Conrad Burns

Mr. BURNS

Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, words cannot express the outrage I felt when I heard this decision. There will be those of us who will express it in different words than probably lawyers will. A couple of weeks ago we were visited and addressed by the Prime Minister of Australia, John Howard, when he related his feelings because he was in this country on September 11 of last year. He said that, since then, this country has reacted in a way that reestablishes or reconfirms the very values on which this country is based. Then we have a circuit court that comes down with a decision such as this. It is absolutely unbelievable. Can our children no longer sing ``God Bless America,'' or even ``America the Beautiful,'' or all the stanzas to our National Anthem? Do you want to take a look at the dollar bill? On the back of it is the symbol of this country, the eagle, and, of course, the eternal eye. This is a value-based society, and to say those who are sheltered from being removed from office, unless the crime is really something, but just for an opinion such as this, I find that unbelievable. We are a nation founded upon the acknowledgement of a Creator. It has been that way since day one, or even when the flame of freedom was ignited in the men and women way back in the 1700s. Men and women have died, given their lives, on the field of battle to protect it, just as they have another symbol of this country called our flag. It doesn't make a lot of sense. Of course, there are a lot of things that do not make sense in this world. I always refer to this place as 17 square miles of logic-free environment. Nonetheless, whenever you jump across the street, we find another logic that I fail to understand. So I will stand here and tell America that those values-- this being one of them--that those men and women did not die in vain. And it did not take very long for this body, that represents constituencies across the width and breath of our country, to react to it. That has to tell you something about who we are and what we are and how we got here. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. BURNS. Yes.

Mr. BURNS

Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, I am honored to stand here today with my distinguished colleague, Senator Inouye, and submit a resolution honoring the Marine Raiders. In recent months, heroism and service to our great Nation have risen as qualities valued and held dearly in the hearts of all Americans, but the men and women of our armed forces are no strangers to these qualities. Our American servicemen and women were not introduced to the concepts of bravery, sacrifice, and patriotism on September 11. The men and women of our armed forces have dedicated their lives to serving this great country since its conception, and I rise today to honor some of this country's greatest servants. In August, 1942, the United States Marines conduct a combat raid on Japanese forces on Makin Atoll in the Gilbert Islands. On August 17 and 18, 1942, these Marines raided Butaritari Island, in the Makin Atoll. These men were members of the 2nd Raider Battalion, a Marine unit trained to conduct guerrilla-style attacks behind enemy lines. The unit was led by Lieutenant Colonel Evans Carlson; his second-in-command was Major James Roosevelt, son of President Franklin D. Roosevelt. The unit came under heavy Japanese resistance, and during the two-day battle, the Raiders killed 83 Japanese soldiers. However, because of weather, were unable to evacuate the bodies of their fallen comrades. The remains of these valiant men, known as Marine Raiders, were recovered and brought home to a grateful nation, at long last, in 1999. A funeral ceremony was held in August 2001 for nineteen of these brave men. As Americans, we have become accustomed to the risks and losses incurred while defending the great American principles of democracy, liberty, and patriotism. Our strength and spirit continue to prevail, and our continuing efforts to honor those who make the ultimate sacrifice in maintaining America's freedom, must not be lost upon the Marine Raiders. The bravery and heroism of these men has gone unsung for almost sixty years, and the time has come now to honor the Marine Raiders by establishing a monument in Arlington National Cemetery. This site would respectfully honor the Marine Raiders with a monument established at a point next to the Challenger Monument. Such recognition will demonstrate to our country and to the world that America will never leave any of our fallen servicemen and women behind, either in memory or geographic location, and will bring them home to the American soil they perished defending. As a former Marine, I am proud to have served this great Nation. The call to service as a member of the armed forces is a strong and noble call. In light of the recent attacks upon America, we remain united in a common vow to never forget those make the ultimate sacrifice in protecting the liberty we as Americans hold so precious. We, as Members of Congress and as citizens of this country, must remain united in fulfilling this promise to those who make that sacrifice today and tomorrow, without forgetting the men and women who made it yesterday, and in every war of America's past. We owe these heroes the honor of remembrance, both for the liberty we enjoy today and our freedom tomorrow. Honoring the Marine Raiders presents us the unique opportunity to present to the world the love and respect we have for our fallen warriors. With the challenges of war looming for our servicemen and women today, this demonstration of respect seems particularly appropriate. I ask my colleagues to join Senator Inouye and me in honoring these men, and their sacrifice, with a memorial in Arlington Cemetery.

