Conrad Burns

Mr. BURNS

Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, today I am introducing legislation to address the difference between the import tariff placed on unfinished cork and refined cork. Unfinished cork has a higher import tariff than already-refined cork--this problem is in need of a resolution. Unfinished cork is the principal element of a fishing pole's grip and must be imported as it is not available domestically. Many fishing rod companies reside in Montana, such as the R.L. Winston Rod Company of Twin Bridges. I am aware that fishing rod manufacturers, particularly fly-fishing rod manufacturers, are under pressure to increase the price of their equipment because of prohibitively high tariff on the import of unfinished cork. While the tariff on already-finished cork is 6 percent, unfinished cork is subject to a 14 percent tariff. It just does not make good sense to charge a significantly higher levy on an unfinished product that is imported and then handcrafted by American workers. This inconsistency must end by leveling the difference between the two tariffs. The reduction will enable American workers to continue manufacturing custom-made fishing rod grips, keep the price of all fishing poles down, and bring a measure of common sense to this portion of our tariff law. Once resolved, domestic businesses will be able to finish fly rods here, leading to an increasingly competitive place in the market for American goods. With this change Montana's small businesses will benefit as will our overall economy in the state. I am pleased that some of my colleagues in the House have decided to assist in this effort. I truly appreciate the work of Representative Simmons of Connecticut, who is leading this legislation in the House. He has already signed on 17 co-sponsors to this legislation at last count. His assistance has been invaluable, and I look forward to working with him as this legislation moves forward. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, as the Senate begins the important task of debating the highway bill reauthorization, another critical infrastructure issue comes to mind: railroads. In Montana, we rely heavily on both passenger and freight rail for our transportation needs. However, Montana is served by only one major railroad, resulting in shippers being captive to little or no competition for price or service quality. That lack of competition hurts our competitiveness for agriculture and manufacturing. It drives up the cost of electricity, because of the increased costs for coal. Sometimes, it even costs us jobs in Montana. To address the problems faced by many captive shippers, I am introducing today the Railroad Competition Act of 2005. I am joined by my colleagues, Senators Rockefeller, Dorgan, Craig, Dayton, Vitter, Thune, Johnson, Baucus, and Coleman. This legislation will extend competition to many captive rail customers and correct problems in the Surface Transportation Board's implementation of railroad deregulation. Specifically, the legislation ensures that rail customers will receive rate quotes for movements between various points on a railroad's system; frees regional and short line railroads to provide access to additional major systems; provides captive rail customers who cannot afford to participate in expensive rate challenge proceedings access to arbitration; and directs the STB to adopt a more realistic and workable rate reasonableness standard. In addition to a lack of competition in many markets, the rail industry in America is badly in need of investment into its infrastructure. To address the infrastructure problem, the legislation increases ten-fold the current Railroad Rehabilitation and Infrastructure Financing program. The legislation also expands who is eligible for the loans and loan guarantees, so that qualified shipping entities can also invest in rail infrastructure. This is about jobs, plain and simple. Last year, when the intermodal hub in Shelby, Montana was closed, over 40 jobs were lost. The Port Authority in Shelby reached out to the railroads to persuade them to keep the hub open, but without competition, the single supplier chose to close. Those jobs are real losses in Shelby, a town of a little over 3,000 people. As high rail rates make U.S. products less competitive, imports flow in to fill the gap--and that costs us jobs. I understand that the rail industry employs a lot of people, and I am glad for those jobs. But we can not let lack of choice and competition in price and service cost us jobs in other areas. Since passage of the Staggers Act in 1980, the railroad industry has experienced significant consolidation, from over 40 major railroads down to 7. Roughly 35 percent of the rail traffic in America is captive, driving up the cost of transportation and placing a heavy burden on shippers. Captive shippers, like my farmers in Montana, have nowhere to go to seek relief. The Surface Transportation Board, the watchdogs over the rail system, is a complicated and expensive mess that hardly provides a fair forum for disputes. To bring a rate reasonableness case, challenging the unfair rates charged to captive shippers, a rail customer must first file huge fees--fees that will double in the coming weeks. Then, the customer must construct a hypothetical railroad and prove to the STB that rail transportation theoretically can be provided at a lower fee. That process can cost over $2 million per case, and take years to see through. At the end, even if the shipper wins, all he gets is a lower fee in the future. Too often, damages for past overcharging are not awarded. Meanwhile, the railroad sits idly by, under no obligation to justify its rates, and continues to collect the exorbitant fees that are under dispute. This system can not stand. The Railroad Competition Act of 2005 directs the STB to address this nonsensical system, and develops a final offer arbitration option, allowing shippers to take their case to a neutral arbiter. These provisions are necessary, not to punish railroads, but to develop a level playing field that keeps my small businesses and agriculture producers in business. Railroads are an essential part of our nation's infrastructure, a vast system that includes our highways, railroads, electric transmission lines, pipelines, and digital infrastructure. In a rural state like Montana, we rely on the rails to cover long distances efficiently, so rail must remain a viable shipping option. We need to achieve affordability, while still allowing sustainability for the railroads. There is a necessary public interest in our shared infrastructure, and the Railroad Competition Act of 2005 is designed to address legitimate public concerns, in Montana and around the nation, about rail operations. I look forward to working with my colleagues to secure passage of this important legislation.

