Mike Crapo

Mr CRAPO

Mr CRAPO. Senator Lincoln makes a good point. While I support the Finance Committee's goal of encouraging accountability and incentivizing the collection of Medicare bad debt by skilled nursing facilities, I do see the need to differentiate between debt owed by individuals and debt owed by States. I believe this conference should consider this point as well.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, I would like to honor a remarkable individual today on the occasion of her retirement from the U.S. Senate Recording Studio. Barbara Berger, or Barb, as she is known here in the Senate, is celebrating her last day of a career spanning 33 years. Barb has been here longer than any Senator save four. She has seen 320 Senators come and go from this body and served under 13 Sergeants-At- Arms. Not only has she seen many of us come and go, she has also witnessed the astounding technological transformation in media that has occurred in the past three decades. In 1972, when Barb began as a receptionist in the front office of the Recording Studio, radio and film were the only mediums of communication available to the Senate, and floor proceedings were not televised yet. I haven't been here as long as some of my colleagues, but over the past 7 years, Barb has been the gracious smile and distinguished and professional face of the Recording Studio. Her poise, civility and shining personality permeate the office and make working with them an absolute pleasure for me. Her institutional knowledge and memory and quiet authority provide me and all the staff and Members who work with the studio reassurance that our messages will be handled with care and expertise. American historian Barbara Tuch man said: Although I know we have already grown accustomed to less beauty, less elegance, less excellence, yet perversely I have confidence in the opposite of egalitarianism: in the competence and excellence of the best among us. The urge for the best is an element of humankind as inherent as the heartbeat. It may be crushed temporarily but it cannot be eliminated. We will always have pride in accomplishment, the charm of fine things . . . As long as people exist, some will always strive for the best. And some will attain it. Barb epitomizes this competence and excellence in her work, and beauty in her kind and graceful spirit. My staff and I will most certainly miss her and I wish her well in retirement.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. As my colleagues are aware, the National Academy of Sciences, NAS, released a report on April 28 of this year calling on Congress to establish new scientific criteria for decisions about awarding Federal compensation to people who have developed specific diseases, including certain cancers, as a result of exposure to radioactive fallout from U.S. nuclear weapons tests. I wholeheartedly agree with them. When Congress passed RECA 15 years ago, an important first step was taken to provide compassionate assistance to those directly affected by nuclear testing conducted by the United States. However, it soon became clear that a legislative remedy which was bound by geographic restrictions, and not scientific evidence, was not sufficient to fully rectify the problem at hand. This was confirmed in 1999, when Senator Hatch introduced his amendments to expand RECA and include affected counties in Arizona. Today, the NAS has determined that residents in counties and States far from the original Nevada Test Site were not only exposed to radiation, but may even have been exposed to much higher levels than those in currently eligible areas. In fact, there are areas in my native Idaho that have demonstrably higher incidence of thyroid dosage of radiation than any other county currently covered by RECA. It seems unconscionable to me that people living in these areas are not currently eligible for compensation. Those affected are not asking for special treatment, they are simply asking for fairness. As R. Julian Preston, director of the Environmental Protection Agency's Environmental Carcinogenesis Division, stated, ``To be equitable, any compensation program needs to be based on scientific criteria and similar cases must be treated alike. The current geographic limitations are not based on the latest science.'' To rectify this inequity, I think it is of utmost importance that Congress take up my legislation, S. 998 to include the State of Idaho as an affected area under the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act. Additionally, it is incumbent upon Congress to address the long-term challenges faced by the RECA program. The NAS report makes several specific recommendations, chief among them that Congress should establish a new process for reviewing individual claims, based on probability of causation, or ``assigned share,'' a method which is used in the courts and other radiation compensation programs. It also recommends that the RECA program be expanded to include workers involved in uranium milling and ore transportation. I urge you to join me in implementing these suggestions of the NAS into legislation.

Mr. CRAPO. I thank the Senator.

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, I rise today to discuss with the distinguished subcommittee chairman the need to amend the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act, RECA.

