Barbara Boxer

Mrs. BOXER

Mrs. BOXER. I don't have a problem.

Mrs. BOXER

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I take this opportunity to recognize and celebrate the important milestone of the 15th anniversary of Armenian independence. Armenia has a rich history which spans more than 3000 years. Considered one of the cradles of civilization, Armenia was the first country in the world to officially adopt Christianity as its religion. The Armenian alphabet and language have helped ensure the continuation of a vibrant Armenian culture, despite great odds and numerous attempts to destroy the Armenian nation and the Armenian people. I was honored to witness the resiliency, courage, and spirit of the Armenian people when I visited Armenia as a Member of Congress in 1991, in the aftermath of the devastating earthquake. During that trip, my commitment to recognizing the Armenian genocide was further strengthened. In 1915, the Ottoman Turks attempted to annihilate the Armenian people in a brutal genocide. To this day, the Turkish Government refuses to acknowledge the atrocities for what they were--a systematic genocide. Not only were the Armenian people able to survive the genocide, but they kept their small nation alive. It was a great victory when the first Republic of Armenia was formed in 1918 following the Armenian genocide. But again, Armenia faced dissolution when it was taken over by the Soviet Union in 1920; the short-lived independence of Armenia ended when it became a Soviet Republic in the USSR. Again, the Armenian people persevered despite their loss of independence and despite more devastation. In 1988, disaster hit when an earthquake rocked Armenia, killing approximately 50,000 people and leaving more than half a million people homeless. Then, on September 23, 1991, Armenia declared its independence from the Soviet Union and formed the second Republic of Armenia. This was a rebirth of the independent state of Armenia and an historic moment for an oppressed country. It was a cause for celebration for Armenians around the world. I am proud that the United States helped the newly independent Armenian nation during its transition to democracy. In December, 1991, the United States formally recognized the independence of Armenia, and the two countries established diplomatic relations with embassies in each country in January 1992. But more remains to be done. This 15th anniversary offers an opportunity to celebrate the United States' relationship with Armenia and to renew our commitment to this country and our calls for Armenian genocide recognition. Following September 11, 2001, Armenia was one of the first countries to respond with assistance to the United States. Armenia provided embassy protection and clearance for U.S. flight, shared intelligence, and froze bank accounts. The U.S. friendship with Armenia remains critical in our fight against terrorism. The United States must never forget Armenia's help and must do all it can to help this independent, democratic nation prosper. On this milestone 15th anniversary, I am honored to recognize Armenian independence. I pledge to do all I can to assist Armenia and my Armenian-American constituents in California.

Mrs. BOXER

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, today I wish to recognize and congratulate the Sierra Oaks Senior and Community Center for 20 years of dedicated service to the seniors in the communities of Tollhouse, Auberry, Shaver Lake, and Prather. Since opening their doors in 1986, this regional asset has made significant contributions to improving the lives of northeastern Fresno County's senior community and their families. For the past two decades, the Sierra Oaks Senior and Community Center has provided a myriad of important social services and activities to help seniors live more independent and active lives. Whether it is providing free health assessments, offering classes in quilting, painting, and computers, or holding a stroke survivors support group, the center upholds the principle that seniors should be afforded the opportunity to live independently and thrive in their own communities. The dedicated staff and outstanding group of senior volunteers work diligently to ensure that those who are in need of their support are treated with the care and respect that they deserve. Through the center, many seniors have acquired invaluable tools to help them lead more active and enjoyable lives. I congratulate the Sierra Oaks Senior and Community Center on its 20th anniversary and wish its staff, volunteers, and sponsors even greater success as they continue to provide important services to the seniors of Tollhouse, Auberry, Shaver Lake, and Prather. You have not only been a pillar of support for your clients, but you have performed a great service for the communities that you serve.