Mr. BURNS

Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, today I am introducing legislation to address the difference between the import tariff placed on unfinished cork and refined cork. Unfinished cork has a higher import tariff than already-refined cork--this problem is in need of a resolution. Unfinished cork is the principal element of a fishing pole's grip and must be imported as it is not available domestically. Many fishing rod companies reside in Montana, such as the R.L. Winston Rod Company of Twin Bridges. I am aware that fishing rod manufacturers, particularly fly-fishing rod manufacturers, are under pressure to increase the price of their equipment because of prohibitively high tariff on the import of unfinished cork. While the tariff on already-finished cork is 6 percent, unfinished cork is subject to a 14 percent tariff. It just does not make good sense to charge a significantly higher levy on an unfinished product that is imported and then handcrafted by American workers. This inconsistency must end by leveling the difference between the two tariffs. The reduction will enable American workers to continue manufacturing custom-made fishing rod grips, keep the price of all fishing poles down, and bring a measure of common sense to this portion of our tariff law. Once resolved, domestic businesses will be able to finish fly rods here, leading to an increasingly competitive place in the market for American goods. With this change Montana's small businesses will benefit as will our overall economy in the state. I am pleased that some of my colleagues in the House have decided to assist in this effort. I truly appreciate the work of Representative Simmons of Connecticut, who is leading this legislation in the House. He has already signed on 17 co-sponsors to this legislation at last count. His assistance has been invaluable, and I look forward to working with him as this legislation moves forward. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. BURNS

Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, this bill conveys 3.4 acres on the Beaverhead-Deerlodge National Forest to Jefferson County, MT and 10 acres on the Kootenai National Forest to Sanders County, MT for continued use as cemeteries. The Elkhorn Cemetery in Jefferson County has been used as a cemetery since the 1860's. Due to surveying errors and limited information when the National Forest boundaries were surveyed in the early 1900's, the cemetery was included as National Forest lands. The cemetery is still in use by local families who homesteaded and worked the mines in the area. However, Forest Service manual direction strongly discourages burials on National Forest lands, placing both the families and Forest Service in an awkward position. The Noxon Cemetery is part of a Kootenai National Forest administrative site that is currently for sale. The cemetery has been used since at least 1910 and contains over 300 graves. Sanders County wants to protect the cemetery from potential damage, and the Forest Service wants to remove the encumbrance of the cemetery from the administrative site sale or future Federal ownership. In both locations, it is clear the cemeteries should not have been included as part of the National Forest. The County Commissioners and the local public strongly support the conveyance. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. BURNS

Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, this bill conveys 3.4 acres on the Beaverhead-Deerlodge National Forest to Jefferson County, MT and 10 acres on the Kootenai National Forest to Sanders County, MT for continued use as cemeteries. The Elkhorn Cemetery in Jefferson County has been used as a cemetery since the 1860's. Due to surveying errors and limited information when the National Forest boundaries were surveyed in the early 1900's, the cemetery was included as National Forest lands. The cemetery is still in use by local families who homesteaded and worked the mines in the area. However, Forest Service manual direction strongly discourages burials on National Forest lands, placing both the families and Forest Service in an awkward position. The Noxon Cemetery is part of a Kootenai National Forest administrative site that is currently for sale. The cemetery has been used since at least 1910 and contains over 300 graves. Sanders County wants to protect the cemetery from potential damage, and the Forest Service wants to remove the encumbrance of the cemetery from the administrative site sale or future Federal ownership. In both locations, it is clear the cemeteries should not have been included as part of the National Forest. The County Commissioners and the local public strongly support the conveyance. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. BURNS

Mr. BURNS. Madam President, on today's vote No. 108, I voted ``nay.'' My intention was to vote ``yea.'' I ask unanimous consent to change my vote. It will not affect the outcome of the vote on the amendment.