Mr. CRAPO. I want to express my appreciation for the chairman's efforts, and those of the subcommittee ranking member, Senator Harkin, in working to ensure the health and well-being of Americans everywhere. As you know, a silent health crisis is currently affecting America's men. On average, American men live shorter and less healthy lives than American women. Men lead in each of the 15 major of death in America except Alzheimer's and have a life span of almost 6 years shorter than their female counterparts. While this health crisis is of particular concern to men, it is also a concern for women whose fathers, husbands, sons and brothers feel the physical, financial and emotional effects of poor health. Men's health is also a concern for employers who pay the costs of medical care, and lose productive employees. In addition Federal, State and local governments must often absorb the enormous costs of premature death and disability, including the costs of caring for dependents left behind. There are a number of ailments of particular concern to men. Prostate cancer is the most frequently diagnosed cancer in the United States among men, accounting for 33 percent of all cancer cases. An estimated 230,000 men will be newly diagnosed with prostate cancer this year alone, and approximately 30,000 will die. Prostate cancer, unfortunately, is not the only health threat facing men. Over 8,000 men, ages 15 to 40, will be diagnosed this year with testicular cancer, and 390 of these men will die of this disease in 2005. Fortunately, many of these conditions are treatable if detected early enough. I was diagnosed with prostate cancer in 2001 and thanks to early detection and treatment was able to beat the disease. I had prostate specific antigen, PSA, tests and other recommended tests every 3 to 6 months after my surgery. Last year, my doctors detected a slight rise in PSA, and I underwent successful radiation treatment. Because I caught and treated the onset of this disease early on, I was able to beat it, again. Appropriate use of tests such as PSA exams and blood pressure, blood sugar, and cholesterol screens, in conjunction with clinical exams and self-testing, can result in the early detection of many problems and in increased survival rates. Unfortunately, many men are not taking the steps necessary to protect themselves and their families from these devastating conditions. Statistically, women visit the doctor far more often than men. Too often, men fail to get routine checkups or health counseling, and they often ignore symptoms or delay seeking medical attention when sick or in pain. In addition, when men do seek care, embarrassment can often prevent them from openly discussing health concerns with their physicians. To increase men's health awareness I have introduced legislation to establish an Office of Men's Health under the Department of Health and Human Services. This office would be based on the Office of Women's Health, currently operating within HHS, which has done a fantastic job of assisting women in identifying and battling many conditions common to women. Educating men, their families, and health care providers about the importance of early detection of male health problems can result in reducing rates of mortality for male-specific diseases, as well as improve the health of America's men and its overall economic well-being. While an Office of Men's Health is not a cure-all, it will assist men to focus on many health problems that can be treated successfully if diagnosed early. Prevention and early detection can only happen with increased public awareness, something the proposed office hopes to provide. I yield to the distinguished chairman to elaborate on this point.

Mr. CRAPO. I thank the distinguished chairman.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, pursuant to section 402 of H. Con Res. 95 of the 109th Congress--

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, pursuant to section 402 of H. Con. Res. 95 of the 109th Congress, I make a point of order against the emergency designation contained in the amendment.

Mr. CRAPO. I will withhold.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, I rise to submit a resolution in a critical and too often overlooked subject--teen dating violence. For many decades the tragic crime of domestic violence in the United States went largely unacknowledged by the public face that our society wears. Behind smiling couples and seemingly carefree children lurked something that was better left unspoken, or so many were convinced. Fortunately, in recent years, this dreadful violence that makes a home a prison where rights, human dignity and freedom are eclipsed by fear and rage is now something that society is more willing to acknowledge, talk about and report to proper authorities. As we expose domestic violence to the light of truth and hold perpetrators accountable for their violent actions and destructive words, it is important to address the reality of the transgenerational nature of this crime within families. I've always liked the adage, ``Children learn what they live.'' Never is this more true than in the case of abuse and domestic violence. When children begin to enter their teen years, the relationship norms they learned watching those in parental roles become their own. The results in many junior high, high schools, and colleges across our Nation are chilling: 20 percent of surveyed male students reported witnessing someone they go to high school with physically hit a person they were dating; 58 percent of rape victims report having been raped between the ages of 12-24; 81 percent of parents surveyed either believe teen dating violence is not an issue or admit they don't know if it is an issue; There is a clear link between adolescent dating violence and adult marital violence. Clearly, the crime of teen dating violence, including physical, emotional, and sexual assault, is a reality for many American teenagers. Like drug abuse, it's a reality of which many parents are unaware. It makes sense to have the people most affected by this insidious disease leading the efforts to raise awareness of and prevent the further spread of it. The Teen Dating Violence Awareness and Prevention Initiative is a movement spearheaded by teenagers across the nation to make a stand and put a stop to teen dating violence. Led by the American Bar Association's Steering Committee on the Unmet Needs of Children and co- sponsored by dozens of other organizations, teenagers from 20 State