Mrs. BOXER

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, today I recognize the University of Redlands. This academic year, the university celebrates its 100 anniversary. The University of Redlands was originally chartered in 1907 on a tract of donated land by individuals associated with the American Baptist Church. It admitted its first student in September 1909 and in 1910 proudly celebrated its first graduating class of three students. Throughout the next century, the University of Redlands has become a preeminent institution and today celebrates a century of contribution and service through education. With today's growth in population, there is an ever-present strain on our Nation's university systems and the ability of students to receive meaningful direct contact with university faculty. The University of Redlands has successfully maintained personal instruction throughout the years and continues today to maintain a student to faculty ratio of 12 to 1. There are currently over 200 full-time faculty and a core of 200 adjunct faculty who are selected for their expertise and experience in their fields. Throughout these past 100 years, the university has also maintained a high level of faculty quality, with 88 percent of the full-time faculty holding a Ph.D. or terminal degree. The University of Redlands has successfully met the ever-changing needs of a diverse population. Over one-third of the university's students are members of historically underrepresented groups, and the student body represents all corners of the world and draws students from across the United States. Most recently, the entering class of 2006 saw 40 percent of its students from outside of the State of California. The university's success contributes significantly to the growth of the local community. Its faculty and staff make the University of Redlands one of the largest employers in the region, helping to maintain a strong local economy. In the past decade, the university has invested over $140 million in its physical plant, employing many local craftsmen and laborers. In addition to investing in the local economy and construction, the university invests significantly in its students, with over $28 million of university funds budgeted for need- based, merit-based or talent-based awards. This contribution has produced an alumni which has made a lasting impact on America, with 45,000 alumni currently contributing to the betterment of society throughout the world. The University of Redlands' commitment to community outreach is seen most noticeably in its students' service and contributions. Over 80,000 community service hours are provided annually by University of Redlands' students to help meet local, national and international needs. Meeting these needs has been a fundamental tenet in the university's educational philosophy for many years, as it was one of the first educational institutions in the Nation to require community service as a condition for graduation. On its centennial, the University of Redlands looks back on a proud history of growth and contribution in inland California and the world. I applaud the service and dedication of the faculty, staff, and students of the University of Redlands as they celebrate 100 years of improving lives and education.

Mrs. BOXER

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, today I honor the memory of a dedicated public servant, battalion chief Rob Stone of the California Department of Forestry. From the time he became a seasonal firefighter at the age of 18, Chief Stone devoted his adult life to providing the citizens of California with safety and service. On September 6, 2006, while assessing a fire from the air and coordinating ground firefighting efforts, Chief Stone was tragically killed in the line of duty when the spotter plane crashed in the rugged forest of the Mountain Home State Park. Upon graduation from high school, Chief Stone attended the California Department of Forestry Firefighting Academy to pursue his lifelong goal of becoming a firefighter. His prodigious talents were evident as Chief Stone moved in rank from firefighter to become one of the youngest engineers ever in the California Department of Forestry. He was then promoted to captain, and his most recent assignment was battalion chief of the Porterville Air Attack Base. Chief Stone's commitment to excellence, coupled with his passion for his profession, enabled him to become a model member of the California Department of Forestry. Chief Stone's colleagues shall always remember him for his leadership and commitment to his job. Chief Stone is survived by his wife Randi, son Wil, and daughter Libbie; parents Cliff and Janet; sister Melissa Martin; brother Marty; and his grandmother Louise Lyons. When he was not on duty or spending time with his family, Chief Stone was an avid outdoorsman who enjoyed gathering cows, hunting, fishing, and camping. Chief Stone served the State of California with honor and distinction and fulfilled his oath as a firefighter. His contributions and dedication to firefighting are greatly appreciated and will serve as a shining example of his legacy. We shall always be grateful for Chief Stone's exemplary service and the sacrifices he made while serving and protecting the people and the land that he loved.