Mr. BURNS

Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, I take the floor today to ask that we finally help the town of Conrad, MT continue its successful program of providing affordable housing for our seniors. I renew my commitment to making sure this occurs. In the defense authorization act of 1994, the Air Force conveyed an unused 42-acre parcel of land to the city of Conrad, which then built a retirement home for Montana seniors. The home has been a great success, and the city of Conrad has begun the process of expanding the facility. When the city proposed using the land as collateral for the home, it ran into a problem. In the quitclaim deed where we conveyed the land to the city, we included a customary reversion clause that would transfer the property back to the Department of Defense in the event that the land stopped being used for the purpose of housing or public recreation. While the intent of this clause is and will continue to be met, a small city like Conrad must use the title to the land to secure construction loans, rather than issuing a municipal bond or some other measure to raise funds used by larger cities. The reversion clause prevents banks from using the land to secure the loan, as the city does not have clear title to the land. Therefore, I ask the Senate to approve this modification to public law 103-160, section 2816 regarding the 42 acre site of the Blue Sky Villa, which removes the reversion clause for this land, giving the city of Conrad clear title. I thank the Senate for it's consideration of this important matter for our senior citizens in Montana.

Mr. BURNS

Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, I take the floor today to ask that we finally help the town of Conrad, MT continue its successful program of providing affordable housing for our seniors. I renew my commitment to making sure this occurs. In the defense authorization act of 1994, the Air Force conveyed an unused 42-acre parcel of land to the city of Conrad, which then built a retirement home for Montana seniors. The home has been a great success, and the city of Conrad has begun the process of expanding the facility. When the city proposed using the land as collateral for the home, it ran into a problem. In the quitclaim deed where we conveyed the land to the city, we included a customary reversion clause that would transfer the property back to the Department of Defense in the event that the land stopped being used for the purpose of housing or public recreation. While the intent of this clause is and will continue to be met, a small city like Conrad must use the title to the land to secure construction loans, rather than issuing a municipal bond or some other measure to raise funds used by larger cities. The reversion clause prevents banks from using the land to secure the loan, as the city does not have clear title to the land. Therefore, I ask the Senate to approve this modification to public law 103-160, section 2816 regarding the 42 acre site of the Blue Sky Villa, which removes the reversion clause for this land, giving the city of Conrad clear title. I thank the Senate for it's consideration of this important matter for our senior citizens in Montana.

Mr. BURNS

Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, I come to the floor today to voice my support for the flag amendment. The flag of the United States of America is a symbol of freedom. The flag of the United States of America has been sanctified by the blood of thousands of U.S. soldiers who have fought across the world, and it must be protected from desecration. This proposed constitutional amendment would overturn the 1989 U.S. Supreme Court's 5-4 ruling which held that laws banning desecration of the U.S. flag were unconstitutional infringements on free speech and therefore a violation of the first amendment. I am proud of the first amendment right to free speech and will always ensure all Americans maintain that right. I am also proud of the American flag and the values behind it. The American flag flies over this great country as a symbol of liberty and patriotism. Desecration of the flag would be destruction of the core principles on which this great Nation was founded. I will continue to be an advocate on behalf of the American flag and the values the flag represents. I encourage my colleagues to support this measure and join me in ensuring the everlasting integrity of the American flag.

Mr. BURNS

Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, I come to the floor today to voice my support for the flag amendment. The flag of the United States of America is a symbol of freedom. The flag of the United States of America has been sanctified by the blood of thousands of U.S. soldiers who have fought across the world, and it must be protected from desecration. This proposed constitutional amendment would overturn the 1989 U.S. Supreme Court's 5-4 ruling which held that laws banning desecration of the U.S. flag were unconstitutional infringements on free speech and therefore a violation of the first amendment. I am proud of the first amendment right to free speech and will always ensure all Americans maintain that right. I am also proud of the American flag and the values behind it. The American flag flies over this great country as a symbol of liberty and patriotism. Desecration of the flag would be destruction of the core principles on which this great Nation was founded. I will continue to be an advocate on behalf of the American flag and the values the flag represents. I encourage my colleagues to support this measure and join me in ensuring the everlasting integrity of the American flag.