Teams attended a national awareness and education summit in 2004. At that time, they developed Teen Dating Violence Prevention and Awareness Toolkits to distribute to high schools across the Nation in conjunction with a proposed National Teen Dating Violence Awareness and Prevention Week in early 2006. Today, I am submitting a resolution declaring February 6-10, 2006, National Teen Dating Violence Awareness and Prevention Week. Many governors, the Department of Education and the Department of Justice have already pledged to work with the goals and activities that are part of the Initiative. This resolution calls on government representatives and agencies, private organizations and public officials to promote activities in their respective communities that raise awareness of the high incidence of teen dating violence that occurs among our teens every day, as well as prevention strategies. I thank my colleagues, Senators Cantwell, Murray, Lieberman, Murkowski, Durbin, Akaka and Biden in joining me in raising awareness of the problem. This is one major step we can take toward the goal of eliminating the tragedy of children hurting children, and I am privileged to be in a position to help lead this effort.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, this month, the city of Ammon, ID celebrates a very special birthday: it turned 100 on October 10. A century ago, this thriving town of over 10,000 people was covered with sagebrush that was so tall and thick, as one historian put it ``one could ride for miles on horseback without being seen.'' Today, the vestiges of those stalwart Mormon settlers can still be seen in this community that champions family, faith and hard work. The steady growth and measured additions of elements that make a city a city: church, school, electricity, railroad, well, park and public works reflect the wisdom of a well-organized, solid community of citizens. I have lived close to Ammon my entire life; it is a fine community and a great place for families. Those Idahoans who call it home can be proud of their fine city and its 100 years of prosperity.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, I would like to recognize an Idahoan, who through his lifelong love and support of the arts, has gained national recognition. Dan Harpole, executive director of the Idaho Commission on the Arts, ICA, since 2002, has recently been named board director of the National Assembly of States Arts Agencies, NASAA. Dan's years of energetic and committed arts leadership in Idaho and the Northwest made his appointment to this position very fitting. He understands the intrinsic and overt value to society of a thriving arts community at all levels. In the course of Dan's leadership of the Idaho Commission on the Arts, the ICA has developed a new strategic plan for its mission and vision in Idaho. By reaching out to all parts of the community, including nonprofits, cultural organizations, schools, art professionals, and State and local government officials, the ICA under Dan's direction has created a plan that aims to successfully integrate art into communities across Idaho for the greater benefit of all. Dan's seminal vision was demonstrated to his colleagues in other States when Idaho hosted the NASAA National Convention this year. I want to publicly recognize Dan for his continued efforts and accomplishments as well as the commissioners and staff for their support. His children, Hunter and Fiona, are his inspiration and joy and we are pleased that they chose to make Idaho their home. What Idaho has gained by Dan's expertise and enthusiasm will now be shared throughout other States as he takes the helm of NASAA.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, it is with a heavy heart that I wish to announce the death of Sheri Garmon, one of many Idahoans who have died from cancer that was likely attributable to nuclear fallout. Like others, Sheri spent time and energy bringing awareness of this issue as it related to Idaho. However, Sheri, who was fighting multiple cancers, became a charismatic spokesperson for those suffering from the same fate. Sheri Garmon, daughter of Don and Millie Garmon, was born in Emmett, ID, in 1952. When Sheri was just a baby, just 6 months old, the National Cancer Institute estimates that on a single day, June 5, 1952, she received 75 rads of iodine-131. That is the equivalent of 10,000 chest X-rays. The exposure came from nuclear testing being done in the Nevada desert; fallout blew over the little valley where Emmett sits. From that day on, Sheri's ultimate fate was sealed. But no one knew then what we know now. Sheri grew up healthy and strong, out there on her family's dairy farm, drinking milk from their cows, eating vegetables and fruits from their garden. She graduated valedictorian of her high school class, and then went on to graduate from the University of Idaho. She became a CPA and a mother. Sheri used her education as a way to provide for her family and pave the way for future achievement for those who knew her. She was always involved in her community and concerned for the welfare of her friends and family. Along the way, Sheri was diagnosed with thyroid cancer. She beat it. Then she was diagnosed with breast cancer. The doctors gave her about a year to live. She wanted to make it to August 20, 2005, to see her daughter graduate from college. While she did pass that date, she will never see Katie married or play with her grandchildren. She did, however, leave a legacy that we have a responsibility to uphold. Sheri is just one of many unrecognized radiation-exposure victims; her story is poignant, but it is echoed throughout her community by many other families who have survived or lost cancer battles over the last 50 years. Sheri played a large role in bringing the plight of many of her friends and family to the attention of Idaho's congressional delegation and general public last year. Sheri is survived by her mother Millie and her daughter Katie Klein. On May 11, 2005, I came to this Chamber and introduced legislation to amend the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act. My legislation would make Idaho citizens, such as Sheri, who were exposed to fallout from nuclear testing in Nevada, eligible for compensation under the act. In my introductory statement, I related stories of Idahoans who recounted going outside in the evenings to look at the beautiful sunsets caused by the testing. Unfortunately, and unbeknownst to them, these skies were filled with dangerous radiation that elevated their exposure and subsequent risk of developing cancer. I also stated that now is the time to amend the act to make it work for everyone who may have become ill because of radiation fallout exposure. Let us not let Sheri's death go unanswered. Join me in supporting S. 998 to amend the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act so that others who are suffering as Sheri did are given their just compensation and treatment; it is the right thing to do.