Mrs. BOXER

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, today I wish to recognize inland southern California attorney Brian Unitt as he receives the San Bernardino County Bar Association's Florentino Garza Fortitude Award. Mr. Unitt is a community leader and an example to us all. The Florentino Garza Award is given to exceptional individuals who overcome significant obstacles and achieve success in the legal field. This prestigious award takes its name from inland attorney Florentino Garza, who overcame a childhood as an orphan and a life as a migrant farmworker to graduate from college and law school and eventually gain prominence in the legal profession. Today I recognize the exceptional work of Brian Unitt, who has overcome blindness to achieve outstanding success in the legal field. Brian Unitt was diagnosed with retinitis pigmentosa at a young age. This debilitating condition begins with a degeneration of cells in the eye's retina, producing reduced vision and eventual loss of sight. Brian Unitt received his law degree from the University of California, Davis, in 1983. Throughout his undergraduate years and in law school, he took class notes in Braille using a slate and stylus, and he typed examinations using an electric typewriter. He passed the California State bar examination on his first attempt and began practicing law shortly thereafter in Riverside, CA. In 1996, Brian Unitt became partner at that same firm, now known as Holstein, Taylor, Unitt and Law. As an attorney, Mr. Unitt practices personal injury law, focusing particularly on appellate work. His experience and dedication over the years has allowed him to be a tremendous advocate for injured individuals, assisting others who have suffered a physical loss. Other attorneys who have had the opportunity to know or work with Brian Unitt have described him as ``brilliant in his legal work,'' ``a true scholar of the law,'' ``a superb lawyer,'' ``a wonderful, wonderful, brilliant plaintiff's attorney,'' and ``civil, professional, and ethical.'' Today I salute the life and service of Brian Unitt. His life story is a true portrayal of a man who overcame tremendous physical adversity to assist others in their battle with physical adversity. I applaud Brian Unitt and look forward to what I hope will be many years of service to the people of inland California. Please join me in honoring a true hero.

Mrs. BOXER

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I am very disappointed. We have looked through this bill and we have seen an amendment that we believe gives Senators the opening to offer this. It was coming from the other side. It was the Burns amendment that dealt with an issue close to this. I will not argue that. What I say to my colleagues today is this: We are very fortunate we have a homeland defense bill before the Senate. We are very fortunate Senators Collins and Murray work in a bipartisan way on a homeland security bill that deals with port security. We are further blessed that Senators have the guts to step up and offer amendments dealing with rail security and transit security. They were agreed to, thereby broadening the scope of this bill. However, it is amazing to me that after we have observed and marked the fifth anniversary of September 11 we would turn away from a simple amendment that I am offering, which costs as much money as it takes for the war in Iraq in 5 hours--5 hours of the war in Iraq. We could take that amount of funding and make sure that on every passenger plane in this country that carries cargo there would be at least one blast- resistant cargo container. Everyone lauded the 9/11 Commission. Let's see what they said about this. The TSA should require that every passenger aircraft carrying cargo must deploy at least one hardened container to carry any suspect cargo. That is the 9/11 Commission Report. That is dated July 22, 2004. The other side is objecting on some thin parliamentary threat and hiding behind it. It is outrageous. I cannot wait to tell the people of this country that for 5 hours of the cost of the war in Iraq, every airplane that has cargo would have at least one blast-resistant container so that if there is a bomb on that plane it will be contained. because only the suspect cargo would go into that particular container. I do not understand what we are doing here. We have a good bill. We can make this bill better. The first thing I heard from my colleagues on the other side of the aisle is, oh, they did not want the airlines to have to pay the $15,000 per container--$15,000. It is a $150 million aircraft, but they did not want the airlines to pay $15,000. Fine. I said we will make sure the Transportation Security Agency gets those containers to the airlines. That is fine. That is fair. The Homeland Security Department now has a test program. We know these things work. So let all of America hear it today. For all the talk about the 9/11 Commission Report and how great it was and how fair it was and how bipartisan it was, how good it was, how clear it was, this very simple recommendation that every passenger aircraft carrying cargo must deploy at least one hardened container to carry any suspect cargo, this Republican Senate would not allow a vote. You are going to hear all kinds of words about why it is not germane, and we are doing something else somewhere else. Do you know what? This is simple. This would do the trick. This is not costly. It would not even rate an asterisk in the Federal Government. So I am very sad to see that we cannot vote on this amendment. But I will be back another day with it. You can be sure of that. I thank you very much, Mr. President. I yield the floor.

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I call up amendment No. 4995 and I ask for its immediate consideration.

