Thomas Carper

Mr. CARPER

Mr. CARPER. Mr. President, I rise today in recognition of LTC John Burke upon his retirement from the U.S. Air Force. John is the longest certified C-5 pilot in the history of the U.S. Air Force, and has served his country with distinction for 32 years. Since 1995, Lieutenant Colonel Burke has served as Chief Pilot for the 709th Airlift Squadron at Dover Air Force Base. Assigned to overseas mission support, joint service exercises, humanitarian relief, Presidential movement and aircrew training, he has been indispensable to his squadron's success. In his latest position, Lieutenant Colonel Burke was responsible for evaluating procedures and techniques that ensured the safety and efficacy of the C-5 in its strategic airlift missions, as well as evaluating its pilots. As you may know, the C-5 is the Air Force's largest cargo aircraft, capable of quickly moving large numbers of men, women and materiel to troubled areas around the world. The C-5 will ensure our military readiness for generations to come, as will Lieutenant Colonel Burke's legacy of leadership and heroism. Lieutenant Colonel Burke is a well-rounded, seasoned officer with a record for consistently combining effective leadership and professionalism. He leads by example--motivating people, making key decisions, producing results and maintaining high morale. He has amassed an impressive 7,400 flight hours and frequent accolades. Throughout his distinguished career, Lieutenant Colonel Burke flew in vital missions and earned numerous decorations. In a career that spans three decades, Lieutenant Colonel Burke has served in significant military campaigns, such as Nickel Grass, Desert Shield and Desert Storm, Operation Enduring Freedom, and Operation Just Cause. On May 30, 1972, barraged by antiaircraft fire flying over Southeast Asia, Burke landed in Song Be to deliver much needed fuel and ammunition to allied troops fighting hostile forces, earning the Distinguished Flying Cross. Additionally, he has garnered numerous other medals and commendations, including the Meritorious Service Medal, the Aerial Achievement Medal, the Humanitarian Service Medal, the Air Force Longevity Service Award Ribbon, and Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross. Military service runs in the New York native's blood. Lieutenant Colonel Burke's father was a World War II Army Air Force navigator and bombardier, and his mother was an Army nurse. Joining the U.S. Air Force in 1970, Lieutenant Colonel Burke carried on the family tradition of military allegiance. LTC John Burke marked his career with consistent, exemplary leadership in service to his Nation, earning a reputation for loyalty, dedication, integrity, and honesty. Upon his retirement he leaves a legacy of commitment to freedom that generations will follow. I commend him for his remarkable service and wish him the best in his future endeavors. He is a patriot in every sense of the word.

Mr. CARPER

Mr. CARPER. Mr. President, I am very pleased to join today with my distinguished colleagues from New Jersey, Nevada, and New York to introduce legislation to index the Federal Housing Administration's, FHA, multifamily loan limits. Last year, Senator Corzine and I introduced similar legislation that raised the FHA multifamily loan limits, which had not been increased since 1992 despite a 23 percent increase in the Annual Construction Cost Index. Senators Mikulski and Bond included this increase in last year's VA-HUD appropriations legislation. I am pleased that these limits were increased last year, however, an important piece of the original legislation was left undone. While the FHA loan limits were increased, they were not indexed. Construction costs will continue to rise, and the multifamily loan limits should be indexed, just like the FHA single-family loan limits. Affordable housing continues to be a problem in this country. Over the July recess, I held a series of housing summits in Delaware to hear from Delawareans about the lack of affordable housing. In each county, I heard that working families in Delaware are having difficulty finding affordable housing. This shortage of affordable housing also comes at a time of limited federal resources. Thus, we have to find the best use of each dollar at our disposal, as well as the most effective use of existing Federal programs to stimulate new housing production and substantial rehabilitation. This bill modifies a current federal program, FHA multifamily insurance, to make that program more effective. In the next Congress, I hope to be able to address the affordable housing problem in a more comprehensive manner. In the meantime, I believe Congress can take some incremental steps to address the shortage of affordable housing. I ask my colleagues to join Senators Corzine, Ensign, and Schumer and me to increase these multifamily loan limits so that more working families will have access to affordable housing.

Mr. CARPER

Mr. CARPER. Mr. President, I am very pleased to join today with my distinguished colleagues from New Jersey, Nevada, and New York to introduce legislation to index the Federal Housing Administration's, FHA, multifamily loan limits. Last year, Senator Corzine and I introduced similar legislation that raised the FHA multifamily loan limits, which had not been increased since 1992 despite a 23 percent increase in the Annual Construction Cost Index. Senators Mikulski and Bond included this increase in last year's VA-HUD appropriations legislation. I am pleased that these limits were increased last year, however, an important piece of the original legislation was left undone. While the FHA loan limits were increased, they were not indexed. Construction costs will continue to rise, and the multifamily loan limits should be indexed, just like the FHA single-family loan limits. Affordable housing continues to be a problem in this country. Over the July recess, I held a series of housing summits in Delaware to hear from Delawareans about the lack of affordable housing. In each county, I heard that working families in Delaware are having difficulty finding affordable housing. This shortage of affordable housing also comes at a time of limited federal resources. Thus, we have to find the best use of each dollar at our disposal, as well as the most effective use of existing Federal programs to stimulate new housing production and substantial rehabilitation. This bill modifies a current federal program, FHA multifamily insurance, to make that program more effective. In the next Congress, I hope to be able to address the affordable housing problem in a more comprehensive manner. In the meantime, I believe Congress can take some incremental steps to address the shortage of affordable housing. I ask my colleagues to join Senators Corzine, Ensign, and Schumer and me to increase these multifamily loan limits so that more working families will have access to affordable housing.

Mr. CARPER

Mr. CARPER. Mr. President, I rise today to recognize Sister Rosa Alvarez for her commitment to social service for Delaware's immigrants. She has dedicated her life to opening doors to families that otherwise might have been closed by language and cultural barriers. In doing so, she has become a lifeline for Georgetown's Hispanic community. In the last decade, Latino immigrants have flooded Georgetown, transforming the ethnic and cultural backdrop of southern Delaware. Sister Rosa has helped the community overcome language barriers so that they can start healthy families and lead productive lives. Sister Rosa has been present for hundreds of area births. Known as ``la abuelita,'' or ``little grandmother,'' Sister offers help to Georgetown's mothers and children, particularly those mothers who are children themselves. Placing heavy emphasis on prenatal care, she helps young mothers make doctors appointments and provides transportation if necessary, to make sure they get to them. She successfully campaigned for vitamins for the community's pregnant mothers, and actively mentors parents who need assistance. Sister Rosa works with La Esperanza, a community center for Sussex County's Latino population doing fantastic work in its own right, to provide social services for thousands of immigrants faced with inaccessible healthcare, domestic violence, reduced education and legal complications. Working alongside Mark Lally and Marjorie Biles in my Georgetown office, Sister Rosa helps the downstate Hispanic community navigate the maze of paperwork often required to get work visas, Medicaid benefits and housing. She helps Spanish-speaking immigrants fill out English language forms and devotes time every week to helping families translate and pay their bills. At some point, all of us need to look back and take stock of where we have been and where we are going. Have we lived our lives in the service to others, or merely for ourselves? At the end of the day, can we say with confidence that we did our best and worked to our fullest potential? I had the pleasure of meeting Sister Rosa at La Red, a Hispanic health center in Sussex County, DE, earlier this year. I was struck by her boundless energy and kind heart. She offers people hope. Her dedication intensifies the work of others, and pushes us to take an introspective look at the purpose of our own lives. Mahatma Ghandi, one of Sister's idols, said in the 1920s, ``If we are to reach real peace in this world, we shall have to begin with the children.'' Today his sentiments are seen in her actions. At a time when the face of our Nation is in constant flux and the call to service rings louder than ever, it is individuals like Sister Rosa who leave me feeling hopeful about our country's future. It is she who brought many in the community to my office for assistance, she who is empowering community leaders, she who is making a difference with her infectious smile. I rise today to honor and thank Sister Rosa for her selfless dedication to the betterment of others. She is a remarkable woman and a testament to the community she represents.