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce, along with my colleagues Tim Johnson of South Dakota and Jim Bunning of Kentucky, an important bill that will allow Americans to save more for the long term and will better prepare them for a secure retirement. The Generating Retirement Ownership Through Long-Term Holding GROWTH, Act has substantial and growing bipartisan support in the House, and Senator Johnson and I are proud to introduce this bipartisan legislation that provides Americans a better tool to grow their long-term retirement savings. The GROWTH Act would allow investors in mutual funds to keep more retirement savings invested longer and growing longer by deferring taxation of automatically reinvested capital gains until fund shares are sold, rather than allowing those long-term gains--which generate no current income or cash in hand--to be taxed every year. To understand how beneficial this bill would be, it is important to understand the role of mutual funds in long-term retirement savings. Among households owning mutual funds, 92 percent are investing for retirement, with more than 70 percent saying their primary purpose in investing in funds is to prepare for retirement. Many of today's workers do not yet have in place the retirement savings supplement to Social Security that will prepare them for the future. In fact, almost half of American workers--nearly 71 million of 151 million workers--are not offered any form of pension or retirement savings plan at work. Meanwhile, the number of years spent in retirement is growing and the costs individuals can expect to bear in retirement are growing, too. The Employee Benefit Research Institute estimates that an individual retiring at age 65 in 2014 will need $285,000 just to cover health coverage premiums and expenses. Individual savings efforts also face significant obstacles. Those not covered by an employer's retirement plan, for example, can set aside a deductible IRA contribution of only $4,000 this year--$4,500 if they are age 50 or older. Mutual funds are a hugely important part of American workers' preparation for retirement, both through their employers' retirement plans and on their own. Mutual funds now make up half of the $3.2 trillion held by American workers through 401(k) plans and other similar job-based savings programs. About 34 million American households hold mutual funds through their defined contribution plans. More than 30 million American households are saving through taxable mutual fund accounts, either as supplements to their employers' plans or because they do not have such plans. The GROWTH Act is also a good idea because it remedies an unfairness in the tax code that can make saving difficult for many Americans. Mutual fund investors who are struggling to save for retirement should not have to pay taxes on ``profits'' they have not realized. If they don't have money in hand, it makes no sense for them to have to pay taxes. The GROWTH Act would defer taxes until the mutual fund shares are sold and the investor has actual funds to pay the taxes. The GROWTH Act would be a valuable contributor to retirement savings efforts. Mutual fund savers who automatically reinvest are doing what policymakers want to see. They are holding for the long term, contributing to national savings, and building up their own retirement nest egg. These Americans should be encouraged to save--not discouraged through a tax on automatic reinvestments. The GROWTH Act is a step that will show immediate results, a step that will help tens of millions of American savers and ``should-be savers'' over the course of their working lives, and a step that with time can make a real difference in the retirement readiness of American families. I urge my colleagues to join Senator Johnson and me in supporting the GROWTH Act. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record. There being no objection the bill was ordered to be printed in the Record, as follows:

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce, along with my colleagues Tim Johnson of South Dakota and Jim Bunning of Kentucky, an important bill that will allow Americans to save more for the long term and will better prepare them for a secure retirement. The Generating Retirement Ownership Through Long-Term Holding GROWTH, Act has substantial and growing bipartisan support in the House, and Senator Johnson and I are proud to introduce this bipartisan legislation that provides Americans a better tool to grow their long-term retirement savings. The GROWTH Act would allow investors in mutual funds to keep more retirement savings invested longer and growing longer by deferring taxation of automatically reinvested capital gains until fund shares are sold, rather than allowing those long-term gains--which generate no current income or cash in hand--to be taxed every year. To understand how beneficial this bill would be, it is important to understand the role of mutual funds in long-term retirement savings. Among households owning mutual funds, 92 percent are investing for retirement, with more than 70 percent saying their primary purpose in investing in funds is to prepare for retirement. Many of today's workers do not yet have in place the retirement savings supplement to Social Security that will prepare them for the future. In fact, almost half of American workers--nearly 71 million of 151 million workers--are not offered any form of pension or retirement savings plan at work. Meanwhile, the number of years spent in retirement is growing and the costs individuals can expect to bear in retirement are growing, too. The Employee Benefit Research Institute estimates that an individual retiring at age 65 in 2014 will need $285,000 just to cover health coverage premiums and expenses. Individual savings efforts also face significant obstacles. Those not covered by an employer's retirement plan, for example, can set aside a deductible IRA contribution of only $4,000 this year--$4,500 if they are age 50 or older. Mutual funds are a hugely