Mr. BURNS

Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, I would like to congratulate the winners of the American Association of University Women ``Woman of Montana'' essay contest, Gina Young. Her essay is entitled ``Rehbein.'' I also congratulate Maureen Sullivan. Her essay is entitled ``Effie Dockstander Holmes: A Woman for All Seasons.'' The essays follow: Rehbein When I think of a woman who has dedicated most of her life helping Montana citizens, I think of my grandmother, Mary Alice Rehbein. For fifty years, she has served the state of Montana in the field of public health. During her years of work and dedication, she has earned the respect of people allover Montana, including myself. From her I have learned how to set goals, to accept the differences of others, and to be responsible for myself. R represents responsibility. Mary Alice Rehbein was born in Jamestown, North Dakota, July 20, 1918, to Ed and Mary Louise Barnhart. She had only nine short years to learn the responsibilities and lessons of life from her mother. At the age of nine, Mary Alice lost her mother to breast cancer. After that tragic death, her father could not stand the loss and moved away from Jamestown leaving Mary Alice to be raised by very strict, practical, but loving grandparents. Her grandparents felt that an education was an absolute must. Mary Alice knew that an education was the only way she would be able to survive in the future. E stands for her life-long education. Mary Alice Rehbein graduated from high school in 1937. She attended business college for two years while selling insurance. Mary Alice realized that she was not going to be very successful at this career because she was a woman. This was the time in Mary Alice's life that she needed to re-evaluate her career choice and money situation. She finally withdrew the last seventy- five dollars remaining of her mother's life insurance policy. Mary Alice found that she could enroll in nursing school for exactly that amount, so she jumped at the chance of a lifetime and invested her last penny in her education. Mary Alice's lifetime of nursing and honors began upon the completion of her nursing degree in 1943. H symbolizes Mary Alice Rehbein's various honors. She has been recognized and received numerous awards throughout her years of service. Some of her honors include Sidney's ``Woman of the Year'' award; the Montana State Department of Health's Public Health Nursing Award for Outstanding and Meritorious Work; an award from the Montana State Mental Health Association; an award from the National League of Nursing Board; and the Dr. Mary Souls Nursing Award, which is the highest honor bestowed on a nurse in Montana and North Dakota. Mary Alice has also held many prestigious offices. She served as a representative to the National League of Nursing Advisory Board for the Western Region of the United States; held the position of the vice-president for the State Nurses Association; and is currently the President of the Montana Nursing League and a member of the Governor's Advisory Board for Aging. Each honor and position has recognized her leadership and the services she has given to public health for the state of Montana. Mary Alice Rehbein is proud of her honors and offices, but she feels the greatest reward has been to provide beneficial health care to the citizens of the community. B portrays how beneficial Mary Alice has been to people of Montana. She was the Richland County Health Nurse for forty- five years. During her years of working she saved lives, helped deliver babies, gave shots to patients for illness and immunizations, checked children's posture and teeth, administered medical attention to the rural areas with orders from the doctors, provided nursing care to schools, monitored blood pressures, and provided home health care for those in need. She has traveled to every state, with the exception of Maine and Alaska, as well as to hospitals in Australia, New Zealand, and Russia. In each of her expeditions she studied, shared information, and acquired knowledge about the availability and kinds of community health. Mary Alice Rehbein has enjoyed her nursing career. E denotes all of her efforts and enjoyment. Mary Alice has spent a lifetime providing nursing service and teaching people about health care. Nothing has been more fulfilling than to see the joy of people, at any age, caring about their health, says Mary Alice, and to employ new nursing ideas. I exemplifies the innovative nursing ideas Mary Alice has brought to Eastern Montana. Besides the general health program that Mary Alice Rehbein ran, she was responsible for the Alcohol and Drug Abuse program until it had funding of its own. She ran the monthly, blood pressure clinics for Richland County and was active in finding ways to provide immunization clinics to isolated residents. In the 1950's, she began encouraging the Mental Health professionals of Montana to provide services to people in out-lying areas of Eastern Montana. She has been instrumental in providing home health care to many people who could not get or afford health care. In addition, she provided hospice care. Mary Alice says that nursing is one profession that will not be replaced with total technology, since people will always need ``hands on'' nursing care. N depicts the profession of nursing. Mary Alice Rehbein is the oldest, insured, and licensed nurse in the state of Montana. After her numerous years devoted to helping the residents of Montana, she has retired as Richland County Public Health Nurse. In her free time she visits lonely people who do not have families to talk to, she looks in on people who need nursing care, she continues to stay up-to- date on the latest nursing trends, and she still makes time to take blood pressures in her small community. Out of all of the women who have helped the state of Montana, Mary Alice Rehbein has been one of the most remarkable. She has dedicated her life to helping the people of Montana and has instilled in me the belief that the true treasure of life is a person's health. Therefore, I believe Mary Alice REHBEIN is one of the Great Montana Women.

Mr. BURNS

Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, today I recognize a very special woman from the State of Montana who has recently retired from the Burns Telecommunications Center. Jacqueline Bean has made a tremendous difference at the Burns Telecommunications Center during her tenure. Her level of influence in the telecommunications industry and Montana has been instrumental in promoting, maintaining and establishing a base to expand upon the Center and extend its longevity. I cannot tell you how many times Jacqueline stressed the need to ensure the center's long-term impact. Jacqueline's commitment and loyalty to the Burns Telecommunications Center and to the goals I established have helped lead to the success of the Center. Jacqueline never lost sight of the vision I had in mind, to promote opportunities in education, healthcare, and business especially in rural States like Montana, to work for increased individual opportunity through telecommunications and support Montana telecommunications projects, involving cutting edge technology for education based distance learning programs, telemedicine initiatives, and e-commerce across secure computer networks in the global economy. Jacqueline put forth a whole-hearted effort to increase these opportunities for students, teachers, administrators, individuals, and employees across Montana by advancing the Burns Telecommunications Center and its mission. Jacqueline has always gone above and beyond the call of duty. She is not only a woman I admire and respect, she is a close, personal friend and I want to extend my personal thanks for all of her support and effort on behalf of the Burns Telecommunications Center. I truly appreciate Jacqueline's loyalty, dedication and commitment and all that she has accomplished on behalf of the Burns Telecommunications Center. We bid farewell, but not good-bye, to a woman that has brought so much integrity to the Burns Telecommunications Center.

Mr. BURNS

Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, I rise today to pay tribute to the men and women of Malmstrom Air Force Base, AFB, Montana for being awarded the Blanchard Trophy as the United States Air Force's best intercontinental ballistic missile wing. This is the eighth time Malmstrom has won this weeklong competition, called Guardian Challenge. There are several areas scored in this competition including missile operations, satellite operations, remote space tracking, security forces, helicopter operations, food services, missile maintenance, communications, and missile codes. The men and women who compete in Guardian Challenge are the best of the best from their respective Air Force Bases. This year marks the 35th anniversary of the competition, boasting some 200 participants. Besides the competition, Guardian Challenge helps sharpen the skills of and improve our military personnel's effectiveness and combat capability, while showing the world that the United States is the world's premier space force, second to none. The 341 Space Wing of Malmstrom AFB controls 200 Minuteman III missiles. This award is just one of several that Team Malmstrom has won over the years. They are truly the best of the best. I am very proud of the men and women from Malmstrom AFB. As Operation Enduring Freedom continues, our military personnel are being tasked with increased missions and more time spent away from their families to support the war on terrorism. As a former member of the U.S. Marine Corps, I understand and appreciate the sacrifices these people and their families make in the name of freedom. Military people are special freedom-loving people. Montana is fortunate to have Malmstrom AFB, and I know that I speak for all Montanans when I congratulate Malmstrom AFB for being the best intercontinental ballistic missile wing in the world.