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, if I may respond, this is not my idea, I say to my good friend from Alaska, with whom I have had many good debates. This is a recommendation of the 9/11 Commission. We all know there are sniffing dogs going through the airports. I voted to make sure that happened. But we also know we are talking about a layered defense. I want to know what the Senator from Alaska would say if this cargo blew up on a plane. I do not think he would be down here saying: Well, I supported making sure we had canine teams. I will tell you right now, either we are going to do homeland defense or we are not. The Senator is right, this is a port security bill. But we have broadened it. I know he was not thrilled about that, and neither was the other manager. They wanted to keep it to port security. Why? Why not keep our people safe, not only when you are dealing with port security but with air security and rail security and transit security? So this idea I have laid out here is not my idea. It is directly from the 9/11 Commission Report. And let the Record show that all kinds of talk about, oh, how safe we are because we have the canine teams, that is just part of a layered defense. The 9/11 Commission knows this, understands this. It would have been very simple to have a vote on this amendment and add this very simple, inexpensive addition to this bill. But I guess it goes back to what Mr. Chertoff said the other day. I guess it just is not a priority. He said: Oh, we are going to go bankrupt protecting the people. I am basically paraphrasing what he said. Bin Laden wants us to go broke, he said. No. Bin Laden wants to kill us. Yes, he wants to kill us. So why are we walking away from a 9/11 Commission recommendation that costs as much as 5 hours of the war in Iraq? The Record will show what happened here today. Mr. President, I thank you and yield the floor.

Mrs. BOXER

Mrs. BOXER. Will the Senator yield?

Mrs. BOXER. I thank Senator Brownback for raising this issue. We are in a do-or-die moment. We have been there before. I am reading that certain experts are saying in 2 weeks there could be another Rwanda. I am very glad the Senator is speaking out. I was very glad this Senate did act, as we know, on a measure last week, actually voting to send $20 million to the African nations to carry on, as my friend points out. If they do not do it, there is a void. What will fill the void will be disease, rapes, killings and, I hate to say it, continued genocide. I am glad the Senator raised this. The hours are running short. We did vote. It is important we use our bully pulpit in whatever way we can. I personally will be going to the United Nations on Monday literally to knock on doors. I am setting up some appointments. We have to do everything we can to prevent this worsening situation from getting to the point where it is unsalvageable. I thank the Senator for his efforts.

Mrs. BOXER

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I rise today with a heavy heart, to pay tribute to a remarkable woman and patriot, Ann Richards. There are so many words that I could use to describe Ann. She was vibrant, fiery, quick-witted, fearless, but for me the word that I think captures her best is genuine. With Ann, what you saw was what you got. She had an authenticity that is rare in life, and even rarer in politics. Even with all of her charisma and charm bubbling over, Ann would be the first to tell you that her life was not perfect and that she had made many mistakes over the years. But it was her embrace of those imperfections, and the wisdom to see that she could learn from her mistakes, that made her such a successful leader. People could relate to her. When she won the Governor's office in 1990, Ann decided she really wanted to shake things up in Texas. So she made it her mission to appoint more minorities to State boards and commissions than any Governor before her. According to the Houston Chronicle, about 44 percent of her appointees were female; 20 percent Hispanic; and 14 percent Black. That is in comparison to her two predecessors, who had given more than 77 percent of their appointments to White men. So not only did Ann blaze a trail by being the first woman elected Governor of Texas in her own right, but she opened the doors of the State house to those who otherwise would have been in the back of the line. Why? Because she understood that you can't just talk the talk, you've got to walk the walk. She knew that change was a good thing, even if it made people squirm in their boots. There are a lot of people talking today about what a tremendous loss this is for Texas. I heard our President, George W. Bush say that, ``Ann loved Texas. And Texans loved her.'' But I have to take that one step further and say, Ann loved America, and Americans loved Ann. She barreled her way into our hearts, and for that we have been made all the richer. I would like to offer my sincere condolences to Ann's children: Cecile, Daniel, Clark and Ellen, her eight grandchildren, and all those who knew and loved her. She will be sorely missed, but I am sure, always remembered.