Mr. BURNS

Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, today I voice my support for the Federal prison industries, FPI, reform bill. This bill would level the playing field for small businesses and provide relief to all Federal agencies by amending the Office of Federal Procurement Policy Act to establish a Governmentwide policy requiring competition in certain executive agency procurements. I understand the importance of keeping our Federal prisoners occupied, but not at the expense of our law abiding, American small businesses. As a Senator representing the great State of Montana, where small business dominates our economy, I have a vital interest in protecting business from unfair Government competition. Many times bids were requested from private firms that offered better pricing and more reasonable terms of delivery. I am for fair competition in the Government procurement process. Congress has a responsibility to ensure that no Government entity, such as FPI, has special status in the Government procurement process that forces Government agencies to buy from that entity. This contradicts one of the fundamental ideas in which this great Nation was founded upon, the ideal of competition. Accordingly, I provide my support to protect small business interests across Montana and America.

Mr. BURNS

Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, I am pleased to join my colleague, Senator Conrad, in sponsoring legislation to provide student loan forgiveness to educators who commit to teaching in our tribal colleges. This legislation will provide up to $15,000 in loan forgiveness--a strong recruitment and retention tool for tribal colleges which often can't pay the same salaries as larger institutions. I am, and have been for years, a strong supporter of Montana's tribal colleges as well as tribal colleges nationwide. They contribute greatly to our Native American communities, providing the tools for our tribal children to succeed in the world of higher education. Graduates often continue their education at Montana State or the University of Montana and take this knowledge and expertise back to their communities. These students strengthen and improve both our tribal communities and our State as a whole. They add to the social, economic, political and cultural fabric that is unique to Indian Country. I know how hard our tribal colleges work to achieve success and to maintain high standards. A talented faculty is key to those goals, but too often tight budgets for tribal colleges limit their ability to recruit and retain faculty. Our tribal colleges and their students deserve quality teachers, and providing loan forgiveness will help attract and keep good faculty in what can be very rural areas. In addition to forgiveness for Perkins, direct or guaranteed loans, this legislation will also provide assistance for nursing faculty at tribal colleges. The nursing shortage is a nationwide problem, particularly in rural areas and specifically in Indian Country. Graduates of tribal colleges often stay near or return home, and that holds true for nursing graduates as well. Supporting nursing programs at tribal colleges addresses that shortage by training professionals who are familiar with the acute medical needs and cultural differences in rural areas and are often willing to stay and wage the battles. This legislation will provide nursing loan forgiveness to nursing instructors at tribal colleges and will help strengthen a valuable program in Montana and around the country.

Mr. BURNS

Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, I am pleased to join my colleague, Senator Conrad, in sponsoring legislation to provide student loan forgiveness to educators who commit to teaching in our tribal colleges. This legislation will provide up to $15,000 in loan forgiveness--a strong recruitment and retention tool for tribal colleges which often can't pay the same salaries as larger institutions. I am, and have been for years, a strong supporter of Montana's tribal colleges as well as tribal colleges nationwide. They contribute greatly to our Native American communities, providing the tools for our tribal children to succeed in the world of higher education. Graduates often continue their education at Montana State or the University of Montana and take this knowledge and expertise back to their communities. These students strengthen and improve both our tribal communities and our State as a whole. They add to the social, economic, political and cultural fabric that is unique to Indian Country. I know how hard our tribal colleges work to achieve success and to maintain high standards. A talented faculty is key to those goals, but too often tight budgets for tribal colleges limit their ability to recruit and retain faculty. Our tribal colleges and their students deserve quality teachers, and providing loan forgiveness will help attract and keep good faculty in what can be very rural areas. In addition to forgiveness for Perkins, direct or guaranteed loans, this legislation will also provide assistance for nursing faculty at tribal colleges. The nursing shortage is a nationwide problem, particularly in rural areas and specifically in Indian Country. Graduates of tribal colleges often stay near or return home, and that holds true for nursing graduates as well. Supporting nursing programs at tribal colleges addresses that shortage by training professionals who are familiar with the acute medical needs and cultural differences in rural areas and are often willing to stay and wage the battles. This legislation will provide nursing loan forgiveness to nursing instructors at tribal colleges and will help strengthen a valuable program in Montana and around the country.