Mr. CARPER

Mr. CARPER. Mr. President, I rise today to recognize Wilmington's Pastabilities for its outstanding commitment to community service. The National Restaurant Association has recognized the restaurant as a finalist in their Restaurant Neighbor Award. The national distinction rewards restaurants for outstanding philanthropic work. In his State of the Union address earlier this year, President Bush unveiled the USA Freedom Corps, challenging every American to commit at least 2 years of their life to serving their community and their country. Pastabilities, in Wilmington, Delaware has exceeded the President's call to action. Owner Luigi Vitrone recognizes the importance of neighborhood revitalization and preservation. He and his staff have spent years dedicating energy and resources to improving their community. The results have been outstanding. Founder of the Little Italy Neighborhood Restaurant Association, LINA, Mr. Vitrone spearheaded the effort to save Wilmington's ``Little Italy'' from an economic downturn. Having lived and worked in the neighborhood for over a decade, the personal investment ran deep. Established in 1997, LINA has raised $4.8 million from public, state and private sources to help rejuvenate the neighborhood. The money raised has been used to add new light posts, brick sidewalks, banners, and flowerpots and to make important structural changes that make the neighborhood more handicapped accessible. Luigi Vitrone has successfully restored Delaware's ``Little Italy'' to the beautiful, unique, authentic community it once was. Volunteer service is vital to the improvement of our community, and the Pastabilities family has lent their time and energy at every turn. Local businesses such as this one serve as role models for citizen action and make Delaware shine. I am proud to put a spotlight on one of the State's premier businesses. I commend Pastabilities for their fantastic culinary work and thank Luigi Vitrone for his leadership and commitment to strengthening the community. This most recent honor bestowed upon the restaurant mirrors the pride felt by the neighborhood.

Mr. CARPER

Mr. CARPER. Mr. President, I rise today to pay tribute to Sally Hawkins, owner and president of WILM NewsRadio in Delaware. On her 80th birthday she remains a vibrant and purposeful woman, a dedicated entrepreneur and a celebrated public servant. Sally started and maintains what is now the only remaining privately- owned and operated all-news radio station in the country. In an era when single-station AM radio operations have all but disappeared, she built a respected news station from the ground up--earning my respect, and the respect of her peers along the way. As chair of the National Governor's Association and now as the DLC's chair for Best Practices, I've spent some time touring the country and highlighting the nation's very best programs, businesses and innovators. WILM certainly ranks among the best. The inroads made by Sally and the family, her family, at WILM are unparalleled. WILM News radio strives to reinforce the foundation of community radio. The station's programming transcends race, creed, income and political boundaries. Its commitment to community outreach and support of the arts and non-profits has helped keep organizations vital during the crucial development stages. In a business environment in which the pressure to cut costs for the sake of profit is common, Sally has never wavered in her commitment to balanced coverage and public service. WILM is heavily committed to providing a neutral forum in which all political aspirants may enjoy equal time to debate issues in front of the public. Sally seeks to enlighten listeners, making them better citizens and more informed voters. How many of us can say that we are proud of the life that we've lived and the service that we've provided to the community? In a career that spans decades, Sally has led the National Association of Broadcasters Board, as well as the boards of the Better Business Bureau, the Delaware State Chamber of Commerce and the U.S. Small Business Administration. She has served on the executive committee of the Grand Opera House, the external affairs committee of Christiana Care, and on the boards of Blue Cross/Blue Shield, Goldey- Beacom College, the Delaware Council of Economic Education, the Girl Scout Advisory Council and the Delaware Community Foundation. Last year, she was named The Ledger's 2001 Entrepreneurial Woman of the Year. This remarkable woman, at the helm of one of our state's most important news outlets since 1972, has done much to pave the path for women who want both successful careers and families and for First State organizations who dare to dream big. Fueled by dedication and determination, Sally Hawkins took control of WILM thirty years ago. Today she still runs the day-to-day operations of the station, writes copy, mentors and travels internationally. Today, I commend Sally Hawkins for her talent and perseverance, and join all of those whom she has touched, in celebrating her life. Happy birthday, Sally.

Mr. CARPER

Mr. CARPER. Mr. President, I rise today to recognize Iron Hill Brewery and Restaurant for its outstanding commitment to community service. The National Restaurant Association has recognized the restaurant as a finalist in their Restaurant Neighbor Award. The national distinction rewards restaurants for outstanding philanthropic work. In his State of the Union address earlier this year, President Bush unveiled the USA Freedom Corps, challenging every American to commit at least two years of their life to serving their community and their country. Iron Hill Brewery and Restaurant in Newark, Delaware has exceeded the President's call to action. The restaurant takes its name from a historic Delaware landmark where Generals Washington and Lafayette battled with General Cornwallis to ensure American liberty and freedom. Today, Iron Hill carries on this tradition of fighting for freedom. For the past four years, Iron Hill has been a major sponsor of the ``Race Against Family Violence'' which takes place each year on Mother's Day weekend. The race benefits Child, Inc., a nonprofit organization that helps free children and families from the threat of domestic violence through prevention, education, treatment and advocacy. To date, the Iron Hill family has raised $16,000 through the ``Race Against Family Violence.'' The operation has also taken an active role in the revitalization of downtown Wilmington, donating food and services and raising money for organizations such as the March of Dimes. Iron Hill has turned the act of giving to the community into a tradition. Twice a year, they provide a complete dinner for Delaware Technical & Community College's culinary class. Volunteer service is vital to the improvement of our community, and Iron Hill Brewery and Restaurant has lent their time and energy at every turn. Local businesses such as this one serve as role models for citizen action and make Delaware shine. I am proud to put a spotlight on one of the state's premier businesses. I commend Iron Hill Brewery and Restaurant for their fantastic culinary work and thank them for their leadership and commitment to strengthening the community. The most recent honor bestowed upon the restaurant mirrors the pride felt by the community.

Mr. CARPER

Mr. CARPER. Mr. President, I would like to set aside a moment to reflect on the life of Mr. Jack. F. Owens upon his passing. Jack was a good friend and a man who made remarkable contributions toward educational opportunities for thousands of Delawareans. He was a man with a kind heart, diverse interests, great abilities and boundless energy. Jack was born in Easley, SC. After graduating from Easley High School where he excelled in various sports, Jack went to Furman University where he continued his academic and athletic exploits, lettering in three sports, and graduating in 1952. After serving his country as a member of the United States Marine Corps, Jack returned to South Carolina and began a career in academia, first in the Pickins County School system and then at Greenville Technical College. Responding to the call of then Delaware Governor Charles Terry, Jack came to Delaware to help open Delaware's Technical and Community College in Sussex County in March of 1967. He was the school's first administrator and headed the Sussex County campus for twenty-eight years, retiring in 1995. In 1993, Jack received Delaware's highest honor when he was awarded ``The Order of the First State.'' As Governor, I had the honor of signing into law legislation that named the Sussex Campus in Jack's honor. Today, it is called ``The Jack Owens Campus.'' The energy and commitment found in the students and faculty at DelTech are, in large part, due to Jack's vision. Even after his retirement, Jack remained committed to public service. He served on numerous boards and commissions including The Arthritis Foundation, the Veterans of Foreign Wars and Ducks Unlimited, and served as a board member of the Beebe Medical Center and as Chairman of the Delmarva Chicken Festival. He received honorary doctorate degrees from Wilmington College and the University of Guadalajara, Mexico, where he helped establish a community college system. Jack leaves behind his wife Donna, 6 children and 6 grandchildren. He also leaves behind many friends, colleagues and several generations of students who are living more productive, satisfying lives today because Jack made the decision thirty-five years ago to come north to Delaware. Jack's lifelong dream was that students in Sussex County would have the opportunity to receive undergraduate and advanced degrees in their home county. He lived to see that dream fulfilled. Jack's legacy will live on in the lives of those he helped shape, in the halls of education facilities he helped build, and in the hearts of those who were lucky enough to call him their friend. I rise today to commemorate Jack's life, to celebrate his life, and to offer his family support. Jack embodied the best of Delaware. He will be sorely missed.