Mr. BURNS

Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, I am pleased to announce the introduction of the Mineral Hill Historic Mining District Preservation Act of 2002. The purpose of this act is for the Forest Service to accept a donation from TVX Mineral Hill, Inc., an inholding of approximately 570 acres of private land in the Gallatin National Forest. This inholding overlooks the northern entrance of Yellowstone National Park and is within well- known elk habitat. The donation also includes 194 acres of mineral rights underlying Federal lands. This bill provides a win-win situation with benefits for the community, for wildlife, for the company, and for the environment. After a rich and storied history, the Mineral Hill Mine is played out and the opportunity to extract minerals has passed. The property is in very good condition and is being reclaimed in accordance with a reclamation plan approved by the Montana Department of Environmental Quality. The Forest Service has been closely involved during the reclamation planning and implementation processes to make certain that the property will remain in the excellent environmental state it is in today. As an added guarantee, the United States will also be the beneficiary of a $10 million insurance policy provided by TVX to clean up the site in the unlikely event that hazardous materials are discovered in the future. The Mineral Hill Mine is located in the historic Jardine Mining District which was established during the 1860s. Many of the buildings at the site go back to that time period. Some of the buildings will be preserved for interpretation purposes and will be available to the public. In addition, the site will be used in cooperation with Montana Tech of the University of Montana for mining and geologic education. The Mineral Hill property is being donated by TVX to the Government without the necessity of a payment. There will be ongoing permits issued by the State of Montana and by EPA for monitoring of water discharge. This bill allows for those permits to be upheld and for the water processes to be maintained. In a letter to my office dated June 25, 2001, the Greater Yellowstone Coalition observed that ``we believe that there would be no adverse impact to the agency and indeed would be a benefit to the public that this donated land is conveyed with the obligation to maintain the NPDES permit already in force.'' This is exactly what the bill provides in section 11. I am pleased to say that this is a bill with the support of all key parties. The Forest Service has agreed to the transfer and management of the land and has been actively involved in this process. The Gardiner Chamber of Commerce supports the project, as do the Commissioners of Park County. The Greater Yellowstone Coalition also supports the donation. Simply put, this legislation is in the public interest. On behalf of the people of Montana, I look forward to its passage.

Mr. BURNS

Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, I am pleased to announce the introduction of the Mineral Hill Historic Mining District Preservation Act of 2002. The purpose of this act is for the Forest Service to accept a donation from TVX Mineral Hill, Inc., an inholding of approximately 570 acres of private land in the Gallatin National Forest. This inholding overlooks the northern entrance of Yellowstone National Park and is within well- known elk habitat. The donation also includes 194 acres of mineral rights underlying Federal lands. This bill provides a win-win situation with benefits for the community, for wildlife, for the company, and for the environment. After a rich and storied history, the Mineral Hill Mine is played out and the opportunity to extract minerals has passed. The property is in very good condition and is being reclaimed in accordance with a reclamation plan approved by the Montana Department of Environmental Quality. The Forest Service has been closely involved during the reclamation planning and implementation processes to make certain that the property will remain in the excellent environmental state it is in today. As an added guarantee, the United States will also be the beneficiary of a $10 million insurance policy provided by TVX to clean up the site in the unlikely event that hazardous materials are discovered in the future. The Mineral Hill Mine is located in the historic Jardine Mining District which was established during the 1860s. Many of the buildings at the site go back to that time period. Some of the buildings will be preserved for interpretation purposes and will be available to the public. In addition, the site will be used in cooperation with Montana Tech of the University of Montana for mining and geologic education. The Mineral Hill property is being donated by TVX to the Government without the necessity of a payment. There will be ongoing permits issued by the State of Montana and by EPA for monitoring of water discharge. This bill allows for those permits to be upheld and for the water processes to be maintained. In a letter to my office dated June 25, 2001, the Greater Yellowstone Coalition observed that ``we believe that there would be no adverse impact to the agency and indeed would be a benefit to the public that this donated land is conveyed with the obligation to maintain the NPDES permit already in force.'' This is exactly what the bill provides in section 11. I am pleased to say that this is a bill with the support of all key parties. The Forest Service has agreed to the transfer and management of the land and has been actively involved in this process. The Gardiner Chamber of Commerce supports the project, as do the Commissioners of Park County. The Greater Yellowstone Coalition also supports the donation. Simply put, this legislation is in the public interest. On behalf of the people of Montana, I look forward to its passage.

Mr. BURNS

Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, I thank the Chair, the chairman of the Agriculture Committee, and the ranking member. I start off by thanking them for the work they did on this bill. Agricultural legislation is, of course, very important to the State of Montana. There is no question about a changed policy on how we serve agriculture. There is no doubt in my mind that this bill will not bring lower prices for food commodities. Agribusiness will continue to buy as cheap as they can. The taxpayer will continue to pay their prices, and also the taxpayer will continue to participate in the income of American agriculture at the production level. That is not going to change. What has changed a little bit is that we are into price support protection of a commodity. We are not in the business of guaranteeing the income of the farmer. This will allow us to make a strong argument for a market-driven economy on the global scene. It will have trade impacts. There is no question in my mind. Even though we have dealt with this kind of situation before, it is my belief that we will drive up the cost of land. When we do that, the bigger producers will buy out the lower producers. So we don't save a lot of small producers--the people we are trying to help out. That is what farm bills do. That is what price supports on commodities do. I will vote for this bill. But it is hard to stand up here and talk philosophy and about a direction when you are in the middle of a 5-year drought. Montana needs some help. Will this bill help those who are in a drought? No, it will not. We will have to get some supplemental money somewhere for drought relief. I think we can do that, if we work very hard. The total cost is over budget--as submitted by the Congressional Budget Office--by $80 billion. We thought we were operating within around a $70 billion or a $72 billion budget. We know we are over budget for this particular piece of legislation. In spite of all of these loan rates and targets, there is a strong suspicion on my part that we will be back in the business of overproduction. If there is a strong conservation title in this bill, it will be hard to implement with soil conservation and water conservation with an enticement to overproduce. I have a suspicion that it is in here. We didn't do anything about insurance. We didn't look into that to see how it is used in unusual ways to enhance the purchase of revenue insurance for farms. We need to look at that. We didn't get the packer concentration legislation that we wanted, nor did we prevent the USDA from using a USDA stamp on meat products imported into this country. We did get a country of origin label. That may be a slippery slope. There is a downside to that. But for every upside there is always a downside. We hope when we get into the administrative rules of that program we can have some input so that our producers are not only protected but have the ability to participate. I know some of us in this body do not live on a border. But I will tell you our challenges along that border are much greater than some would imagine. We did nothing about captive shippers when we moved our crops to ports and plants. Those of us who only have one railroad have real serious concerns about producing for the railroad. It wasn't meant to be that way. But that is the way it is under present conditions. As you know, in agriculture, we buy retail and we sell wholesale, and we pay the freight both ways. Those things were not even dealt with or looked at in this piece of legislation. As we look at this issue, we are back to loan rates which are a little bit higher than before. We are back at targets, and we are back to deficiency payments. Those of us who thought we were going to get an LDP payment in September forget about that. It is going to be smaller. You are going to get it in four payments starting this September. The last payment is coming in June of next year. I don't think that is going to make every banker in the world happy. It won't get us out of our doldrums as far as producing this year's crop. Like I said, we haven't had a crop for 5 years. Again, we are in a situation in Montana where we need an infusion of money. That is what drives my vote today. It is not because I agree philosophically about where this bill is taking us. I think probably when you look at it, the chairman of the committee was exactly right. If you look at it, it is not very much more money for our producers as compared with where we have been in the last 4 or 5 years. It doesn't increase their income all that much. You will just have to do more paperwork to get it with risk involved. Tomorrow, we will vote for this bill. But I have the expectation that it will not be long before we will be revisiting this business of agriculture--before any of us are gone from this body. I thank the Chair. I yield the floor.

Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, I am going to keep it as short as I possibly can. I want to make a couple of comments, and then I will fade away into the past. How is that?

Mr. BURNS

Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, it gives me great pleasure to bring to your attention today a story about a young man that I am proud to say is from Montana. His name is Jerimiah Tretain and he is Montana's Youth of the Year. Jerimiah has come from what I consider the ``school of hard knocks.'' At a young age he was abused by his father, then moved with his mother and older sister to Montana. Life has been difficult for him and The Boys and Girls Club of Billings & Yellowstone County have helped him get through some times through anger management and counseling. They are a truly wonderful organization. It humbles me to see such a brave man conquer so many obstacles and being steered in the right direction in order to achieve his goals and dreams to enter Montana State University in Bozeman, MT, in 2003 and eventually become an architect. I wish Jerimiah all the success in the national Boys and Girls Club competition. You make Montana proud!

Mr. BURNS

Mr. BURNS. Madam President, I rise today to pay tribute to a wonderful group of people from the Great Falls, MT. Today, The Great Falls Area Chamber of Commerce Military Affairs Committee, MAC, will receive the Zachary and Elizabeth Fisher Distinguished Civilian Humanitarian Award for 2001 at the Pentagon on May 1, 2002. The competition for this award encompassed the entire Department of Defense. The First Award is given to individuals or organizations that demonstrate exceptional patriotism and humanitarian concerns for the members of the armed forces or their families. As you may know, Great Falls, MT, is home to Malmstrom Air Force Base. The 341 Space Wing controls 200 Minuteman III missiles. I have had the pleasure to speak to members of MAC on several occasions over the years at their monthly luncheons held at Malmstrom Air Force Base. Let me tell you, as this award signifies, they are second to none. The support they show for our Malmstrom Air Force Base men and women is more than just these monthly luncheons. For many years, MAC has sponsored a free picnic for military members and their families, with over 5000 people attending the annual event. At these picnics, MAC gives away over $15,000 in prizes, which comes from the local merchants. They also sponsor annual golf tournaments, raising money for military support programs. The leadership of MAC and Malmstrom AFB work together as TEAM MALMSTROM to foster understanding of the issues facing the military and the Great Falls community. As we face another round of base closings in the future, the Great Falls community has, once again, shown they are committed to the future of Malmstrom AFB and the brave men and women who serve their country from there. Malmstrom AFB's future is much brighter; the tours there by our Air Force men and women are better, due to the Great Falls MAC. Now, the entire Department of Defense knows Malmstrom AFB has tremendous support from the residents of the Great Falls, MT area. Congratulations MAC.

Mr. BURNS

Mr. BURNS. Of course. From the Montana legislature, that's where. We're very creative in Montana.

Mr. BURNS. I wonder if I might very briefly add a couple of points at this juncture. I wanted to join my colleagues here on the floor today because I feel strongly about this measure. As Senator Baucus said earlier, this whole idea started in Montana, and we've seen the kind of effect it can have there, so I feel confident that a federal broadband credit can have a similar effect in other areas of the country. The other point I wanted to make goes back to Senator Grassley's discussion of farming applications. I've spent a fair amount of time in agricultural pursuits myself, and if there is any doubt how agricultural organizations feel about broadband, you should take a look at the farm groups that have endorsed this bill. The American Farm Bureau, American Agri-Women, National Cattlemens' Beef Association, National Corn Growers Association, National Council of Farmer Cooperatives, National Pork Producers Council, National Sorghum Producers Association, National Wheat Growers Association, North American Export Grain Association, Rice Millers' Association, California Cotton Growers Association, California Cotton Ginners Association, Western Growers Association, U.S. Rice Producers' Group. The list goes on and on. Anyone who thinks farmers don't care about technology should spend some time on a modern farm, and what you will learn in that American agriculture is one of the most innovative industries in the world. Let me give you an example. Deere and Company, the farm equipment maker, is also a supporter of this legislation. And you may think at first, ``Why do they care? They just make tractors.'' But when you talk to them, you learn that the tractor of tomorrow-- indeed of today--has a lot of high-tech equipment on board that, as it drives through the fields, gathers information on plant conditions and soil conditions and moisture content and so forth. And that is incredibly valuable information to a farming operation. But to really use that information, you need a broadband connection to send it from the tractor to, say, a plant specialist a hundred miles away. Without that broadband connection, it will take a very long time to transmit the data, which makes it a lot less useful. So we need to take action now to get broadband networks built out all over the country, including those little places like Circle and Superior and Big Timber and Crow Agency and thousands of communities like them around the United States. And this bill is going to help do that, so I a feel very strongly that we need to pass it at the earliest opportunity.