Mrs. BOXER

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Washington for her good work. I thank Senator Collins for her work on port security. I am proud to say that in the Commerce Committee, in a bipartisan way, we have worked over and over again to make this country safer. I was part of that under the leadership of Senator McCain at the time, and first Senator Hollings and now Senator Stevens. I want to show you a little bit of history about what has happened in the Republican Congress every time we have voted out one of these good bills because you can say what you want about partisan politics, but the fact is, almost every single time we reported one of these bills out of our committee, it simply died and went nowhere. I want to talk about that history because, of course, Senator Collins is right that protecting Americans is our job. It has nothing to do with being a Democrat or a Republican. Here is what happened. In the 107th Congress, we passed the Ship, Seafarer, and Container Security Act; no action by the full Senate. In the 108th Congress, we passed the Maritime Transportation Security Act of 2004. It passed the Senate on September 21, 2004, and was not even considered in the House of Representatives. In the 109th Congress, we passed the Transportation Security Improvement Act of 2005. Commerce passed it on November 17, 2005; no action by the full Senate. There you have it. Do you wonder why the 9/11 Commission has given this Congress and this administration failing grades? You can talk about bipartisanship. We reported these bills out of the committee on a bipartisan basis, but the leadership never bothered. So when I heard that the last days of this session were going to be about homeland defense, I said thank God for that, thank goodness for that. Whether it is an election driving it or anything else, I could not care less. Let's get it done. This Congress and this administration have received failing grades from the 9/11 Commission. I ask unanimous consent to have this document printed in the Record, which is a final report on 9/11 Commission recommendations.

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, here are some of the things on which we received bad grades: We are not providing adequate radio spectrum for first responders. We are not establishing a unified incident command system. We are not allocating homeland security funds based on risk. We are not protecting the critical infrastructure. We don't have a private sector that is prepared. We don't have a national strategy for transportation security. We are not prescreening passengers like we should be. We don't have screening checkpoints detecting explosives. We are still not screening the cargo that goes into passenger planes, even though they are taking away our lip gloss. I don't care about giving up my lip gloss, believe me. I would give up my lip gloss and everything else, but how about protecting the cargo that goes underneath that passenger plane? How about making sure it is safe, making sure it won't explode? I have an amendment that I will offer to this bill--unless the majority shuts me down--to say that until we are screening all of the cargo, let's make sure there is a blast-resistant container on these aircrafts. That is a recommendation of the 9/11 Commission that has not been followed. So when you have a suspect piece of cargo and you are not sure about it, put it into the blast-resistant cargo container. We pushed this in the Commerce Committee. TSA tested it and we know it works. But it is not happening. I could go on, page after page of this document, where this Congress and this administration have failed. I say they have been soft on homeland defense. Why? I say two reasons: They cannot afford it because they are spending our money in Iraq instead of protecting us from the terrorists at home, instead of going after Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan. The President says over and over again that it is one and the same. Do you know what? The bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee was right out there and said Saddam Hussein--the tyrant though he is, and he deserves whatever fate awaits him--had not one thing to do with al-Qaida. As a matter of fact, he was threatened by them because he had a secular government. He was fearful of them, and rumors were that he wanted some of them assassinated. The war in Iraq has strengthened Iran. It is a recruiting tool for Osama bin Laden. It is busting the budget. It is causing the debt to explode, not to mention the deaths of close to 3,000 of our service men and women, and 20,000 have been severely injured. The money going there is about $10 billion a month. We could protect every single American aircraft today from the threat of shoulder-fired missiles with the cost of Iraq in 1 month. Then there is the other priority of this administration--tax breaks for billionaires. That is costing trillions. Look at every other President in the history of our country; they didn't do that in a time of war. So you have the war in Iraq, and the only strategy we have from this President is that we are going to be there ``as long as I am the President.'' Well, that is not a strategy; that is a recipe for more death, more destruction. That is clear. There are many ways that we could begin reducing the cost over there--the cost to our troops. We can say to the Iraqi people that our people have fought and died for you; now take the reins of your own government and protect yourselves. If you cannot figure out how to protect neighbor from neighbor, you have a problem. Nobody did it for us. Everybody always says compare what happened in Iraq to the American Revolution. I don't get the comparison, but if we go with that for a minute, it is true that other countries helped us in that battle-- France, for example--but at the end of the day, we had to take over the security on the ground and make our new country a success. So we cannot force democracy and force people to love each other at the point of a gun. It is their business. We have spent our treasure and are spending our treasure to the point where we cannot afford a comprehensive bill. You heard Senator Collins say, ``I hope you will vote against this broad bill.'' Why? We have been condemned by the 9/11 Commission for not doing enough in a broad way. This bill just does port security. Thank goodness we have amendments to add rail and transit. It is moving toward the Reid bill. Let this go on because the more we debate and the more we offer amendments, the more this bill looks like the Democratic alternative. It has taken a big step in that direction. We know what happened in Madrid. We saw what happened in London. We know our infrastructure is at risk. But 5 years after 9/11, we get failing grades. It is a sad moment. I thank my colleague, Senator Collins, and I thank my colleague, Senator Murray, two fantastic women who fought hard to get a port security bill to the floor. But let's welcome this as an opportunity to protect our people, not just focus narrowly on one problem. I hate to say it, we have an array of problems. We have 41 problems and 41 recommendations of the 9/11 Commission, the bipartisan Commission we have not listened to, and that is what the Reid bill does. It is very important. I thank my colleagues for going as far as they have gone, but I hope we will go even further and change this truth that this Congress has been soft on homeland defense. We can change that, and I welcome the fact that we will be debating security from now until we get out of here because if ever there were a place we have neglected, it is homeland security. I am very happy to be part of this debate. I look forward to supporting the Reid amendment and all the other amendments that will make our country safer. We can scare people. We can make speeches and frighten them. That is not our job. Our job is to protect them, not to scare them. We haven't done that, and we have an opportunity to do that between now and the time we get out of here and go home. I yield the floor.