Mr. CARPER

Mr. CARPER. Mr. President, I rise today to discuss the status of the National Fire Plan, the 2002 Wildfire season and the Delawareans who risked their lives to save others. Since January 1, over 47,000 wildfires have burned more than 3,200,000 acres around the country. The vast majority of these fires have been small, just a few acres at most; however, several have been massive fires consuming hundreds or thousands of acres. To those living nearest these fires, they have suffered a tremendous loss. But thanks to the outstanding effort and tireless dedication of firefighters from around the country, many of these large wildfires have been suppressed, and the smaller fires have been prevented from growing larger. While wildfires tend to be a greater problem in the West, concern for the residents, for their health, for their safety, and for their homes extends nationwide. In Delaware, we have not experienced the devastating effects of fires seen in other states, yet men and women from my state have been willing to stand shoulder to shoulder with their brothers and sisters in helping fight these devastating fires. The Delaware Wildfire Fire Crew, a 20-member advanced firefighting group made up of eight Department of Agriculture Forest Services employees and twelve volunteers has been on the road for two weeks, battling fires in Wyoming, South Dakota, and Virginia. Most recently, the crew helped put out a lightning sparked fire that burned approximately 850 acres of the George Washington National Forest in Virginia. Their heroism and their selflessness were apparent. I want you to know that my heart was filled with pride when I learned this convoy of Delaware firefighting personnel was en route to offer assistance. These men and women were willing to stop what they were doing at a moment's notice. They were willing to put their own lives on hold, leave their own families, and help those who needed help. At some point, all of us need to look back and take stock of where we have been and where we are going. Have we lived our lives in the service to others, or merely for ourselves? Have we made clear our commitments and worked with purpose to fulfill them, or simply meandered in search of a cause? At the end of the day, can we say with confidence that we did our best and worked to our fullest potential? For these firefighters, and the thousands of others fighting this season's wildfires, the answers are clear. They live a life of service. They embody a commitment to excellence that serves as an example and an inspiration to us all. Whether working to protect those of us here in Delaware, or risking their lives to fight the raging wildfires of the West, they proved to us that if a family is in trouble, if a fire threatens a home--Delaware's volunteer firefighters will be there for us--and for America--leading the way.

Mr. CARPER

Mr. CARPER. The Senator from Kentucky and I agree on a variety of issues that relate to what we are talking about. Tomorrow, the Senate Judiciary Committee holds hearings on class action reform. I think it is a situation that calls for a national or a Federal solution. Many of us heard from our constituents around the country that we as a Congress need to do something to address asbestos reform legislation because there are a lot of folks who are being hurt from asbestosis and they are not getting anything out of it. Their damages are not being covered. Meanwhile a lot of people who are not sick, will never be sick, are diluting the money that should be going to people who really have asbestosis or diseases related to asbestos. Those are issues that I think cry out for a national solution. The one we are talking about here today, medical malpractice, is a problem in a number of States--I will acknowledge that--but it is a problem that can be fixed in a number of States. Delaware is one of those States in which legislation is pending today to address this issue and where it is most appropriately addressed.

Mr. CARPER. I thank the Senator for yielding.

Mr. CARPER

Mr. CARPER. Madam President, I rise to enthusiastically support the nomination of David William Thomas to be the next United States Marshal for the District of Delaware. It has been my pleasure to know Sgt. Thomas for many years. He is a good and decent person, a devoted and committed husband and father, a fine police officer, a volunteer fire fighter and an all around ``great guy.'' I believe he will serve both Delaware and the United States very, very well. ``Tito,'' as many call him, has been a police officer for more than 20 years. He began his career as a patrol officer with the University of Delaware Police where he quickly developed a reputation for firmness in his enforcement of the law and university policy as well as for sensitivity to the particular needs and concerns of the student body. After three years, Sgt. Thomas moved to the Delaware State Police where he served in several different capacities ranging from Patrol Trooper, where the rubber literally hits the road, to public information officer, interacting with the public and the media. During his tenure with the State Police, ``Tito'' Thomas worked directly for two governors of Delaware. During the second term of former Governor Mike Castle who is now Delaware's congressman, Sgt. Thomas provided security as a member of the Executive Protection Unit. During my own second term as Governor, ``Tito'' served as Legislative Liaison for my Department of Public Safety, promoting public safety legislation in our state general assembly. In addition to his employment as a police officer, Sgt. Thomas has served his community as a volunteer in other capacities. Notably, he is a member of the Aetna Hose Hook and Ladder Volunteer Fire Company in Newark, Delaware and a volunteer CPR Instructor with the American Heart Association. David Thomas' extensive and varied background in law enforcement, his demonstrated sense of commitment to his community, his devotion to his growing family and his exemplary moral character all serve to qualify him well to be United States Marshall for the District of Delaware.

Mr. CARPER

Mr. CARPER. Mr. President, I rise today to congratulate Wesley College's Chris Noll, the 2002 NCAA National Golf Champion. His victory demonstrates the success that comes from hard work, perseverance, experience of a remarkable team, a dedicated coach, and the support of an outstanding college. The championship competition held in Nebraska last month ended a dramatic, record-breaking season for the Wolverines. After a stellar overall performance throughout the year, the Wolverines were selected by a committee to play in the NCAA Championships. At the championship, they scored their highest finish in both Wesley records and in Pennsylvania Athletic Conference history. The team dominated the Conference and won the Pennsylvania Athletic Conference Tournament. Throughout the season, Chris Noll set Wesley College records. He finished first in the Glen Health Ship Builders, the Wesley College Invitational, the King's College National Invitational tournaments and the District II Championships. The Dover sophomore was named Pennsylvania Athletic Conference Player of the Week for four consecutive weeks in addition to a Ping All-American. He closed the season as the 2002 NCAA National Golf Champion. For the past decade Wolverine Coach Rick McCall has worked tirelessly to successfully build and strengthen the men's golf program. McCall was named All-Middle Atlantic Region Coach of the Year this season, as well as the Pennsylvania Athletic Conference Coach of the Year. In 1989 he won the Delaware State Golf Association Annual Golf Award. Later he was given the Pat Knight Award for his lifetime contribution to junior golf and two Philadelphia P.G.A. Junior Golf Awards. He is dedicated to the game. The success of Wesley's golf team is indicative of the depth of the community's support, and the caliber of students, faculty, and staff at the College. I commend those associated with Wesley College athletics for their commitment to preparing athletes for success both on and off the court. Today, I congratulate Coach Rick McCall, Chris Noll and all of the fine athletes on the golf team. Athletics play a vital role in the development and integrity of students. Wesley College athletes prove that the school's emphasis on the ``carry-over value of athletics'' is warranted. I am proud of their achievements as student- athletes.