Mr. BURNS

Mr. BURNS. I am pleased to announce the introduction of the Mineral Hill Historic Mining District Preservation Act of 2002. The purpose of this Act is for the Forest Service to accept a donation from TVX Mineral Hill, Inc., an inholding of approximately 570 acres of private land in the Gallatin National Forest. This inholding overlooks the Northern entrance of Yellowstone National Park and is within well known elk habitat. The donation also includes 194 acres of mineral right underlying federal lands. This bill provides a win-win situation with benefits for the community, for wildlife, for the company, and for the environment. After a rich and storied history, the Mineral Hill mine is played out and the opportunity to extract minerals has passed. The property is in very good condition and is being reclaimed in accordance with a reclamation plan approved by the Montana Department of Environmental Quality. The Forest Service has been closely involved during the reclamation planning and implementation processes to make certain that the property will remain in the excellent environmental state it is in today. As an added guarantee, the United States will also be the beneficiary of a $10 million insurance policy provided by TVX to clean up the site in the unlikely event that hazardous materials are discovered in the future. The Mineral Hill Mine is located in the historic Jardine Mining District which was established during the 1860s. Many of the buildings at the site go back to that time period. Some of the buildings will be preserved for interpretation purposes and will be available to the public. In addition, the site will be used in cooperation with Montana Tech of the University of Montana for mining and geologic education. The Mineral Hill property is being donated by TVX to the government without the necessity of a payment. There will be ongoing permits issued by the State of Montana and by EPA for monitoring of water discharge. This bill allows for those permits to be upheld and for the water processes to be maintained. In a letter to my office dated June 25, 2001, the Greater Yellowstone Coalition observed that ``we believe that there would be no adverse impact to the agency and indeed would be a benefit to the public that this donated land is conveyed with the obligation to maintain the NPDES permit already in force.'' This is exactly what the bill provides in Section 11. I am pleased to say that this is a bill with the support of all key parties. The Forest Service has agreed to the transfer and management of the land and has been actively involved in this process. The Gardiner Chamber of Commerce supports the project, as do the Commissioners of Park County. The Greater Yellowstone Coalition also supports the donation. Simply put, this legislation is in the public interest. On behalf of the people of Montana, I look forward to its passage.

Mr. BURNS

Mr. BURNS. I am pleased to announce the introduction of the Mineral Hill Historic Mining District Preservation Act of 2002. The purpose of this Act is for the Forest Service to accept a donation from TVX Mineral Hill, Inc., an inholding of approximately 570 acres of private land in the Gallatin National Forest. This inholding overlooks the Northern entrance of Yellowstone National Park and is within well known elk habitat. The donation also includes 194 acres of mineral right underlying federal lands. This bill provides a win-win situation with benefits for the community, for wildlife, for the company, and for the environment. After a rich and storied history, the Mineral Hill mine is played out and the opportunity to extract minerals has passed. The property is in very good condition and is being reclaimed in accordance with a reclamation plan approved by the Montana Department of Environmental Quality. The Forest Service has been closely involved during the reclamation planning and implementation processes to make certain that the property will remain in the excellent environmental state it is in today. As an added guarantee, the United States will also be the beneficiary of a $10 million insurance policy provided by TVX to clean up the site in the unlikely event that hazardous materials are discovered in the future. The Mineral Hill Mine is located in the historic Jardine Mining District which was established during the 1860s. Many of the buildings at the site go back to that time period. Some of the buildings will be preserved for interpretation purposes and will be available to the public. In addition, the site will be used in cooperation with Montana Tech of the University of Montana for mining and geologic education. The Mineral Hill property is being donated by TVX to the government without the necessity of a payment. There will be ongoing permits issued by the State of Montana and by EPA for monitoring of water discharge. This bill allows for those permits to be upheld and for the water processes to be maintained. In a letter to my office dated June 25, 2001, the Greater Yellowstone Coalition observed that ``we believe that there would be no adverse impact to the agency and indeed would be a benefit to the public that this donated land is conveyed with the obligation to maintain the NPDES permit already in force.'' This is exactly what the bill provides in Section 11. I am pleased to say that this is a bill with the support of all key parties. The Forest Service has agreed to the transfer and management of the land and has been actively involved in this process. The Gardiner Chamber of Commerce supports the project, as do the Commissioners of Park County. The Greater Yellowstone Coalition also supports the donation. Simply put, this legislation is in the public interest. On behalf of the people of Montana, I look forward to its passage.

Mr. BURNS

Mr. BURNS. In addition to the GAO study, I wish to bring your attention to a voluntary effort to address emissions from the aviation sector, known as the ``EPA/FAA Local Air Quality Initiative.'' As part of this voluntary initiative, the Environmental Protection Agency, Federal Aviation Administration, States, airlines, aerospace manufacturers, and environmental groups are working together to develop analyses that address the same subject matter detailed in H.R. 4.

Mr. BURNS. At this time, the General Accounting Office is working on a study--requested by the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, Aviation Subcommittee--to conduct a comprehensive overview of key issues associated with emissions from aviation activities. This study would cover the same subject matter as contemplated in Section 803 of H.R. 4. At this time of tight budget constraints, it is not a good use of limited resources to produce redundant studies. Accordingly, I urge Senator Murkowski in conference on the Energy Bill to strike the language in H.R. 4 requesting an aircraft emissions study.