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I rise to speak in strong favor of the amendment offered by the Senator from New York. I have listened carefully to the reasons the other side is objecting. At this stage, it sounds as if they are objecting. I hope they will accept this amendment.

Mrs. BOXER. Yes.

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I am glad that I said what I did because maybe we have a chance to see this amendment get a favorable response in the Senate. It is true that this is broader than a port security bill, but so was Senator McCain's amendment and Senator Shelby's amendment. We are broadening this bill because I believe this is our last opportunity to address the issue of homeland defense. This is a great opportunity to look back at what we have done right and what we have done wrong. And one of the things that was wrong was when Christie Todd Whitman, then head of the Environmental Protection Agency, came before my committee, the Environment Committee, and said the air was safe. She said the air was safe. People were down there at that site. The Senators from New York, Senator Clinton and Senator Schumer, know best how people are suffering, but I can tell you, in California, when we had fierce fires and we had horrible problems that befell our first responders, I wrote a bill. At that time, we could not get a bill through that said that these first responders, these bravest of the brave, deserve to have health care. Many of them were working part time and didn't have health benefits. Many of them lost their jobs and lost their health benefits. That is what is happening to those who worked at the World Trade Center site. Senator Collins makes some good points about jurisdiction, but I don't think the families who are seeing their loved ones wheeze and cough--and one I just read about died literally holding the hand of his 4-year-old--care that this bill before us is about the Department of Homeland Security but the amendment deals with the first responders through another agency. That is why politicians get such bad names sometimes, because we come up with the craziest reasons for saying we can't support something. I am encouraged that Senator Collins said not necessarily, that she may, in fact, support this bill. Words are cheap. We can say anything we want; it is free. But if you mean what you say, that the first responders are heroes, if you mean what you say when you say they should be lauded, remembered, their families protected, and all the rest, then do something about it. I am so pleased that the Senator from New York has given this Senate a chance to say thank you and to say we are sorry because some of the people were told the air was fine when it wasn't. I hope we will stand up and be counted. As I said earlier today, I am so glad we have the subject of homeland defense before this Senate. It comes in the form of a port security bill that Senators Collins and Murray worked on and on which many members of the Commerce Committee and other committees have also worked. This is a good bill, but we can't leave here thinking that because we did a port security bill, we have addressed the issue of homeland security and all the ramifications that followed from 9/11. We are making this bill better. We are making it more like the Reid amendment. We are going after rail security. We are going after transit security. And now with the Clinton amendment, we have a chance to help those who deserve to be helped--the heroes of 9/11. We were just reminded--we saw the scenes, we saw their selflessness, and this is a chance for everyone who spoke about them to cast a ``yea'' vote for them. That is an opportunity we should not miss today. Again, my thanks go to the Senator from New York and my colleagues for allowing debate on this very important amendment. I yield the floor, and I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mrs. BOXER

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

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the pending amendment be laid aside.