Mr. BURNS

Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce a bill to amend the Elementary and Secondary Education Act with regard to the transfer of students from certain schools. The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 includes a requirement that schools not meeting adequate yearly progress--the AYP--for 2 consecutive years must provide transfer within the school district, and if no such schools exist, make efforts to provide transfers between school districts to the extent practical. This is the school choice provision. However, the current law's guidance on school choice does not adequately define practicality or feasibility, and where definitions are provided, they are overly broad. We have just come off the Easter break. We had an opportunity to talk to a lot of educators and students. We return to our work starting today to make some significant--maybe not significant changes, but little changes to No Child Left Behind to make it more practical and make it more common sense in States such as Montana. When we start looking at these maps, and as the President pro tempore leaves the Chamber, he understands what rural is when he looks at his State of Alaska. We are not nearly as big as Alaska. However, when we look at the State of Montana--and for those who wonder about distances and sizes, from the Yak, which is up in the northwest corner of the State, to Alzada in the southeast corner, it is farther than it is from Chicago to Washington, DC. So there is a pretty fair chunk of land out here, and we have young folks who go to school in just about every part of the State. These are the elementary schools I am going to talk about as I speak on No Child Left Behind and the legislation I am introducing today. The bottom line is No Child Left Behind is not a one-size-fits-all legislation. We have some of the greatest teachers there are in the country, and we have some of the brightest minds to teach. Accordingly, it is imperative that Congress continues to hear the needs and concerns of America's rural education communities. Just to give my colleagues an idea, I had a little bit to do with the passage and the shaping of the 1996 Telecommunications Act. In that bill, we had a piece included called broadband. Back in those days, most folks had not heard of the Internet, broadband, or digital. There were not very many of us around here who were even computer literate. We are getting better. We are getting a little younger. I can remember when we put the broadband section in the bill, primarily to do two things in my State: distance learning, allowing these smaller schools in rural areas to access the Internet and classes to be taught via a two-way interact from another location so that their curriculum could be broadened, just like a school, say, located in Billings, Great Falls, Missoula. Just because someone was born way out here and went to school in Jordan, MT, where we have a county the size of Rhode Island--it only has 1,800 folks and only one high school. It used to be a boarding school. I do not think it is anymore. But it used to be when you took your student to school on Monday morning, you did not see them until Friday night after the football game was over. So we deal in a little bit different kind of environment and situation. The Federal law must recognize the significant differences between urban and rural school districts with regard to student transportation, school spacing, and, of course, the school-of-choice options. Although No Child Left Behind leaves the State of Montana in control of determining the feasibility of transfers between different school districts, it is much less flexible when it comes to transfers within the same school district. My legislation would add to existing guidelines on the practicality and the feasibility of school choice that a school district would not be required to provide a student with a transfer option to another school if providing the option is impractical due to the distance to be traveled, a geographical barrier or hazard, the duration of the travel, or an unusually high cost of travel. However, if choice is not offered under the latter circumstances, students in affected schools will still receive valuable supplemental education services, and school districts will still have the option to provide students school learning choices through distance learning programs or virtual schools or several other options offered under current law. We are pretty sparse in eastern Montana. From Miles City to Jordan is about 90 miles. I was talking about Jordan a while ago up on the big dry creek. You heard me say I have a lot of dirt between light bulbs out there. Well, we have a lot of land between schools out there also, and school districts can be quite large. The centers of Billings, Great Falls, Missoula, the Flat Head, or even Bozeman are grouped pretty closely. In eastern Montana, however, they are far apart. We have elementary schools not even on paved roads, still on gravel. I know one that is still on a mud road. If it rains real hard or during the spring thaw, they cannot get a car in there or a pickup truck or even a four- wheel drive vehicle, so they all ride horses, which is not a bad idea. It saves on gas, and as high as gas is, it probably isn't a bad idea at all. This is a map of the elementary schools to give an idea of where they are located way out there. Now, I want to take a look at the high schools. There are not as many of them. What are you going to do if a school in Miles City is in need of improvement under the current law? Where are you going to send them? To Broadus? I don't think so. That is another 80 or 90 miles. Pretty soon the miles start adding up. Right now the law requires the schools to pay for students to transfer them in the same district unless doing so is too expensive. In Montana, as with many rural schools in rural States, there are considerations greater than just cost. While the law makes sense in Billings, it does not work in districts where the schools are farther apart. Take the Broadus County School District in southeastern Montana as an example. As we can see, there is a lot of distance between schools. There are not very many schools out there. These are high schools. These are not elementary schools but high schools. Some may take up to 2 hours one way to drive. It not only hurts the family life of the students, but it disrupts what they do and also has an adverse effect on their academic performance. Sometimes this type of commute may be necessary. My legislation makes this decision a matter for rural States to decide instead of the politicians here in Washington, DC, or by a rule written into a law that just is unworkable in my State. I realize No Child Left Behind had some built-in flexibilities, and I also realize that some States did not take advantage of some of those flexibilities. Now we are locked into a situation where it is almost impossible to change unless we change the legislation and reword it. My legislation simply clarifies what is feasible and practical for school choice transfers within school districts and gives the States, especially my State, the ability to treat schools in rural Broadus differently than it treats schools in more urbanized Billings, MT. I would imagine the Senator from Florida who is new to this body and a terrific addition to this body has some rural areas in Florida. We think of Florida as more urbanized, but they have some rural areas too, just like Montana. That does not mean there are kids out there whose needs should not be addressed. When we visit schools, we get all kinds of questions from the students. I was visiting a sixth-grade class the other day. They came up with all kinds of questions. Some of them were pretty good, some were not so good. I did have one that was just a little bit different. This young man stood up in sixth grade, and he said: Senator, what do you want written on your tombstone? My gosh, I never had that question before, and I did not know exactly how to handle it, so I just told him: He's not here yet. That is the only way I could answer him. These young people are very bright. They like their schools in these areas with distance learning. And we have telemedicine. We are delivering medical care much differently now. We are doing it with broadband services. We have 14 counties that do not have a doctor. It is done by physician assistants and many other people. The other day a student from our part of the country enrolled at Montana State University at Billings. He had taken enough courses in his senior year in distance learning from MSUB that he has a full semester completed. So when he goes away to school, he already has half a year done. This is why we have the Telecommunications Act. This is why we have the No Child Left Behind Act. We have to look at schools and libraries and some of the kinks we have to work out in that law so that these smaller schools and libraries can get their moneys so they can offer this online education. This is just another part of tweaking the No Child Left Behind law to make it work in rural areas. I urge my Senate colleagues, especially those from rural States, to join me in cosponsoring this bill because it is very important. If we are really dedicated to the program of No Child Left Behind, we cannot leave rural children behind either, and we have to make it work.