important part of American workers' preparation for retirement, both through their employers' retirement plans and on their own. Mutual funds now make up half of the $3.2 trillion held by American workers through 401(k) plans and other similar job-based savings programs. About 34 million American households hold mutual funds through their defined contribution plans. More than 30 million American households are saving through taxable mutual fund accounts, either as supplements to their employers' plans or because they do not have such plans. The GROWTH Act is also a good idea because it remedies an unfairness in the tax code that can make saving difficult for many Americans. Mutual fund investors who are struggling to save for retirement should not have to pay taxes on ``profits'' they have not realized. If they don't have money in hand, it makes no sense for them to have to pay taxes. The GROWTH Act would defer taxes until the mutual fund shares are sold and the investor has actual funds to pay the taxes. The GROWTH Act would be a valuable contributor to retirement savings efforts. Mutual fund savers who automatically reinvest are doing what policymakers want to see. They are holding for the long term, contributing to national savings, and building up their own retirement nest egg. These Americans should be encouraged to save--not discouraged through a tax on automatic reinvestments. The GROWTH Act is a step that will show immediate results, a step that will help tens of millions of American savers and ``should-be savers'' over the course of their working lives, and a step that with time can make a real difference in the retirement readiness of American families. I urge my colleagues to join Senator Johnson and me in supporting the GROWTH Act. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record. There being no objection the bill was ordered to be printed in the Record, as follows:

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, I would like to honor the life of a special Idahoan who is also the father of my colleague from Idaho, Senator Larry Craig. Elvin Oren Craig, who passed away last week, left many legacies and will be missed by many people. In Idaho, he served as a lifelong advocate for Idaho agriculture, and a leader in Washington County, Midvale and Weiser. He also was very active in his local VFW Post in Midvale, ID. At 87 years old, he had remained active despite a diagnosis of prostate cancer. In fact, he worked until only about 6 months ago when he decided it might be time to let up a little bit. Elvin Craig's legacy also lives on in my colleague and in Senator Craig's consistent and honorable service to Idahoans over his years in public office. I know that Elvin was proud of his son's service to Idaho and the country--first in the Idaho State Senate, then in the U.S. House of Representatives, and now in the U.S. Senate. Elvin's family and friends know of his community service and his persistent commitment over many years to Idaho's farmers and ranchers and his own family. He worked hard while maintaining his sense of humor. His full life was an outstanding example of what it means to be an Idahoan. I am pleased to pay tribute to a remarkable man, Elvin Oren Craig, and to share my condolences to my friend, Larry Craig, and his family upon the passing of a great man.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, I would like to recognize a nontraditional Idaho community that although a Federal installation, is as much a part of our State as any other community. The Mountain Home Air Force Base Gunfighters support and execute our military air mission worldwide while devoting time and energy to improve the quality of life on base and off. In the 1940s, Mountain Home Air Force Base was established and over the next few decades took on many different Air Force missions including bombers, fighters, tankers, and even intercontinental ballistic missiles for a short time. As the needs and overall mission of the Air Force has evolved over the years, Mountain Home has followed suit, proven to be a site of flexibility and superior support, operations, and training. Wings based at Mountain Home have provided air support all around the world and, in times of need like September 11, here at home. The capabilities of the personnel, facilities, resources and organizations at Mountain Home have always been characterized by flexibility, readiness and immediate and forceful global deployment in a tightly controlled and effective command and control environment. Exercising their skills and military professionalism, Gunfighters have not only fought the battles but participated in reconstruction and humanitarian missions in the current conflict in the Middle East as well as other places around the globe where innocent people are suffering from the evils of poverty, economic oppression, and the tragedies of natural disasters. In a similar way, Gunfighters have proven to be able to ``deploy'' to the community on base and off at a moment's notice when duty calls. Last year alone, volunteers worked on base more than 100,000 hours valued at $1.5 million. Many of these individuals already have more than full-time work in the military but have found the time to make a difference to others expecting no compensation. Stories abound of emergency assistance given by members of the military to civilians in Idaho. Recently, two jet fighters escorted a disabled civilian aircraft to safety, averting a possible crash and fatality. Another form of giving that is particularly important to the troops who are deployed is donating blood. I am proud to say that in the recent Armed Forces blood drive, Mountain Home Air Force Base more than doubled its goal and donated a total of 265 units of blood that was shipped directly to Iraq. In addition, the base sent 60 units of a special blood product designed to promote quick clotting to our mobile medical units. What a terrific example of fellow soldiers and families lending aid and comfort to our military men and women across the world. I offer my sincere thanks and gratitude to our very own Idaho Gunfighters, both at Mountain Home and deployed. You make Idaho proud.