Mr. CARPER

Mr. CARPER. Here is the first paragraph: It's easy to imagine the frenzy that would be engulfing Washington if it was President Clinton now revising his explanation of a controversial 12-year-old stock deal. Rush Limbaugh would be reacting in outrage. Robert Bork would be decrying the loss of moral authority in the Oval Office. [One of our Senators] would be demanding a special prosecutor. Congressional committees would be subpoenaing the president's old business partners. This is a whole lot more important than trying to find political advantage in a particularly difficult debate and a difficult time in this economic recovery. This is about the economy. As a nation, we are trying to come out of a recession. There is a fair amount of financial data which suggests we are heading in the right direction. The number of people being laid off is slowing. Manufacturing activity is increasing. Even economic activity among some of the most hard-hit sectors of the economy, technology sectors, is showing signs of life. I am encouraged by that. If you look at the stock exchange for much of the last several weeks and months, it does not really reflect the returning, emerging vibrancy in the rest of the economy. That is not a good thing. One of the reasons why it is so important for us to pass this legislation is to send a clear signal to investors not just around the country, but around the world that the United States is a good place in which to invest. Our trade deficit last year was about $300 billion. This year it is going to be even more than $300 billion. We are starting to see the value of American currency, the dollar, which was robust and strong for the last several years, deteriorate. The worst thing that could happen for us, at a time when we need to attract foreign investments, would be to send a message that the United States is not a good or safe place in which to invest. When we are looking to much of the rest of the world to help finance a trade deficit of over $300 billion, it is important that we send a strong message throughout the world that the U.S. remains the best place in which to invest. There are a number of provisions. I will not go through this bill provision by provision. I want to talk about some of the groups that have the greatest interest, the most at stake, what our obligation is to them, and how this legislation seeks to make sure that we not only recognize that obligation but that we act on it. Shareholders of companies, publicly traded companies, should have confidence. They should have confidence not only in the CEOs and top officials, but they should have confidence in the board of directors whose job it is to represent the interest of the shareholders and to know that that board is indeed independent. Shareholders should have confidence in the audit committees of the board. Investors should know that the audit committees of the board are comprised of independent- minded board members, knowledgeable board members who will act, not as a lap dog, but as a watchdog every day as they serve on the audit committee. Shareholders should have confidence that there are rigorous auditing standards that exist in this country and not that there are rigorous auditing standards that are on a piece of paper somewhere, but there is a strong, independent, knowledgeable entity that is going to make sure that those auditing standards are enforced. How about the auditors of publicly traded companies? We should take away from them the temptation to look the other way or give the benefit of the doubt to a company that they are auditing because of the temptation from some other part of the auditing company which deals with consulting services; in many cases, these are lucrative services. We want to make sure the folks doing the audits of publicly traded companies are interested in doing a good job because that is their responsibility. Auditors should not be interested in cutting corners, looking the other way because doing so might enable their accounting company to attract and to retain lucrative consulting services. This bill goes a long way--some would say too far--toward curtailing that activity. To me, it strikes the right balance. Most of us know of someone who used to work for one of the big eight, then big five, now the big four accounting firms who actually went to work for one of the companies that they audited. I do. I suspect all of us could think of someone who has made that transition in their lives. There is nothing wrong with that. However, the revolving door can be more troublesome when the person moves from the auditing company one day, the company responsible for doing the audit, and the next day, the next week, the next month ends up as a senior official of the company that last week, last month they were auditing. This measure doesn't completely stop that revolving door, but it slows it down. Another area that this bill tries to address is the question: How often is it appropriate to have a fresh set of eyes in charge of those independent auditors doing that independent audit of a publicly traded company? Under current standards every 7 years we say that the lead partner of an audit should be changed. This measure takes it down to 5 years. Not everyone agrees with that. Some would like to have a change in auditing companies, requiring auditing companies to rotate every 5 or 7 years. I don't think that is a good idea. I do believe the approach we take in this measure, moving from 7 to 5 years the period of time after which the lead auditor, the lead partner has to be changed, is sound. How about investors? I talked about shareholders, about the auditors themselves. How about investors? The investors in this country and other countries need to be comforted by the knowledge that when they hear an analyst on television or read of an analyst's recommendation of a particular stock or stocks, when an analyst says buy, they mean buy. When an analyst says sell, they mean sell. When an analyst says hold, they mean hold. Investors have the right to know that the analysts whose advice they are following or attempting to follow are not being pressured to color their recommendations of a buy, sell, or hold by what is happening on the investment banking side of the business, and to know that the analyst's compensation is going to be derived more from how well the analyst does his job, providing good analysis and investment advice, and not about how much new business that analyst can help bring to the investment banking side of their company. How about the CEOs and senior management? When they break the law, they should be fully prosecuted under the law, and if what they have done is an offense for which they can be imprisoned, they ought to be. Our job in the Congress is to pass laws and to say what the crime or penalty should be when people violate those laws. It is the job of the Justice Department to fully prosecute--with the help of the SEC and the other watchdog agencies--people who violate the laws. Senator Leahy, on behalf of a number of Senators, earlier this week--yesterday, I believe--offered legislation that provides a new law that says not only can we prosecute some of the corporate wrongdoers--I am tempted to call them criminals, but I won't--who violate the trust, and to not only say you have to go after them under the mail and fraud provisions of the criminal code, but to broaden that--which is sometimes difficult to do--and make the prosecutions more easily done and with very tough penalties under another part of the code. CEOs should not be allowed to profit from financial misinformation or from manipulation of their books. I commend the President and those who have worked on this legislation to say, to the extent that this does happen--a CEO or senior official benefits financially from tampering or cooking the books--they would be compelled to give that money back. I mentioned earlier the legislation offered by Senator Carnahan of Missouri which would actually make sure there is a disclosure of sale when a CEO or senior official sells their stock; that the transaction would not only have to be reported to the SEC, but disclosed electronically. Another provision in the bill that I think is especially good and timely, given what has gone on at WorldCom, where apparently a senior official of that company received a $360 million loan from the company--a loan which I don't believe the shareholders ever knew about--at least when they found out about it, it was too late for a lot of them. That kind of information should be fully disclosed promptly and through a medium that allows those who have some need to know-- investors and shareholders--to have that information in a timely way. Finally, a word about the employees who work for some of these companies that have gone through, or are going through, a meltdown. They need, I think, recourse when they are urged, on the one hand, by senior officials to buy company stock for their 401(k) investment plans at the very time when senior officials are bailing out of the company stock. There should be some kind of recourse for employees when that happens. In the belief of what is good for the goose is good for the gander, employees should never again face the situation that Enron employees faced where, during a lockdown period of time, employees could not sell their stock while senior officials were able to bail out and sell their stock. What is good for the goose is good for the gander. To the extent that employees in a lockdown period are not able to sell their company stock in their 401(k) plan, the senior officials of the company should not be able to enter into transactions involving their stock either. There is one thing I don't believe we address in this bill; the others I mentioned, we do. One area we do not address--and I suspect it comes later--and a member of the staff will tell me if I am mistaken. One of the problems we have with 401(k)s for the employees, the investors, is that they don't get very good advice. The companies don't want to be held liable if they provide bad advice when all is said and done. And when we move on to other issues, I hope we will have agreed on a way to better ensure that the employees who are not getting very good advice do get that good advice. I worry about the concentration of assets and investments. I know some people believe there should be a cap and that they should not be able to invest any more than half or a quarter in company stock for your 401(k). If I am an employee and I am buying company stock, maybe I should have to sign a form that is an acknowledgment that I am about to do something very stupid--something similar to what the employees did at Enron, where they put all their eggs in one basket--and acknowledge that is not a bright thing to do, and acknowledge that I am doing that unwise thing myself. Maybe that is needed here. In addition to that kind of disclosure, I think we do need to address the need for better advice for employees. I will go back to where I started; that is to say, a lot is riding on this legislation--a whole lot more than we would have guessed 6 months ago. Six months ago, as we saw Enron melt down and the disclosures come forward, we thought it was one company that was poorly run, maybe fraudulently run. A lot of people were hurt who worked at that company. A lot of people who worked for the auditor, the accounting firm, Arthur Andersen, have lost their jobs and were, frankly, fully innocent, but they have been harmed. Six months ago, there was a full sense of outrage at Enron and the people who led it to its fall. We know now that what happened at Enron may not be precisely the same as other companies, but it is symptomatic of the behavior in other companies, where the people who run those companies do not meet their obligations to the shareholders, to the employees, and where greed has corrupted too many people. While it is difficult for us to pass a law outlawing greed, we can try to outlaw fraud. But it is tough to do that; I acknowledge that. With the developments within a whole host of other companies-- disclosures of financial mismanagement and misstatements, misrepresentation of performance of other companies in recent months-- the importance of what we are doing this week and next has grown. We need to get this economy moving in the right direction. I believe that, underneath, a lot of the fundamentals are pretty sound. If you look at growth, and productivity, and the manufacturing activity to which I alluded earlier, there is some good news. The troubling news is what is going on in the stock market, as investors are skittish, and that is understandable. We can begin to restore, in a very meaningful and tangible way, the confidence of those investors in America and in American companies, and we ought to do that. The last word I will say is this. I commend Chairman Sarbanes. He is not presently on the floor. I also commend the committee staff and personal staffs for the kinds of hearings that have been held this year which have led us to this day. Chairman Sarbanes is not the sort of person who is interested in rushing out and being on television every night. He is not interested so much in seeing his name or picture in the newspaper. He is interested in getting at the truth. I think the hearings that were held over many months have led us to finding the truth and, maybe just as important, to finding the right course for us to take as a nation, to be able to right some of the wrongs that have been done and to reduce the likelihood that further wrongs will occur in the future. I know some have been impatient for us to get to this day and to take up this legislation, pass it, and to send it to the President. I think it has been worth the wait. I acknowledge that not everything that needs to be done ought to be done by the Congress. The stock exchanges have made a number of excellent changes, and they are to be commended. Many companies and many corporate boards, that have sort of been tarred with the same brush, and senior officials and CEOs who are doing a good job in acting and behaving in a most important way, have been tarred and feathered with the same brush. A lot of companies have said, themselves, they have taken a look in the mirror--boards of directors, audit committees, and others--and said: We can do better. And they have adopted reforms. Shareholders-- market forces--have come to bear on companies, their boards of directors, as they should, and that is helpful as well. In the end, there are some things the Congress can do and ought to do, maybe not all of them, but a lot of them are included in this legislation before us. I am proud to have participated as a member of the Banking Committee in its development and proud to be a witness to the work that is going on in this Chamber to make a good bill even better. I yield the floor.