Mr. BURNS

Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce a bill to amend the Elementary and Secondary Education Act with regard to the transfer of students from certain schools. The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 includes a requirement that schools not meeting adequate yearly progress--the AYP--for 2 consecutive years must provide transfer within the school district, and if no such schools exist, make efforts to provide transfers between school districts to the extent practical. This is the school choice provision. However, the current law's guidance on school choice does not adequately define practicality or feasibility, and where definitions are provided, they are overly broad. We have just come off the Easter break. We had an opportunity to talk to a lot of educators and students. We return to our work starting today to make some significant--maybe not significant changes, but little changes to No Child Left Behind to make it more practical and make it more common sense in States such as Montana. When we start looking at these maps, and as the President pro tempore leaves the Chamber, he understands what rural is when he looks at his State of Alaska. We are not nearly as big as Alaska. However, when we look at the State of Montana--and for those who wonder about distances and sizes, from the Yak, which is up in the northwest corner of the State, to Alzada in the southeast corner, it is farther than it is from Chicago to Washington, DC. So there is a pretty fair chunk of land out here, and we have young folks who go to school in just about every part of the State. These are the elementary schools I am going to talk about as I speak on No Child Left Behind and the legislation I am introducing today. The bottom line is No Child Left Behind is not a one-size-fits-all legislation. We have some of the greatest teachers there are in the country, and we have some of the brightest minds to teach. Accordingly, it is imperative that Congress continues to hear the needs and concerns of America's rural education communities. Just to give my colleagues an idea, I had a little bit to do with the passage and the shaping of the 1996 Telecommunications Act. In that bill, we had a piece included called broadband. Back in those days, most folks had not heard of the Internet, broadband, or digital. There were not very many of us around here who were even computer literate. We are getting better. We are getting a little younger. I can remember when we put the broadband section in the bill, primarily to do two things in my State: distance learning, allowing these smaller schools in rural areas to access the Internet and classes to be taught via a two-way interact from another location so that their curriculum could be broadened, just like a school, say, located in Billings, Great Falls, Missoula. Just because someone was born way out here and went to school in Jordan, MT, where we have a county the size of Rhode Island--it only has 1,800 folks and only one high school. It used to be a boarding school. I do not think it is anymore. But it used to be when you took your student to school on Monday morning, you did not see them until Friday night after the football game was over. So we deal in a little bit different kind of environment and situation. The Federal law must recognize the significant differences between urban and rural school districts with regard to student transportation, school spacing, and, of course, the school-of-choice options. Although No Child Left Behind leaves the State of Montana in control of determining the feasibility of transfers between different school districts, it is much less flexible when it comes to transfers within the same school district. My legislation would add to existing guidelines on the practicality and the feasibility of school choice that a school district would not be required to provide a student with a transfer option to another school if providing the option is impractical due to the distance to be traveled, a geographical barrier or hazard, the duration of the travel, or an unusually high cost of travel. However, if choice is not offered under the latter circumstances, students in affected schools will still receive valuable supplemental education services, and school districts will still have the option to provide students school learning choices through distance learning programs or virtual schools or several other options offered under current law. We are pretty sparse in eastern Montana. From Miles City to Jordan is about 90 miles. I was talking about Jordan a while ago up on the big dry creek. You heard me say I have a lot of dirt between light bulbs out there. Well, we have a lot