Mr. BURNS

Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, I think if we have learned one thing from this exercise on energy legislation, it is that we found trying to mark up a bill on the floor of the Senate is pretty difficult. I was reminded that back in 1992 we almost did the same. We didn't have quite the spirited committee action on energy, but we still got into the same kind of a bind when it came to the floor. Maybe it doesn't make a lot of difference. I would like to remind my colleagues that today we should be talking about a policy we can shape to take us into the future. We are not only dealing with the acute situation we find ourselves in today, but where we want to be in 20, 30, 40, or 50 years from now. What do we do about new technologies, and which technologies are able to be developed in that time? That question indicates to me we have a great deal of flexibility to allow those new technologies to evolve and be used as soon as they are developed. Whatever we do in Government mandates, therefore we should make sure they are not frozen in place. We should allow those new ideas to grow. Market forces will dictate more in the way of conservation than any mandate by the Federal Government has ever done. Let me remind you that if gasoline goes to $2 a gallon, you are still spending more money for the water you buy in that filling station than you are for the gasoline. You will start looking for conservation practices in the things you do in your traveling habits. Fossil fuel has been the primary fuel of our economy since the turn of the last century. For over 100 years it has served us well, and it could for the next hundred. However, it should not be the only fuel we use in our everyday lives. New technology has moved us to unlimited use of renewables and different sources in the evolution of conservation technology and practice. We know the present conditions and situations. We should deal with them and decide what our policy will be after resolving this acute situation. The condition we find ourselves in today is about energy security. To those who would use the flimsy argument saying we should use less and produce less, I say there is another one that is acutely in our makeup; that is, energy security is economic security is national security. What direction that takes us in is very important. Our challenge should be that debating this bill will take us beyond that situation. The world condition is at hand, and it should be dealt with right now. I have iterated many times that we are still dependent on fossil fuels. The switch from those fossil fuels is a process that will take a long time, and it will be very expensive. What is at stake here? Let us look at the real facts instead of the misinformation that is floating around this town. Let me remind you that the American people know what is at stake, and they are not comfortable with the facts they are given. They are equally uncomfortable with what is happening on the floor of this Senate. I have one simple question: Why are we importing oil from Iraq? Agreed, they are allowed to sell oil under the U.N. resolution. The income derived from those sales is to be used to buy food and medical supplies for the citizens of Iraq. If Saddam Hussein sells us anywhere from 650,000 to 850,000 barrels of oil a day, and also sells some oil on the black market, what is he doing with that money? Where do you think it goes? I will tell you where it doesn't go. It doesn't go to the citizens of Iraq. He buys arms and technology to equip his army and support terrorist activities around the world. In fact, we are told that Iraq is paying $25,000 cash to any family who loses a suicide bomber. That is going way over the line. From the Gulf, we import about 10.8 million barrels of oil a day, and 1.5 million barrels comes from Saudi Arabia. Nearly a million barrels come from Iraq. Let us take a look at this tiny little spot called the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. Keep in mind that when it was created, this little area was set aside for oil and gas exploration and production. That is the reason it was set aside--not the whole Arctic Plain, but just that little footprint of 2,000 acres or less. Conservative estimates put the total production at about 1.35 million barrels a day. That would replace 55 years of oil from Iraq and 30 years of oil imports from Saudi Arabia. The reserves in ANWR are estimated to be 10 billion barrels. That is a conservative estimate. Remember how we underestimated Prudhoe Bay. It has produced nearly 20 percent of our domestic production in the last 25 years. Since 1973, domestic production has decreased by 57 percent. We are only producing about 8 million barrels a day, and we are using 19 million barrels a day. Anybody who doesn't understand that didn't take basic math in the same grade school where I went to school, which is a little country school. We hear every day on the floor of the Senate that we should be concerned about our balance of payments. We should be concerned about it. Last year alone, we sent $4.5 billion to Saddam Hussein's Iraq for his oil. As I said, energy security is economic security is national security. This has a job impact. We heard all kinds of estimates. But we know this won't happen without the effort of labor. Yesterday, if you had stood with the heart and soul of the labor folks in this country and heard their arguments that this should happen, then you would understand why the Nation supports the development and exploration of this tiny spot. We have people living in Montana who work on the North Slope. We have had since the first day they started production up there. They jump on airplanes, spend a couple of weeks, and come home for a week. It is important to my state. If Prudhoe were built today, the footprint would be around 1,500 acres--64 percent smaller than it is. ANWR will impact 2,000 acres out of 1.5 million acres on the Coastal Plain. I have been up there. I have seen the Porcupine caribou herd. It has grown about three times in size during the last 20 years. That is where they calve. They don't stay there all winter. They are a migrating herd. Nothing has kept them from migrating. The people who live in that area depend on that herd. That is a source of food supply for them. When they migrate, that is when they get their winter stores. They don't have grocery stores like we have down here. They don't want anything to happen to that herd. I don't think they are going to mislead us on how that herd will be impacted. Oil and gas production and wildlife have successfully coexisted in the Alaskan Arctic for over 30 years. The figures bear that out. Despite what is told and the misinformation that flies around here, the folks on the Coastal Plain support this by 75 percent. They understand what the revenue does. They understand that it provides a government service which is demanded by them. That is even taking into account the money that it pumps into the National Treasury. Anybody on the Budget Committee around here would understand that also. I know how this impacts a State represented by two Senators who have stood in this Chamber and have fought for their people every day. It is like us going to southern Illinois and saying: You can't have any more oil production down there. But they can't say it because there are no public lands. But in Alaska there are, and that is the difference. Withdrawal of public lands from any exploration of natural gas in the States of Montana, Wyoming, Colorado, and some in New Mexico, has cost the American people 137 trillion cubic feet of natural gas. And that is going to be the fuel that produces the electricity of the future. We think it is for ``the environment,'' when it could be lifted, produced, and moved with hardly a disturbance to any of the surface of our land. And, yes, you are going to see natural gas turn up as a transportation fuel. What we are doing in this argument defies common sense. These are the facts. They should not take away from our investment into new technologies and our determination for conservation. I will not let anybody else redefine the word ``conservation'' because it is defined as a wise use of a resource. We should move forward on R&D into new technologies. Even coal--and Montana is the ``Saudi Arabia'' of the coal reserves in this country--it is there, it is handy, it is affordable, and it is ready for use. Our investment in fuel cell technology will be an important part of our energy mix, and we should not depart from its development. I will tell you what fuel cells do. Fuel cells are to the electric industry what the wireless telephone is to the communications industry. They are safe, clean, and now we have a chance to make it affordable. We should continue our work in that area. But, in the meantime, let's do what common sense tells us to do: Let's use that little footprint afforded to this country for the production of energy because energy security is economic security, is national security. I thank the Chair and yield the floor.