Mr. CARPER. Madam President, I know the Senator from Maryland is getting tired of receiving all these bouquets, but he deserves them. Senator Enzi is not on the floor, but he deserves one or two as well, along with others of our colleagues, not just on the Banking Committee but other Members as recently as this morning who offered amendments to this legislation which improve it materially, especially the amendment offered by the Senator from Missouri, Mrs. Carnahan. It is all well and good that we say to those who are senior officials within companies, if you have a stock transaction, you have to report it. Give them the paperwork, they report it, and it goes somewhere where few people ever have a chance to see it or be aware of it. It is quite another thing to list that transaction, do it electronically so anyone who has access to the Internet can find out about it. Senator Carnahan's amendment includes this electronic disclosure, and that is a very good improvement to the legislation. I like what the Senator from North Dakota, Mr. Dorgan, has offered today, with respect to the process where we have companies normally registered and incorporated here in a State in America who somehow slip off to Bermuda and incorporate. We actually provide an incentive; if we don't adopt the Dorgan amendment, we provide an incentive for that kind of behavior. Not only does that have an adverse effect on States such as New York or Delaware or Maryland or Pennsylvania, it also has an adverse effect on shareholders because the heads of companies that are registered or incorporated in a place such as Bermuda would otherwise not have to sign off and vouch for the financial statements they are providing. Even as recently as this morning, a good bill has gotten better. I appreciate the amendment offered earlier by Senator Lott on behalf of the President and the addition of a number of provisions in the bill that the administration supports, and, frankly, I think we all should. I came across an interesting column this week. I didn't know if I would read it, but given that the Senator from New York is presiding, I have to at least read the first paragraph. This is a column by a fellow who writes in the LA Times and is syndicated across the country, Ronald Brownstein. I will read a paragraph and perhaps ask unanimous consent that the entire column be printed in the Record.

Mr. CARPER

Mr. CARPER. I appreciate that. When we vote, I will be here to vote. When the yeas and nays are asked for, my voice will say yes on that final vote.

Mr. CARPER. Mr. President, I thank the deputy majority leader for yielding this time to me. On the floor this afternoon I see three, maybe four Senators--four of whom I have been privileged to serve with in the House of Representatives, one of whom I have just been privileged to serve with for the last year and a half. The senior Senator from Nevada knows the great affection I hold for him. He and I were elected to the House of Representatives in 1982. We came to Congress together in 1982. We began our first years in the House of Representatives many mornings working out together in the House gym. I have had the privilege of knowing his family and watching his kids grow up. For me, and I know for many of us, this important policy decision is also a decision that is intertwined with the respect and admiration we have for our colleagues. I have great respect and admiration for both the senior and junior Senator from Nevada. As some of you know, I spent a fair number of my years in the Navy, 5 years on active duty, another 18 years as a Reserve naval flight officer, most of that time on airplanes but other times on ships. I have been on ships that are nuclear powered. They included aircraft carriers and submarines. I have known hundreds of people who lived many years of their lives on nuclear-powered vessels. When you have that kind of background, you are maybe more comfortable with nuclear power than those who have not literally lived on a floating nuclear powerplant. I acknowledge there are a lot of people who have legitimate concerns about the various aspects of nuclear power--a few of them have been pretty well vetted here today. One of them is transportation: how to move this nuclear waste through dozens of States and do so safely, especially in an age of terrorism. There are concerns about the terrorists themselves and whether or not they might strike, either at a site such as Yucca Mountain or at a barge or a railroad or a highway. Before I served in the Senate a year and a half ago, I served as Governor of Delaware. During those years, I became all the more mindful of the transportation of hazardous waste through my State and alongside my State via the Delaware River and the bay which divides the State of the Presiding Officer and my State. Every day hazardous materials make their way up and down the Delaware River. Throughout I-95/I-495, which crosses my State and the railroads of my State, the Norfolk Southern and CSX, we have dangerous materials every day traverse throughout Delaware--sometimes hazardous materials, sometimes explosive materials. We have learned to deal with them and deal with them safely. In Europe, they have shown a record over time of being able to transport nuclear waste in a way that is safe as well. I know people who are concerned about nuclear power because of the possibility there will be an accident at a nuclear powerplant. I acknowledge those concerns are not illegitimate. The safety record of the nuclear power industry has been better in the last 10 years than probably in all the years before, and it continues to improve. While I acknowledge, on the one hand, the legitimate concerns about nuclear power being a viable, growing part of the generation of electricity in our country, I want to talk briefly about the virtues, the advantages of nuclear power. We had a great debate on energy policy over the earlier part of this year. We talked about the growing demand, the rise in price of foreign oil, now up 50 percent. We talked about the huge and growing trade deficit we have in this country, over $300 billion last year, maybe $400 billion this year, and a significant part of that is oil imports. I think we have begun a serious discussion and debate about what to do with respect to air emissions, how we can curtail sulfur dioxide, mercury, carbon dioxide, and nitrogen oxide from powerplants in this country and other sources. Nuclear power, whether we like it or not, does not create sulfur dioxide emissions. It doesn't create mercury emissions. It doesn't create nitrogen oxide emissions. It doesn't create carbon dioxide emissions--it doesn't contribute to those. With respect to our environment and the quality of our air, I think nuclear power is, if anything, a friend. I, as have a number of my colleagues, had a chance to go to Yucca Mountain. I visited the place. I talked to people who worked on that project for any number of years. I met with people in Nevada who oppose the designation of Yucca Mountain and those who favor it. I have had the opportunity along with many of my colleagues to participate in hours of hearings and other meetings with advocates and opponents of designating Yucca Mountain and licensing Yucca Mountain. In the end it comes down to maybe two votes: one, a procedural vote as to whether or not we are going to vote to proceed to the final vote and that is one that would carry on to the licensing of Yucca Mountain. I said to my colleagues on the Energy Committee a month or so ago, I have agonized with this vote probably as much as any in my memory, trying to do, on the one hand, what I think is the right thing for my country and trying to treat my dear colleagues the way I would want to be treated. It is a tough call. It is tough for me and I know it is for many of us. We have two votes. On the first vote, on the motion to proceed, if my vote is needed--and I am going to stand in the well there--if my vote is needed in order to be able to proceed to the final vote, I will vote yes--if my vote is needed. On the final vote, if the motion to proceed is approved, I will vote yes on the designation of Yucca Mountain. With that, I thank the deputy majority leader for yielding his time to me.