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, a small town in Idaho celebrates its 100th birthday this month. Potlatch, named after the lumber company that made its home there in the early part of the 20th Century, was started by Frederick Weyerhaeuser after scouts reported that it would be a fine place to establish a lumber company. When the mill opened, it was the largest white pine sawmill in the world and, in a very interesting way, a social experiment. Weyerhaeuser built a ``company town'' including homes, churches, a post office, schools, commercial buildings and even an opera house and ensured the new towns connectivity to commerce by building a railroad. When you think about it, this is quite a phenomenal achievement even for a large company and showed tremendous business foresight as well as a consideration of the needs of its workers. Older residents even tell stories about the rather unique way that students were kept in line at school: if the students got into trouble, the parents were told that they would lose their job at the mill if the bad behavior continued. How times have changed! Although the population is only about half of what it was in its heyday, and no longer a ``company town,'' the notion of community that was bred over decades lives on in Potlatch residents today. I congratulate Potlatch on 100 years of community success.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. Thank you very much, Mr. President. Mr. President, I stand and join my colleague, Senator Bunning from Kentucky. I was one of those who was able to be on this trip to Guantanamo yesterday. Along with Senator Isakson from Georgia, we were joined there by two other Senators, Senator Wyden from Oregon and also Senator Nelson from Nebraska, who came in on a separate trip. We had an opportunity to view exactly what is happening at Guantanamo. As I said, I am glad to be able to stand with my colleague, Senator Bunning, and set the record straight about what the United States and the honorable men and women of our armed services are doing to serve the United States, the people of this country, and, frankly, the people of the world as we fight to defeat terrorism. I want to first thank my colleague, Senator Bunning, who has given a very thorough and helpful review. I will try not to repeat too many of the things he went through, but he has identified the core points that need to be made as we discuss what is truly happening at Guantanamo. I want to start out by going into a little bit of detail about who exactly is there. Secondly, I want to talk a little bit about the legal framework because, frankly, a lot of the debate we hear throughout the country and throughout the world today has to do with different points of view about the legal framework within which we are dealing with the circumstances at Guantanamo. Then I want to talk about the question of transparency; in other words, do we really know what is happening there? I know there are a lot of people who will say: You went there and you visited, but did you really see the truth? I want to talk about that. I also want to talk about what we saw--how are the detainees being treated. Finally, I want to talk about our own troops. What is their morale? And what is their conduct? And then, actually, the last thing I want to talk about is: Of what benefit to the United States and the world is Guantanamo? I am going to go back now and talk, first of all, about who is there. I think there has been a bit of a misconception about who it is we are detaining at Guantanamo. Since the effort began in defeating the Taliban in Afghanistan--and it has expanded to the war in Iraq--the United States has captured more than 70,000 detainees--70,000--in the conduct of the war in Afghanistan and Iraq. Among that number, the vast majority have been handled in other ways. Either they have been released or they have been turned over to other authorities, other nations, or they are being held in facilities in the area of the battle. But we are working with Iraq, Afghanistan, and other governments to make sure they take control of detainees to the maximum extent possible. But there are some detainees who are so dangerous that we have made the decision we must maintain control over them. They are also controlled because they have information that is critical to us in the battle against terrorism. And after a very thorough vetting process, out of 70,000 who have been captured in these battles and in other efforts to fight against terrorism, approximately 800 have been moved to Guantanamo. My numbers are going to be kind of rounded here, but of that 800, about 235 have already been released or moved into the custody of other countries. My colleague, Senator Bunning, indicated that is not always good news. At least 12 of those who have been released have been found again in the battlefield--some of them killed in battle, others captured again, and at least one was found to have ordered some very significant terrorist activities after being released from Guantanamo. But about 235 of the 800 who we determined were so dangerous they needed to be moved to Guantanamo have been released or put into the custody of other countries. Approximately 520 remain at Guantanamo. Who are these 520? These are terrorist trainers. These are bomb makers. These are recruiters and facilitators for al-Qaida and other terrorist groups. These are terrorist financiers. These are bodyguards of Osama bin Laden. And these are would-be suicide bombers--to name just a few of those who we have identified and the activities we are stopping by keeping them detained. I am going to come back a little bit later and talk about what we learn from these detainees. But I would like to talk, next, a little bit about some of the details of individuals whom we have identified. An elaborate process has been put into place, as I indicated, to identify whom we will return and take to Guantanamo to assess the threat they pose to the United States and the international community, and then to give regular review to this process to be sure they are still the threat that they were and deserve to be kept at the Guantanamo base. But as a result of this effort, we have collected the most dangerous, and the ones with the most information who can give us the most assistance, through the interrogation process, to help us pursue the war against terrorism. These detainees include terrorists who are linked to a major al-Qaida attack, including attacks in east Africa, the U.S. Embassy bombings, and the USS Cole attack; terrorists who taught or received training teams on arms, explosives, surveillance, and interrogation resistance at al-Qaida camps in Afghanistan and elsewhere; terrorists who continue to express their commitment to kill Americans, if released; terrorists who have sworn personal allegiance to Osama bin