Mr. BURNS

Mr. BURNS. I thank my good friend from Virginia. The Senator from Virginia has rural areas; we have frontier areas. That kind of draws a distinction. I think the Senator from Virginia has picked up a big part of the responsibility of furthering the agenda of high technology because our States do have a lot of similarity, such as in distance learning and telemedicine. These areas are isolated by mountains, where communications and the free flow of information have eluded people. Of course, with that in mind, I think he has picked up on what he wants to do with his State of Virginia, so that not only Northern Virginia benefits from research and development but the advancement of the information age, and also that the rest of the State can participate in it as well. If you look at my State of Montana, you see we have similar challenges ahead of us. I congratulate Senator Allen for his fine work. He has done a marvelous job chairing this high-tech task force. Under his leadership, we were able to aid in some victories last year, including the extension of the Internet tax moratorium for 2 years and the inclusion of an enhanced depreciation provision in the stimulus package that the President just signed. Senator Allen went over the list that pretty well sets our priorities, and not necessarily in that order; they are all very important. I am a member of the Internet caucus, which is a bipartisan group. This year in our opening reception we had over 40 exhibitors. Senator Allen came. Approximately 1,000 people attended that reception. The free flow of information has become very important. I want to go over a couple of points. I gave a lot of speeches before I ever came to the Senate saying there have been three interventions that have changed our whole way of life. It has really brought the size of our planet down considerably. First is the jet engine, second is the transistor, and third is the silicon chip. In a matter of hours, we can be anywhere in the world. We can in 5 seconds exchange ideas visually and audibly anywhere in the world, whether it be land line or through space. The silicon chip has sped up the way we handle information. It has changed our life forever. This planet is smaller because of those inventions. Look at what has happened since. As the information age came upon us, we realized as far back as 1989 and 1990, when I first came to the Senate, that the policies that guided the infrastructure for that flow of information were passed in 1934. We soon understood that some policy changes were going to have to take place before we could see gigantic moves or an extension of the way we were to deal with the free flow of information. As a result, it only took 6 years to pass the Telco Act of 1996 because we were trying to set policy for technologies that went way beyond what was thought in 1935. The free flow of information is democracy. We all base our decisions on the information we get. As long as it is a free flow of information, a free flow of ideas, our democracy and our Republic will remain strong and people will participate in the political arena. Freedom equals opportunity, but it is also held together by an ingredient called responsibility. We were not finished looking at the policies before we got the Internet, this great infrastructure of information. We have to take a look at the insurance to be sure we have sound organizations as the gatekeepers. Specifically, before we can look at the complex area of comprehensive spectrum reform, we should keep in mind the vital nature of spectrum to those on the front line of homeland defense, our first responders: The police, fire, medical, public health, and other emergency response agencies. We passed a bill in the last Congress that is revolutionizing the cell phone industry. For the first time, we made 911 the national emergency number. Now, with new technology, one can dial 911 on a cell phone and reach the nearest first responder. Before, in the cell phone industry, if one dialed 911, they were apt to get anybody anywhere. The calls now go into the nearest communications center that can handle an emergency. Another topic that will prove of utmost importance to critical infrastructure is the operation of a shadowy organization known as the Internet Corporation for Names and Numbers, commonly known as ICANN. The formation of ICANN originated with the so-called green and white papers of the Clinton administration in 1998 that proposed the delegation of control of the domain name system from the Commerce Department to an entirely new organization which would be a new, not- for-profit corporation formed by private sector Internet stakeholders. The Clinton administration further proposed that the U.S. Government should end its role in the Internet numbers and names address system. Soon thereafter, ICANN was created and the Commerce Department began to delegate the functions of the Internet domain name system to it. In the eyes of many critics, this delegation has happened far too swiftly. While ICANN is supposed to function by consensus of the Internet community, its operation has often been controversial and shrouded in mystery. Recently, even the President of ICANN, Stuart Lynn, admitted publicly the organization is not working and needs to undergo comprehensive structural reform because it is losing sight of effectiveness in accomplishing our real mission. Taking into account that the ICANN mission is ensuring the stable and secure management of the Internet domain system, I am extremely concerned at these developments which are so critical to our national security. In another area, to make the Internet more responsible and make it respond to the users, to give the users confidence in this system, we have to look at spamming. Spamming is the receiving of unwanted junk mail. I do not know of a time on my address anyway that I have received more spam than I am right now. It is a lot more than when I was in the U.S. Marine Corps, I can tell you that. The irresponsible use of spamming by marketers cannot be tolerated. To ensure the free flow of information and confidence in this system, we have to take a look at privacy. Those are the areas we should be focusing on now in order to let this great technology be a workhorse for us. I thank the chairman of the high-tech task force. I applaud him for his leadership in taking on this great responsibility. I yield the floor.

Mr. BURNS

Mr. BURNS. I thank both of my friends from Nebraska. Both have been champions for renewable fuels, especially in the area of ethanol development. We all know we have not put forth our best effort toward research and development for the best use of this fuel. I was raised in the Midwest. When people think of ethanol, they think of corn. But corn is not the only grain that can be used. I lend my support to what the Senator from Nebraska is saying, and also to all our work in research and development for making this fuel more viable, making it work, and making it cost effective. It must be one of our big challenges. I have heard my good friend from Nebraska, the former Governor of Nebraska, make a couple of speeches on ethanol; both his enthusiasm for the product and the benefits it provides. It is not only good for our country, but good for our air and for the agricultural community that sorely needs help. Increasing the use of ethanol to 5 billion gallons is a step in the right direction. Some say it is possible to increase that figure. It is a number we finally settled on that was acceptable to folks who want to participate in this industry in my State of Montana. As I have stated, early this morning we spoke of the high-tech task force that we put together on this side of the aisle. We talk of all the research and development for the free flow of information. Here is another area we should zero in on. It will be new structures that will allow us to take advantage of this fuel and make it as efficient as using total gasoline or oxygenated gasolines. I talk to refiners in the private sector. Nobody wants to make a cleaner fuel than the refiners. The increase in production of ethanol is a good step. However, we should look at what we can do with our land grant universities who have the wherewithal to do some real research and development on this fuel, making it more viable than it is today. We have shortchanged making it better and more cost effective. We can let this work for us. I support my good friends from Nebraska. I thank them for their leadership on this issue. It is important. I would like to be part of trying to round up a little more money in a government-private sector partnership and allow the research to go forward on this matter. I thank my good friend from Nebraska. I yield the floor.

Mr. BURNS

Mr. BURNS. The Senator must have been pretty good at it. He still has all of his fingers and thumbs.

Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, will the Senator yield?