Mr. CARPER

Mr. CARPER. Mr. President, today I recognize the rededication of ``The Circle'' in Georgetown, DE scheduled for July 19. Thanks to the great efforts and hard work of the citizens of Georgetown, this historic site has been restored to its original splendor. The Circle was established in 1791 by an act of the Delaware General Assembly. Subsequently, the town of Georgetown was laid out around the Circle. While Delawareans knew of its historic and cultural significance, it was confirmed nationally in 1973 when The Circle was placed on the National Register of Historic Places. Georgetown has long been famous for Return Day, a celebration that takes place every 2 years, 2 days after the state's general election. With the campaign behind them, voters and candidate's return to the Circle to enjoy parades, listen to music, and literally ``bury a hatchet.'' We talk a lot in my State about working together, about putting aside partisan differences to cross party lines to get things done. This celebration at the Circle embodies that effort and commitment. Over the years, the Circle fell to a state of disrepair. Once a place of stately honor, financial assistance was needed to return the Circle to its original state. The community of Georgetown joined together and formed a committee to oversee the repairs and maintain the historic beauty of the site. The repairs were financed through a Transportation Enhancement Grant from the Federal Highway Administration, the Delaware Department of Transportation, and members of the Delaware General Assembly from Sussex County. Together, these groups were able to provide substantial funding for renovations. The residents of Georgetown should be praised for their commitment to restoring the Circle. With their initiative and dedication, future generations will be able to enjoy its rich history. The July 19 rededication is a celebration of the community's collective efforts. Delaware's future will be built upon its rich history. We must work hard to preserve these symbols of our past to ensure that they are not forgotten. The citizens of Georgetown worked hard to ensure that the area's unique history will be preserved long into the future.

Mr. CARPER

Mr. CARPER. Mr. President, the attention of a lot of people in the Northwest and in the Midwest and in California has been drawn to the potential shutdown not just of the Amtrak passenger rail service, but commuter rail service in Boston, New York, Philadelphia, Wilmington, Delaware, Chicago, Los Angeles, and a lot of places in between. Amtrak has sought to negotiate a loan from a consortium of private lenders. Literally in the middle of the negotiation, the administration put on the table its restructuring plan for Amtrak. That plan was, in my view, a ``dismantling'' plan for Amtrak. That was the end of the negotiations with the private lenders, for the most part. Now Amtrak faces a difficult decision as to when to begin curtailing and shutting down its operations. When they do that, it will have a cascading effect on the operations of many commuter railroads in America as well. The Secretary of the Department of Transportation, Norman Mineta, was before one of our committees today testifying. Knowing him as an old colleague and somebody who I respect, I think he is in a tough spot. I have not been inside his heart to see what he would want to do in his heart. Given that independence, I think he would favor going ahead with the loan guarantee, or support the Congress in going through and including a $200 million emergency supplemental for Amtrak. The administration, which created this crisis before us, is now still in a very good position to end the crisis, the threat. They can do that by saying, yes, we will provide the full loan guarantee, or we will support the appropriation from the Congress. Our thanks to the chairman of the Appropriations Committee, Senator Byrd, and Senator Stevens, the ranking Republican, for their willingness to support $200 million in the emergency supplemental to help us get through this difficult time, and later this fall we will resolve more fully the passenger rail service in this country. I have said for a long time--and I will say it again today--the problem with passenger rail service in this country is we have never provided adequate capital support for passenger rail service. We need to do that, to find an earmark source of revenue. I hope in the months to come we will debate that and come to a consensus on that point. I thank the Chair.

Mr. CARPER

Mr. CARPER. Madam President, I do not believe any of the Senators who are on the floor at this time were serving in the House or the Senate when Amtrak was created. It was created in 1970 and it was created after an extended debate which found none of the private railroads in this country wanted to continue to provide passenger rail service. They wanted out of the business and they got out. They convinced the Congress and then the President, Richard Nixon, that they should be able to buy stock in this entity called Amtrak, they should turn over a lot of their rolling stock--their locomotives and their passenger cars or dining cars, the whole Northeast corridor from Washington to Boston, repair shops, train stations--to this new entity, Amtrak, to see if they could make it go as a quasi-governmental entity whereas for years the private sector had not been able to make a go of it. Lo and behold, 32 years later Amtrak has not been able to figure out how to make money, how to make a profit doing what the private railroads could not make a profit doing in the 1970s or 1960s or the years before that; that is, carrying people. Last Thursday here on the floor I talked a bit about all those other countries around the world that offer terrific passenger train service, whether it is Britain or France or Spain or Italy, Scandinavia or Germany--or over the other side of the world, Asian countries such as Japan, where people can go in trains that run at 200 miles an hour and can actually write on the trains and people can read your writing-- something no one is able to do with mine when I ride the rails with Amtrak. They can put a cup of coffee on the table and the coffee is still like it would be on this table before me. The reason why they have such good train service in those countries is because they make it a national priority. They believe it is in their national interest to have good passenger rail service. Some of those countries are more densely populated than our own, but as time goes by we are becoming more densely populated, too. I said last week that some 75 percent of Americans today live within 50 miles of one of our coasts. As time goes by, we are going to become more densely populated. Those dense populations provide for a number of problems: congestion on our highways, congestion in our airports, the fouling of our air. As we all climb into our cars, trucks, and vans to go from one place to the other and then fill them up with gas, we import a lot of the oil we refine into gasoline and we end up with a huge trade deficit, about a third of which is attributable to imported oil. Part of the reason so many of those other countries put so much of their money, so much of their resources into their passenger rail system is not because of nostalgia. They do not pine for the days when people rode the trains from coast to coast. They do it because it is in their naked self-interest to have good passenger rail service. It is in our naked self-interest to have good passenger rail service as well. As a former Governor, I served on the Amtrak Board appointed by the President, confirmed by the Senate, and I served there as a member of the board of directors for 4 years. There were a number of times during the time I served on the board--and a number of times since--that Amtrak has run short of cash. They negotiated with a consortium of private lenders and got enough money to carry them through their tough patch and when the next Federal appropriation comes through or the ridership peaks in one of the peak ridership periods for the summer or Thanksgiving or Christmas or the other holidays, they pay off the loans. Amtrak is endeavoring to arrange a bridge loan from a consortium of private banks to carry them through to the end of this fiscal year. Their ability to negotiate that loan fell apart with the announcement of the administration's restructuring plan for Amtrak, which is not so much a restructuring plan for Amtrak but it is, frankly, the end, the demise of Amtrak as we know it. With that having been done and the inability to negotiate with the private lending consortium, I think in large part because of the announcement of the restructuring plan for Amtrak by the administration, the administration has some responsibility to step to the plate and to provide--as they can under law; they have the discretion under the law--a loan guarantee so Amtrak can go ahead with this negotiation with the private bankers. They ought to do that. When we get past this very difficult time--and I want to tell you if Amtrak does shut down, it is not because everybody rides Amtrak but because Amtrak is very involved in commuter operations. Amtrak runs the entire Northeast corridor. Electricity is sold to the commuter trains. The commuter trains use Penn Station. Amtrak is involved in the Midwest--we have a colleague here from Chicago--in helping run the commuter operations there, and California. It is not just the Northeast corridor. It is throughout the country. A shutdown, especially a hasty shutdown, will create havoc, not necessarily because of the people who run Amtrak trains but all the people who depend on Amtrak and maybe don't know it. They depend on Amtrak to get to work every day and to get home. Let me close with this thought, if I could. When we get through this difficult time--and we need to, and I hope the administration steps up to the plate and says we have some responsibility and acts to discharge those responsibilities--when we get through this, that carries us to the next fiscal year. We need to determine as a country, with a healthy debate with the administration fully engaged, what we are going to do for passenger rail service in America. What will taxpayers support? What will Congress and the administration support? That debate is one in which I look forward to participating. I think passenger rail going forward will depend, in no small part, on our willingness, and that of the administration, to find a dedicated source of capital funding. Since Amtrak's creation 32 years ago, there has never been adequate capital support for the railroad. There has never been capital support. We all know that railroading is capital intensive. There needs to be a dedicated source of capital funding. My colleagues will hear me say that more in the months to come. In my judgment, that is the key. If we support passenger rail service, we have to provide the capital to support it. I thank the Chair. I yield the floor.