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I call up amendment No. 4913 and ask unanimous consent to send a modification of the amendment to the desk.

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

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, my amendment simply requires the Secretary of Defense to submit a report on the procedures and guidelines necessary to protect U.S. military and civilian personnel in the event of a further increase in sectarian violence in Iraq. Right off the top, I thank Senator Stevens and his staff and Senator Inouye and his staff. They really helped me in getting this amendment accepted. It means a lot to me because I worry deeply about this situation. The reason I worry is, as we look at this war, we just have not seen plans. We have not seen that we have been ready for the contingencies we face. We never seem to plan for the worst-case scenario. Frankly, I think we need to do that in this case because we have not been right in predicting what would happen. We have seen, over time, that we have not had enough body armor, we have not had enough up-armored HMMWVs or countermeasures against roadside bombs. Frankly, the American people are losing confidence that we are prepared to protect our troops in the case of a full-scale sectarian conflict. There was a quote in the paper recently from the commander of day-to- day operations in Iraq. This is the quote: Quite frankly, in 33 years in the United States Army, I never trained to stop a sectarian fight. Let me repeat that. This is from the commander on the ground in Iraq: Quite frankly, in 33 years in the United States Army, I never trained to stop a sectarian fight. Now, for 6 months I have been asking Secretary Rumsfeld for a plan for our troops in the event there is a full-blown civil war in Iraq. And I have not received any kind of answer on it. After I sent my first letter to the Secretary asking for such a plan, I got a letter back from Under Secretary of Defense Eric Edelman. And he said: Recent acts of violence intended to spark civil war have failed. That is the answer to my letter. When I asked: What is your plan in case civil war breaks out, he said: Well, there isn't a civil war. Obviously, that is not good enough. My second letter to Secretary Rumsfeld was answered by Deputy Secretary Gordon England. He told me: Iraq's enemies are intent on provoking widespread intercommunal conflict but they are not succeeding. So, again, a lot of reassurances but no plan. So, once again, I did not receive any type of answer that gave me any solace that there is some planning to protect our troops and our civilian personnel if things get worse over there. Now, we know the number of monthly incidents of sectarian violence increased from 5 per month in 2003 to 250 per month in 2006. Let me say that again. Monthly incidents of sectarian violence increased from 5 per month in 2003 to 250 per month in 2006. Well, why do we need a plan now? I think the facts speak for themselves. The Pentagon's latest report that we received on conditions in Iraq, which was dated August 2006, said: Concern about civil war within the Iraqi civilian population and among some defense analysts has increased in recent months. And this is what they said: Conditions that could lead to civil war exist in Iraq. So if the Pentagon is telling us conditions that could lead to civil war exist in Iraq, the least we can expect from our Pentagon leadership is for them to provide some kind of contingency plan to protect our troops and civilian workers we have over there. July saw the highest level of weekly attacks since military operations in Iraq began. Since last spring, the number of daily casualties, both military and civilian, reached nearly 120 per day, up from approximately 80 per day. According to the United Nations--and I believe this is also quoted in this report, so this is the Pentagon quoting the United Nations--an estimated 22,977 families--or 137,862 individuals--have been displaced in Iraq due to sectarian strife since the February 22, 2006, Samarra Mosque bombing. So for those people who put their head in the sand and say, this sectarian strife, it is going to go away, the people really do not want it, the facts belie that. I would say to my colleagues, think of one of your towns. And 137,862 would be one of your very large towns. If everyone in that town left that town, that is how many people have been displaced in Iraq due to sectarian strife. General Peter Pace, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, acknowledged to one of our committees there is a possibility of the situation in Iraq evolving into civil war. And he did not anticipate such a situation a year ago. So when I heard about that, I sent a third letter--a third letter--to Secretary Rumsfeld asking: What is the plan in case of civil war? That letter remains unanswered. Now, there is no reason the Secretary of Defense cannot provide the relevant committees in the House and the Senate a plan in case of civil war. My amendment will allow for this plan to be submitted in a classified form. I think that is very important because we certainly do not want that published. But we want to know that it exists and that there is a plan to protect our troops and civilians. Congress has the responsibility to provide oversight of the executive branch. Congress failed to ensure that the administration had a plan to win the peace in Iraq. We all know that. I saw Senator Biden just briefly on the Senate floor, and he was one of those voices, along with Senator Lugar-- bipartisan--way early asking: Where is the plan? Where is the plan? Where is the plan? We never had it. Now the President says: We will be in Iraq. As long as I am President, we will stay in Iraq. That is not a plan. That is an admission of no plan, no exit strategy. So at least let us have a plan, a contingency plan, that if the sectarian violence escalates, we know that our people will be protected. I again thank Senator Inouye, Senator Stevens, and their staffs because I have to say without their help--this was a bit contentious, but we worked on it until we got it so that it could be accepted on both sides. I am very grateful. At this time, I yield the floor and ask, at the appropriate time, we have a voice vote on this amendment. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mrs. BOXER