of land between schools out there also, and school districts can be quite large. The centers of Billings, Great Falls, Missoula, the Flat Head, or even Bozeman are grouped pretty closely. In eastern Montana, however, they are far apart. We have elementary schools not even on paved roads, still on gravel. I know one that is still on a mud road. If it rains real hard or during the spring thaw, they cannot get a car in there or a pickup truck or even a four- wheel drive vehicle, so they all ride horses, which is not a bad idea. It saves on gas, and as high as gas is, it probably isn't a bad idea at all. This is a map of the elementary schools to give an idea of where they are located way out there. Now, I want to take a look at the high schools. There are not as many of them. What are you going to do if a school in Miles City is in need of improvement under the current law? Where are you going to send them? To Broadus? I don't think so. That is another 80 or 90 miles. Pretty soon the miles start adding up. Right now the law requires the schools to pay for students to transfer them in the same district unless doing so is too expensive. In Montana, as with many rural schools in rural States, there are considerations greater than just cost. While the law makes sense in Billings, it does not work in districts where the schools are farther apart. Take the Broadus County School District in southeastern Montana as an example. As we can see, there is a lot of distance between schools. There are not very many schools out there. These are high schools. These are not elementary schools but high schools. Some may take up to 2 hours one way to drive. It not only hurts the family life of the students, but it disrupts what they do and also has an adverse effect on their academic performance. Sometimes this type of commute may be necessary. My legislation makes this decision a matter for rural States to decide instead of the politicians here in Washington, DC, or by a rule written into a law that just is unworkable in my State. I realize No Child Left Behind had some built-in flexibilities, and I also realize that some States did not take advantage of some of those flexibilities. Now we are locked into a situation where it is almost impossible to change unless we change the legislation and reword it. My legislation simply clarifies what is feasible and practical for school choice transfers within school districts and gives the States, especially my State, the ability to treat schools in rural Broadus differently than it treats schools in more urbanized Billings, MT. I would imagine the Senator from Florida who is new to this body and a terrific addition to this body has some rural areas in Florida. We think of Florida as more urbanized, but they have some rural areas too, just like Montana. That does not mean there are kids out there whose needs should not be addressed. When we visit schools, we get all kinds of questions from the students. I was visiting a sixth-grade class the other day. They came up with all kinds of questions. Some of them were pretty good, some were not so good. I did have one that was just a little bit different. This young man stood up in sixth grade, and he said: Senator, what do you want written on your tombstone? My gosh, I never had that question before, and I did not know exactly how to handle it, so I just told him: He's not here yet. That is the only way I could answer him. These young people are very bright. They like their schools in these areas with distance learning. And we have telemedicine. We are delivering medical care much differently now. We are doing it with broadband services. We have 14 counties that do not have a doctor. It is done by physician assistants and many other people. The other day a student from our part of the country enrolled at Montana State University at Billings. He had taken enough courses in his senior year in distance learning from MSUB that he has a full semester completed. So when he goes away to school, he already has half a year done. This is why we have the Telecommunications Act. This is why we have the No Child Left Behind Act. We have to look at schools and libraries and some of the kinks we have to work out in that law so that these smaller schools and libraries can get their moneys so they can offer this online education. This is just another part of tweaking the No Child Left Behind law to make it work in rural areas. I urge my Senate colleagues, especially those from rural States, to join me in cosponsoring this bill because it is very important. If we are really dedicated to the program of No Child Left Behind, we cannot leave rural children behind either, and we have to make it work.