Mr. CARPER

Mr. CARPER. Mr. President, it is Friday. The weekend starts for most people today. It looks as if it is going to be a great weekend whether at the Delaware beaches or the New Jersey shore. Next weekend might start a little early for a lot of people in this country, for hundreds of thousands, maybe millions of commuters from Trenton, NJ, to New York, Connecticut, Philadelphia, Wilmington, Baltimore, Washington, Chicago, and out on the west coast, L.A., and a lot of other places as well because right now it looks as if, starting in the latter part of next week, Amtrak will begin an orderly shutdown of its operations, and there will be a cascading effect that will also lead to disruption of commuter operations in all those cities and many others I did not mention. Amtrak is running out of operating funds for this fiscal year. They expect to run out of operating funds sometime in early July. The new president of Amtrak has announced his intention to try to negotiate a loan for Amtrak from a consortium of commercial banks, which Amtrak has done any number of times in the past, for operating moneys to bridge a period of time until the new Federal grant comes through or to negotiate money for capital improvements to Amtrak. Those negotiations were underway in earnest early this week. I understand the auditors for Amtrak were not able to say with conviction that Amtrak was a going concern because, in part, of the announcement of the administration yesterday for the Amtrak restructuring plan, which is really, in my judgment, an Amtrak dismantling plan. Rather than Amtrak being able to negotiate the bridge loan with private lenders to carry them through the end of the year when our new appropriation might be available, Amtrak faces a cutoff of its operations, again, the impending effect on commuters throughout this country late next week. The Presiding Officer and I have discussed this situation any number of times in the year and a half we have been here, and we have discussed it more earnestly in the last week or two. I am mindful of the efforts he is making to avert what could be a disaster. They are efforts that are supported by any number of our colleagues. A week or so ago, 52 of us finished putting our signatures on a letter to the ranking members of the Senate Appropriations Committee voicing our support for a $1.2 billion appropriation for Amtrak in the next fiscal year. A week or so prior to that, the Senate voted to accept a provision included in the Senate appropriations bill for another $55 million as part of an emergency supplemental to enable repair work to begin on Amtrak locomotives, passenger cars, and sleeping cars that had been damaged in wrecks around the country, wrecks, frankly, not caused by Amtrak or Amtrak's neglect, but because of trucks that were on the tracks in some places and because of problems with track bed outside the Northeast corridor that led to a derailing. That money is in the emergency appropriations bill passed by the Senate and is one of the items at issue in the conference. I have been led to believe the President has threatened to veto even those moneys as part of the emergency supplemental if they remain in the bill. We are looking at a train wreck. It seems to me we look at a train wreck about every year close to this time. I wish to take a moment this morning to look back over time. I would like for us to go back to 1970. That was when Amtrak was created. Amtrak was created because our Nation's private railroads did not want to continue to carry passengers. They could not make money doing that. They wanted out of the business. Then-President Richard Nixon signed into law legislation creating Amtrak. The deal was the private railroads would pony up some money to buy Amtrak stock. They agreed to turn over all of their old locomotives, their old passenger cars, their old dining cars, their old sleeper cars. They agreed to turn over their old track bed in the Northeast corridor between Washington and Boston, old overhead wires, old signaling systems, old repair shops around the country, old train stations, and give all that to Amtrak. Somehow Amtrak, with a little seed money, was to make a go of, and begin turning a profit from, operations that the private sector could not make profitable. It did not happen. We should not be surprised that it did not happen because it has not happened in other countries either. For those Americans who this summer are going to be traveling to places in Europe--England, France, Spain, Italy, Germany, up into Scandinavia--throughout Europe, they are going to ride on trains that will almost take their breath away, beautiful trains, trains that run at speeds of close to 200 miles an hour, trains where one can sit with a cup of coffee or a cup of tea on the table and it does not even rattle or vibrate. Americans are going to be traveling to places in Asia this summer, and they will ride trains in Japan and other countries that provide a similar high-quality, fast, dependable service. In those countries, the private sector does not operate that train service. The national governments of those nations have decided it is in their naked self- interest to invest their taxpayers' dollars in national passenger rail service. They do not do it out of some sense of altruism. They do it because they realize that in order to relieve congestion on their highways and in their airports, passenger rail can make a big contribution toward reducing that congestion. Those countries, those governments, realize that in order to reduce their dependence on foreign oil and to reduce their trade deficits, passenger rail service can make a real contribution. They have problems with clean air in those countries as well, and they realize, compared to the emissions that come out of their cars, trucks, and vans, that the emissions emitted by passenger trains are far less. We have similar kinds of concerns in this country. We have congestion around our airports and on our Nation's highways worse by far than we did in 1970. We have problems with air pollution that are as bad, or maybe worse, than the problems we faced in 1970, certainly with respect to global warming and carbon dioxide in our atmosphere. We have a trade deficit in this country that makes our trade deficit woes of 1970 pale by comparison. Over half of our oil is imported, and that number is growing. In the 1970s, not even a third of our oil was imported. National passenger rail service will not solve all of these problems for the United States, but it will help us to reduce the size of those problems. We can take a lesson from our neighbors, our sister nations in Europe and in Asia, and we ought to do that. There are a whole series of things that need to happen this year and next. I want to mention those, and then I will close. We need to pass an emergency appropriations bill that includes at least $55 million so the work can begin on repairing wrecked trains in order to provide service to people, especially the Auto Train south of Washington to Orlando, FL, where Amtrak actually makes money. We need to keep that money in the supplemental appropriation. It would be great to grow it, but we at least need to keep that money. The White House has, in my judgment, a moral responsibility. Having acted this week in a way that I believe disrupts Amtrak's ability to negotiate a private sector loan from a consortium of banks for $200 million to carry them through the end of this fiscal year, the administration should use their discretion, authorized under law, as I understand, through the FRA, to provide a loan guarantee so that Amtrak can obtain the money it needs to avoid the kind of disruption we are going to begin witnessing by next weekend if nothing is done. We need to take up in the Senate the Amtrak reauthorization bill, which has cleared the Committee on Energy and Commerce by a vote, I think, of 21 to 3. Senator Hollings has been a champion for passenger rail service. He has authored very good legislation. Many of us have cosponsored it. We need to take it up, and we need to pass a motion to proceed and debate it. If people want to offer amendments to it, that is all well and good. We debate amendments, vote them up or down, and then move on to the bill. Fifty-two of our colleagues in the Senate have said: We believe Amtrak ought to be funded at $1.2 billion next fiscal year, and we need to go forward. As we take up the appropriations bill, we need to provide that money through the appropriations process in the Senate and work with our colleagues in the House and in the administration. Finally, we need a good, healthy debate on what the future of passenger rail service should be in this country. I realize that the heydays of passenger rail of the 1800s and the early 1900s are behind us, but there is still a huge need for the good that passenger rail service can provide us with respect to congestion, air congestion, highway congestion, with respect to reducing the emissions into our air, and with respect to reducing our reliance on foreign oil and trying to curtail, at least a little, our trade deficit. What should the future passenger rail service be in this country? In my judgment, it ought to include making the Northeast corridor world class. As to the beautiful Acela Express train service that is now available, we are not able to harness the full potential of those trains from Washington to Boston because of the work that can and should be done to the track bed, to the overhead wires, to the signaling system, to enable the trains to go 150 or 160 miles an hour, which is faster than in many places they can now go. We need to begin developing high-speed rail corridors in other parts of this country, the southeastern United States and Florida, in and out of Atlanta. The Northeast corridor finally should be extended at least into Virginia, maybe as far as Richmond. I know there are people in North Carolina who would like to see the Northeast corridor extended into North Carolina where they are investing in passenger rail service on their own. There are any number of densely populated corridors such as out of Chicago, Chicago/St. Louis, Chicago/Milwaukee, Chicago/Indianapolis, Chicago/Detroit, where it makes a lot more sense for people to travel on high-speed trains instead of on commuter airlines that are going less than 300 miles. On the west coast, whether it is L.A. to San Diego or maybe L.A. to Las Vegas, L.A. to San Francisco, Portland, Spokane, Seattle, Portland- Seattle, Seattle-Vancouver, those are areas that are just ripe for high-speed passenger rail. The challenge for us is how to raise the money to put in place the infrastructure, the high-speed rail capability, the track bed, the overhead wires, the signaling, to be able to provide the service where it would be used. The former chairman of the Amtrak board of directors who succeeded me on the Amtrak board, and preceded me on the Amtrak board, is former Wisconsin Governor Tommy Thompson, now Secretary of Health and Human Services. He and I believe, as do many others, including many in this body, there needs to be a dedicated source of capital for passenger rail service in this country to make world class the Northeast corridor, to begin developing, in conjunction and coordination with the right-of-way of freight railroads, the high-speed corridors in these densely populated areas of America. I was struck to learn a couple of years ago that 75 percent of the people in America today live within 50 miles of one of our coasts. Think about that. As time goes by, the density of our population, especially in those coastal areas, will not diminish, it will increase. The potential good that passenger rail service can provide for us will increase as well. Not everybody wants to ride a train from one end of the country to the other. Some people do, but a lot of people could benefit by riding a train in a densely populated corridor. A lot of people every day ride the longest train in the world, and that is the Auto Train that leaves just south of Washington, DC, down to near Orlando, FL, and back every day. There are people who ride trains that go through spectacular parts of America. They go along the northern part of America, the Northwest, and the Coast Starlight from the west coast from one end of California up to the Canadian border. People are willing to pay good money to ride those trains. I think one of the big questions we face is, What do we do with the other long-distance trains where Amtrak is unable to provide service and out of the farebox pay for the full cost of the service? I was always frustrated as Governor that when Delaware received Federal transportation monies, we did not have the discretion to use any of that money to help pay for passenger rail service in our State, which did not make sense. For example, we could use our Federal congestion mitigation money in my State--other Governors could in their States --for freight railroads. We could use it for roads and highways. We could use that Federal congestion mitigation money for bicycle paths. We could not use it for passenger rail service, even if it made sense for our States. That is foolish. That ought to change. This Senate has tried to change it any number of times. We have not gotten the support we need from the other body. Sometimes we have not gotten the support we need from the administration. We should give Governors and mayors the discretion to use a portion of their money to help underwrite the cost of long- distance trains that are not fully sustainable. A number of years ago when I was on the Amtrak board, we started an experiment to see if Amtrak might partner with the freight railroads, when operating outside the Northeast corridor, to carry things other than people, such as mail, express packages, but also to carry other commodities, even perishable commodities, that are highly time sensitive in terms of getting where they are needed. A lot of times, shippers will use trucks because they believe there is a greater reliance in terms of on-time performance, and especially in shorter distances, but a greater ability than trucking to provide on-time performance, and we started an experiment to see if maybe we could carry not only people but commodities as well, and specially designed cars attached to Amtrak trains. If Amtrak were able to make money carrying these commodities on the track bed of a freight railroad, Amtrak would share the profits with the freight railroads. Amtrak would have a way to supplement its costs and to underwrite its costs of the long-distance trains which, frankly, do not make money. Amtrak has entered into an agreement with, I believe it is the Burlington Northern-Santa Fe Railroad, to be able to do that kind of thing, and it has attempted to negotiate with other freight railroads. That could be part of a solution as well. I am not sure there is consensus in this body as to what the long-term passenger rail system should be in this country. I am not sure we know. We do know if we do not do something, if the administration does not do something, by next weekend we are going to have a train wreck. Not a literal train wreck but a figurative train wreck. A lot of people who will want to go to work next Thursday or Friday are not going to get to work or they will end up in traffic jams in and around their cities and communities, the likes of which they have not seen for a long time. Maybe on the brighter side, some people who didn't want to go to work next Thursday or Friday will get a long weekend. For them, maybe that is good. For our Nation, this is not good. We need to address this issue. We need to address it today. The administration has that capability of addressing it today. The administration should use discretion as provided to the Federal Railroad Administration to use the loan guarantee to enable Amtrak to go forward for us to have an orderly debate over this fiscal year to determine the long-term course for passenger rail service in America.