Laden; terrorists who have been linked to several al-Qaida operational plans, including possible targeting of facilities in the United States; members of al- Qaida's international terrorism support network including the financiers, the couriers, the recruiters, and the operatives and those who participated in attempted hijacking instances. Let me give a couple specific examples. One al-Qaida explosives trainer is there who has provided information to the United States on the September 2001 assassination of Massoud and on the al-Qaida organization's use of mines; another individual who completed advanced terrorist training at camps in Afghanistan and participated in an attempted hijacking and escaped while in custody that resulted in the deaths of Pakistani guards; another individual who was involved in terrorist financing who provided information on Osama bin Laden's front companies, accounts, and international money movements for financing terror. The list goes on and on. This is who is there at Guantanamo. These are the people whom we seek to detain and about whom the debate in this country revolves. They are dangerous, and they must be kept under control or they will kill more Americans and threaten people throughout the world. What is the legal framework within which they are being detained? That is the crux, though it is not often stated that way, of the debate. I will get into this in more detail, but Senator Bunning has already indicated, the treatment that is being provided to the detainees is probably the most humane, high quality treatment any nation that has ever captured detainees at war has ever provided to its prisoners. I suspect no other nation today or throughout history could claim to be treating its detainees better. But still the question arises, how and under what legal framework should they be handled? There is an irony here. These detainees do not serve in a normal army. They do not wear uniforms. They do not serve a nation that is a signer to the Geneva Conventions. They do not honor Geneva Conventions, meaning they do not refrain from attacking civilians and conducting terrorist activities. And because they do not qualify in these categories, they don't qualify under the Geneva Conventions as prisoners of war. Here is the irony. If they were prisoners of war, they wouldn't be entitled to the legal benefits about which we are now wrangling. They would be entitled to humane treatment, but they would not be entitled to get into the court system of the country that has captured them. Many throughout this Nation and throughout the world are saying we should provide all of the legal benefits in a criminal law system, such as the criminal justice system in the United States, to these detainees. The United States has declined to do so, stating that these are enemy combatants under the Geneva Conventions. But they are not prisoners of war under the Geneva Conventions. And there is the irony. If we could classify them as prisoners of war under the Geneva Conventions, we could avoid the debate about what their rights are and how they should be treated. Instead, since they are not a group entitled to participate in the United States criminal justice system and are not a group entitled to be considered prisoners of war under the Geneva Conventions, but are instead enemy combatants under the Geneva Conventions in a category for which nations have not yet agreed on how they should be treated, the United States is embroiled in a debate as to how to treat them. How have we resolved this decision? On January 19, 2002, the Secretary of Defense gave specific guidance that all detainees are to be treated humanely. On January 21, the same year, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff issued executive orders to commanders that transmitted the Secretary of Defense order that these detainees be treated humanely. On February 7, 2002, President Bush determined that al-Qaida and Taliban detainees should be treated humanely, consistent with the principles of the Geneva Conventions and consistent with military necessity. The detention of enemy combatants in wartime is not an act of punishment. It is a matter of security and military necessity. It prevents enemy combatants from continuing to fight against the United States or its partners in the war on terror. Releasing enemy combatants before the end of hostilities and allowing them to rejoin the fight would only prolong the conflict and endanger our coalition and American forces. Here is the point of the debate. The United States, though these enemy combatants are in an uncertain category, has provided to them all of the humane treatment required by the Geneva Convention and more legal rights than they would have if they were prisoners of war. Yet the United States continues to be criticized because there are those-- and this is what everyone needs to understand--who will not be satisfied until we choose not to treat these enemy combatants in the context of a war but instead choose to treat them as criminals in a criminal justice system and thereby change the legal framework under which they are being handled. The United States correctly and properly refuses to do so. If we were to do so, we would not be able to defend the interests of the country against enemies who are conducting war against us as effectively as we can if we are able to treat them under the Geneva Conventions as enemy combatants. And when you hear the debate about how they are being treated, listen carefully, because most of the debate is not about their physical condition or whether they are being treated humanely. It is about how they are being categorized with regard to these legal battles that those who are engaged in the issue wish to see ensue. Let's talk about what we saw, and then I will describe how they are actually physically being treated and whether what we saw is true. I have already had those who knew that I went there ask me whether the opportunity we had is one which truly showed us what was happening at Guantanamo. To me this is an issue of transparency. What is happening there, and were we shown what was truly going on? First, we visited every facility there. Five Senators, with many other individuals with us from other government agencies, went through and visited every facility. My colleague Senator Bunning indicated that we even went to Camp X-Ray which has not been utilized for 2 or 3 years and which is literally overgrown. I walked into one of the containment facilities there at Camp X-Ray. I