Mr. BURNS

Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that privilege of the floor be granted to Rexon Ryu, a detailee with Senator Hagel's office, during consideration of S. 600, the State Department authorization bill.

Mr. BURNS

Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that following morning business today the Senate begin consideration of S. 600, the State Department authorization bill.

Mr. BURNS

Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, today I join in mourning the loss of Pope John Paul II. In my lifetime, he was the first Pope I can remember who could actually be put in the category of being an evangelist. No other Pope ever traveled as much as this Pope did, and no man ever took the Word to the different corners of the world like this man did, and that is why he is so revered around the world. (The remarks of Mr. Burns pertaining to the introduction of S. 696 are printed in today's Record under ``Statements on Introduced Bills and Joint Resolutions.'')

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

Mr. BURNS

Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the SPYBLOCK bill, along with my good friend Senator Wyden of Oregon. The SPYBLOCK bill will help reduce one of the most damaging practices in the online world today--spyware, or computer software downloaded onto a computer without the user's permission or awareness--that then is often used to illicitly gather personal information, assist in identity theft, track a user's keystrokes or monitor browsing behavior. It is hard to overstate the potential damage that Spyware can do in cyberspace if it is allowed to grow unchecked. It could cripple e- commerce, because consumers would be afraid to make their financial or other personal data available on-line. It could damage the activities of businesses large and small, by making their data or computer systems vulnerable to attack and abuse. It could fuel the growth of whole new categories of cybercriminals. The recent data theft incidents at ChoicePoint, Bank of America, and others only underscore the need for a much more proactive policing of cyberspace. The SPYBLOCK bill will give Federal enforcement authorities additional tools to curb spyware. It also bans adware programs that conceal their operation or purpose from users, because every consumer should have a reasonable opportunity to consent to the installation of software that generates pop-up ads on his or her computer. We have worked hard on this bill, and consulted extensively with industry and consumer groups to ensure all perspectives on this growing problem were heard. The issues are not new to the members of the Commerce Committee either, as this bill is very similiar to one we marked up toward the end of the last Congress. I look forward to working with my colleagues in the Commerce Committee and the full Senate to ensure prompt passage of this important measure. I thank my colleague Senator Wyden again for his work on this bill, and I yield back the balance of my time. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. BURNS

Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the SPYBLOCK bill, along with my good friend Senator Wyden of Oregon. The SPYBLOCK bill will help reduce one of the most damaging practices in the online world today--spyware, or computer software downloaded onto a computer without the user's permission or awareness--that then is often used to illicitly gather personal information, assist in identity theft, track a user's keystrokes or monitor browsing behavior. It is hard to overstate the potential damage that Spyware can do in cyberspace if it is allowed to grow unchecked. It could cripple e- commerce, because consumers would be afraid to make their financial or other personal data available on-line. It could damage the activities of businesses large and small, by making their data or computer systems vulnerable to attack and abuse. It could fuel the growth of whole new categories of cybercriminals. The recent data theft incidents at ChoicePoint, Bank of America, and others only underscore the need for a much more proactive policing of cyberspace. The SPYBLOCK bill will give Federal enforcement authorities additional tools to curb spyware. It also bans adware programs that conceal their operation or purpose from users, because every consumer should have a reasonable opportunity to consent to the installation of software that generates pop-up ads on his or her computer. We have worked hard on this bill, and consulted extensively with industry and consumer groups to ensure all perspectives on this growing problem were heard. The issues are not new to the members of the Commerce Committee either, as this bill is very similiar to one we marked up toward the end of the last Congress. I look forward to working with my colleagues in the Commerce Committee and the full Senate to ensure prompt passage of this important measure. I thank my colleague Senator Wyden again for his work on this bill, and I yield back the balance of my time. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.