Mr. CARPER

Mr. CARPER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration be authorized to meet to conduct a hearing on ``Examining the Plight of Refugees: The Case of North Korea'' on Friday, June 21, 2002, at 10 a.m. in Dirksen 226. Agenda Witnesses Panel 1: The Honorable Arthur Dewey, Assistant Secretary of State for the Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration, Department of State, Washington, DC. Panel 2: Soon Ok Lee, North Korean prison camp survivor, Seoul, South Korea; Helie Lee, West Hollywood, California; and Norbert Vollertsen, M.D., Seoul, South Korea. Panel 3: Felice D. Gaer, Chairwoman of the Commission on International Religious Freedom, Washington DC; Debra Liang-Fenton, Vice Chairman, U.S. Committee fon Human Rights in North Korea, Minneapolis, Minnesota; Jana Mason, Asian Policy Analyst, U.S. Committee on Refugees, Washington, DC; and Elisa Massimino Lawyers Committee for Human Rights, Washington, DC.

Mr. CARPER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions be authorized to meet for a hearing on ``Avoiding the Summer Slide: The Importance of Summer School to Student Achievement and Well Being'' during the session of the Senate on Friday, June 21, 2002, at 9:30 a.m. in SD-430.

Mr. CARPER

Mr. CARPER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak as in morning business for 10 minutes.

Mr. CARPER

Mr. CARPER. Mr. President. I would like to speak for a few minutes about the Democratic Leadership Council's ``National Service Day.'' Today I join the Democratic Leadership Council, DLC, former President Clinton, DLC Chair Senator Evan Bayh, and New Democrats across the country in calling for the expansion of national service opportunities in a ``National Service Day.'' Creating a strong system of voluntary national service has been a signature New Democrat idea from the founding of the Democratic Leadership Council to President Clinton's AmeriCorps initiative. In the wake of the surge of patriotism following the events of September 11, national service is squarely at the center of national debate. To build on this momentum, the DLC's Clinton Center is hosting ``National Service Day,'' during which former DLC Chair President Clinton will participate in three service projects in New York City, and DLC Chair Evan Bayh, Representatives Harold Ford, Jr. and Rep. Tim Roemer will host a roundtable discussion with Members of Congress and AmeriCorps members from across the country. Other elected officials, including Virginia Governor Mark Warner, San Jose Mayor Ron Gonzalez, and Wisconsin State Representative Antonio Riley will join the DLC in promoting the New Democrat tradition of opportunity, responsibility and community through national service. In recognition of National Service Day, I am hosting Britt Eichner from Bear, DE, today. A rising senior at Archmere Academy with a 4.0 GPA, Britt embodies a commitment to service. As Hugh O'Brian Youth Foundation Ambassador, she volunteered more than 100 hours of service to the community. Last spring, she mobilized faculty and student mentors to adopt neighborhood families in need. As proof that living with diabetes doesn't have to slow anyone down, Britt just completed her fifth Bike-a-Thon for the American Diabetes Foundation Tour de Cure. And she recently spent a weekend in western Philadelphia revitalizing neighborhoods in a community cleanup. Students like Britt represent the real promise of community service. While every American should be asked to consider setting aside time for service, be it mentoring a student or volunteering at a community center, it is also time to make sure we give those who are willing to serve, as Citizen-Soldiers in the Armed Forces or as AmeriCorps or Peace Corps volunteers, the opportunity to serve their country full- time. I am proud to say that in Delaware, people of all ages and backgrounds are helping to solve problems and strengthen communities through 23 national service projects across the state. This year, AmeriCorps, the domestic Peace Corps, will provide more than 170 individuals the opportunity to spend a full year serving in Delaware communities. More than 230 students in Delaware colleges and universities will help pay their way through school while aiding their community through service opportunities that are part of the Federal Work Study Program. And more than 3,300 seniors in Delaware will contribute their time and talents to one of three programs that make up the Senior Corps: Foster Grandparents, who serve one-on-one with more than 1,200 young people with special needs; Senior Companions, who help more than 100 other seniors live independently in their homes; and Retired and Senior Volunteer Program, RSVP, volunteers, who work with more than 330 local groups to meet a wide range of community needs. These numbers, though inspiring as they are, represent just a small fraction of our population and are much smaller than the number of people who want to serve. If we are to make national service a culture- changing rite of passage in America, we must do more. National service should not be a special chance for a few, but a way of life for many. At a time when Americans from all walks of life are asking what they can do to help make our Nation safer and stronger, national service offers an answer that points us towards a higher politics of national purpose.