Mr. BURNS

Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, I thank my good friend from Alaska, and I thank the chairman of the Energy and Natural Resources Committee for the time. This is a great day. I think this is a good day. We have finally started talking about legislation we hope will facilitate a policy to make us a little more efficient but also increase supply, especially in case of emergency, and to keep this economy rolling. The bill we have today is 433 pages long, and it is written in legalese that most people, including me, do not easily understand. As complicated as this bill is and as complicated as this process is, the reality is simple: This country needs a comprehensive energy policy. Last fall, this country was shaken to its foundation. That experience has made each of us stand back and make decisions about what is really important in our lives. As I have traveled across this country and in my home State of Montana, I keep hearing the same thing over again. Everybody in America wants to protect their family, they want to provide a safe and secure living environment, they want to protect their loved ones from harm. There is one thing that is undisputable. I represent an energy State. We have been in the production of energy for a long time in Montana so we know a little something about it. There is also something else that is indisputable and that is that a comprehensive energy policy is absolutely paramount to American freedom. Let me put it this way: Energy security is economic security is national security. If that magic word that goes across our television screen and across our mind is ``security,'' we cannot separate those three. Energy security is economic security is national security, so that the decisions we make here in the Senate will affect and direct the lives of every single American, without exception. The policy we set here on the Senate floor should ensure that energy is affordable, and that it is abundant. Affordable energy means businesses stay open and businesses prosper and people keep working. It means senior citizens who are on fixed incomes are able to pay their electricity bill at the end of the month without having to give up something else. It means someone can fill up their car with gas and drive their kids to school; fill up a truck and deliver goods across the country without breaking the bank; and, yes, to my State, crank up the combines, harvest a crop and put another one in, without fearing the repercussions of high fuel prices. Every one of us will be affected no matter how basic the level. So we have to answer a lot of questions. How do we get dependable, affordable supplies of energy? That will be the focus of this debate, and the policy that carries us not through my generation but also the next generation and the next. And that is about the time we will have another policy change because technology and circumstances will change. We have heard some of my colleagues claim Americans use too much energy, that we are greedy, that we use more than our fair share of the world's supply of energy. Would those same people stand up and argue that the United States produces more than its fair share of goods and services? Would they say we have an oversupply of American ingenuity? Are we producing more computers, more cars, more agricultural goods than we should? I don't think so. I don't think the hard-working people who produce those goods think so either. We can do that because we are good at it and because we have used our energy with the best conservation technology known until this date. Let's go one step beyond the economic security that affordable energy provides. Think about the security it provides this country when we improve our ability to produce different kinds of energy domestically. For example, this country buys 56 percent of its oil from other countries. Think back to the 1970s when we had the lines at the gas stations. Then it was around 35 or 36 percent from foreign countries. I don't like that kind of vulnerability. Much of that oil is produced from countries or producers that have very honest intentions, but, I will remind Americans, not all of them and not all of it. Every drop of oil we produce domestically is one that we do not buy from Saddam Hussein. Every barrel bought from a rogue nation could mean a bomb built to hurt this country. I think it is about time we turn off the spigot of terrorist oil. In this debate we will start talking about the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge. While at times the point may be confused, like in the colloquy that just preceded me--ANWR was a wildlife refuge created by law and that law gave express permission or grant to drill within parts of it. I can think of no other public land that was created with that express intention and law. I would like to point out that the debate over ANWR will boil down to whether we open up 2,000 acres for exploration in Alaska. It will be examined. It will be turned inside and out, over and over again. We will debate this a long time. I say to my good friend from Oklahoma, whose State is an energy producer like my state of Montana, that since 1997, in my State alone, the Federal Government and the executive branch have managed to shut off 727,000 acres from gas and oil development in Montana in two different decisions. There was no congressional discussion either time. I agree with open debate and I am glad to be a part of this process, but I wonder why we only get to do it when we want to open Federal land, and not when we shut it off. Why is it that a midlevel manager in the Forest Service can make the decision to close 350,000 acres, and we don't hear a whimper or whisper on the Senate Floor. Because of a decision made in a federal bureaucracy or through executive order, it has been decided we are going to take that land out of production. That denies my State the ability to produce energy for a country that really needs it, and the jobs it provides and the revenue it provides to my State to build schools, build roads, provide government services. Of course, this debate will extend beyond domestic oil and gas production, and it should. We are developing excellent technology. We are tapping resources to create energy from new sources. I heard mention today about renewables. They want to use thermal activity. We live next to an area that has more thermal activity than any place in our country: Yellowstone Park. There is thermal potential all the way around it. You just try to develop it. It cannot be done because you have to cross federal land to get there, which makes absolutely no sense. We will talk about fuel cells. We will talk about biomass. We will talk about ethanol. We will talk about wind. Those are only a few of the opportunities we have to use our resources in new ways. I am proud to support alternative and renewable energy, and will continue to do so. But we can't shortchange our energy needs today by focusing our efforts on alternative energy alone. Many of the technologies are promising but are still in the developmental and very expensive stages in comparison to our traditional energy sources. By continuing to develop and encourage alternative fuels and create markets for those technologies, we can approach this country's energy future with optimism. It is time we go to work. It is time we debate those issues one by one. But keep in mind what I said at the beginning of this speech. I do not know of a military airplane we fly that doesn't burn oil-based fuel. And if something really bad happens in this country, I tell you something: The fire truck that shows up and the emergency vehicle will burn gasoline. In order to fight this great battle against terrorism and against people who would erode our freedoms, who work in the shadows, and who are a faceless enemy, the weapons we need still burn gasoline. We have to think about the American people and their safety and their security. What we are asking in this is a policy that will develop those new technologies. But we cannot turn our backs on the demand for the energy sources we have used for so long in this country. Let us work to give the American people what they need--a safe, steady energy supply that will ensure economic stability and national security. I thank the Chair. I yield the floor.

Mr. BURNS

Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, I rise today to recognize Eric Bergoust, a distinguished freestyle skier from Missoula MT. At the age of 31, Eric has attained nearly every milestone that inspires athletes to achieve their dreams. He is an Olympic champion, a world champion, and has held numerous world records throughout his career. As impressive as his accomplishments are, the passion Eric has for his sport is truly remarkable. Passion shines brightest through innovations, and Eric has made many. He has landed unprecedented jumps throughout his career, and has developed a one-armed take off style that has opened up new possibilities to all freestyle skiers. Like so many of his fellow Montanans, Eric has achieved great things through both his appreciation of the virtues of a will-do attitude and the determination to follow through on a task. These assets led Eric down the seemingly improbable path from a boy jumping off the roof of his house into a matress pile, to a young man driving alone from Montana to Lake Placid with only makeshift skis and ten dollars in his pocket, to an Olympic and world champion. It has been exciting to see Eric accomplish so many things. But when I consider the determination and passion that have pushed Eric along, it has become clear that maybe his path really wasn't so improbable after all.