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I rise today to recognize San Bernardino Valley College. This academic year, the campus celebrates its 80th anniversary. San Bernardino Valley College was founded in 1926, when 140 students met at San Bernardino or Colton High Schools for classes. Later that year, construction began in the city of San Bernardino on a campus that would come to educate 700,000 students and play a central role in the growth of Inland southern California. San Bernardino Valley College has educated generations of the region's future leaders and workforce. Over the years, San Bernardino Valley College has anticipated and planned for the changes that took place in California and our Nation. During World War II, the campus played an instrumental role in assisting with the war effort. In the years following the war, a number of celebrities visited the campus, and in 1947 the campus hosted the Bob Hope show that featured Desi Arnaz, his orchestra, and others. In 1950, the campus played a central role in the race for U.S. Senate, hosting senatorial candidates Richard Nixon and Helen Gahagan Douglas. San Bernardino Valley College also has worked to meet the ever- changing needs of a diverse population. The civil rights era brought forth increased cultural awareness, and the campus responded by hosting diversity programs. Today the campus has an enrollment of over 12,000 students, three quarters of which are non-White students. The campus is recognized as a Hispanic Serving Institution by the Hispanic Association of Colleges and Universities, HACU, and continues to receive title V funding for its pursuit of ethnic diversity. In the past 80 years, technology has also impacted education. Faculty and staff have worked to help San Bernardino Valley College grow and adapt to this ever-growing need. College classes and degree programs are now offered not only on campus but at alternative community sites and on television and the Internet. The campus has also responded to today's need for quality science education and important student services. San Bernardino Valley College has produced influential leaders in California and abroad, with prestigious alumni emerging each year. Dr. Charles Young attended Valley College before and after serving in the Korean war and went on to become the youngest chancellor of a University of California campus at age 36, taking charge of UCLA from 1968 until 1997, completing the longest tenure of any University of California chancellor. Judith Valles, former mayor of the city of San Bernardino, attended Valley College and served as both faculty and staff on campus. Graduating in 1966, Dr. Yolanda Moses went on to serve as the president of the City College of New York and was named the 74th president of the American Anthropological Association. And graduating as a business administration major in 1959, Jack Brown went on to become the president and CEO of Stater Bros. Markets, one of the Nation's largest supermarket chains. Today San Bernardino Valley College can look back on a proud history of growth and change in the San Bernardino Valley and California. I applaud the service and dedication of the faculty, staff, and students of San Bernardino Valley College as they celebrate 80 years of improving lives and education to the people of the Inland Empire and southern California.

Mrs. BOXER

Mrs. BOXER. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. Amendment No. 4895

Mrs. BOXER

Mrs. BOXER. We have no objection on our side.