrs. BOXER. It is my understanding that Senator Feingold has up to 30 minutes to speak on the bill. He and I discussed it. If he has any added time, he has graciously agreed to yield it to me with the understanding that if he wants additional time, I will get it back to him later. But I think, if it is necessary for me to make such a request, I ask unanimous consent that whatever time the Senator yields back be yielded back to me with the understanding he will be able to speak again if he so chooses.

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, is it a fact that I have 34 minutes remaining on my manager's time?

Mrs. BOXER. Senator Feingold graciously said he would yield me the remainder of his time with the understanding that if he needed more, I would give him some of it. So what is his amount that is remaining?

Mrs. BOXER. I ask unanimous consent that that be done.

Mrs. BOXER. Well, the Senator from Maryland has been on the floor all day.

Mrs. BOXER. How much time would my colleague wish?

Mrs. BOXER. Then why don't we give you 5 minutes first and then 10 minutes for Senator Cardin.

Mrs. BOXER. He is very pleased with that. How many more minutes do I have on my 10 minutes?

Mrs. BOXER. So, again, we have complied with the new ethics rules. I want to say also, in terms of the Corps reform matters, there is an environmental organization, American Rivers, and they have written a very important release that I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record.

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.

Mrs. BOXER

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources be authorized to hold a hearing during the session of the Senate on Monday, September 24, 2007, at 3 p.m. in room SD-366 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building. The purpose of the hearing is to consider scientific assessments of the impacts of global climate change on wildfire activity in the United States.

Mrs. BOXER

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, could the Chair tell me what the order is this morning.