had to brush away the weeds in order to move through the door and to go in and see what it looked like. We visited Camps 1, 2, 3, and 4. And they are numbered in terms of the order in which they were built. These are the newer camps that were constructed to provide better facilities for these detainees than were originally there at Camp X-Ray when we first started using the base. We were able to see the medical facilities. We were able to observe literally everything at the base. And I can say that I don't think it would have been possible for them to have hidden from us what was happening. We were able to observe the interrogations, to interview and discuss with the personnel present what was happening, right down to the troops who were conducting the specific guarding activities inside the cell blocks. If that is not sufficient, the International Committee of the Red Cross has had 24-hour-a-day, 7-day-a-week access to the facility at its discretion. They have had a permanent presence, recently changing that only at their choosing. The media, both national and international, have had 400 visits to Guantanamo, representing over 1,000 members of the media who have been there to also observe. Lawyers for the detainees, who would not even be allowed if we categorized them as prisoners of war, have come and, in many of the habeas corpus cases, to observe and discuss with the detainees. And somewhere in the neighborhood of 15 to 20 Senators and 75 to 100 Representatives, in addition to over 100 congressional staff, have been there to observe. My point is that in terms of transparency, is the United States letting its own people, its Congress, and the world know what is being done there? I believe the answer is clearly yes. My colleague Senator Bunning went through the numbers of deaths in the Nazi concentration camps, in the gulags under Stalin, and the numbers, you will recall, were in the millions. Not one detainee has died at Guantanamo. On the contrary, they have the best medical care that I believe any detainees in history have ever had. So as far as the question goes with regard to whether we are providing a true and accurate picture to the public about what is happening there, the answer is unequivocally yes. What is happening there? I would like to talk a little bit about what we saw. As I indicated, there are a number of facilities. They are called Camp 1, 2, 3, and 4. They are building Camp 5 and Camp 6. They are different in terms of the levels of security and in terms of the operations. Those who are detained there are able to be in one of the camps versus the other camps depending on how they respond to their detention. If they are the more violent kind who do not follow instructions, then they are often in individual confinement. This individual confinement does not mean solitary confinement. It means they would be in a cell block with 40 or 50 others, and you can see each other through the cell. These are not enclosed. So they have the ability to play chess between cells and so forth. They have running water, sinks, and toilets in each cell. They have religious paraphernalia so they can practice their religion. They are facilitated in the practice of that religion by being provided with prayer calls and with directions. From wherever in the camp you are, you can see an arrow that points toward Mecca so you know the directions. They are provided recreational opportunities, showers, and three, good, solid meals a day, as well as outstanding medical care. Those are the ones who are in the most closely confined circumstances. Those who are more willing to follow instructions and less willing to attack their guards are allowed to live in more communal circumstances where the rooms, instead of being individual cell units, are in units where ten or more can live together, and then those groups can go out in recreational facilities and have a little bit expanded recreational opportunity and the like. Then there is the maximum security facilities which would be comparable to the kinds of similar facilities that are there that you could find anywhere in the United States, in prison facilities that are subject to extensive litigation and oversight by attorneys and our own judicial system. Throughout this entire process, whether one is in the most extreme, highest maximum security circumstance or whether one is in some of those areas where the more responsible detainees are able to be, they are always provided with the best possible treatment. I don't believe it would be possible for a valid argument of some type of physical abuse to be made because there is such care there to be certain that even when the detainees are being interrogated--and, by the way, the interrogation is a very humane and, frankly, easygoing process which does not create physical threat to the detainees--there are always more than one or two or three people observing what is happening so there cannot be a circumstance where something goes awry and someone abuses the relationship and the situation. Let me talk a little bit about the medical care. I said they are getting top-notch medical care. I asked many of those who we were there with what the comparability would be between the medical care provided to these detainees and that provided to detainees by other nations in other wars or in other circumstances. Consistently no one could give me an example of better medical care ever being provided anywhere. I asked if it was equivalent to the kind of medical care that our own troops were being provided. The answer was yes. It is probably better medical care than these detainees have ever had in their lifetime. When they were first brought there, many of them had traumatic injuries from the battles in which they were captured. Those injuries were treated. Now they have reached a point that they have been there several years, some of them, where they are being treated for the kinds of problems you and I and others would want to have medical care for. They are getting annual checkups. They are being treated for diabetes, if they have back ailments or heart problems, whatever it may be, if they have dietary needs, they are being treated for them. A number of them have lost their limbs, not because they lost them in battle but because they lost them while they were building bombs to blow up Americans. And we have provided treatment for their loss of limbs and actually provided them with prosthetics and helped them with the physical therapy so they can regain the use of their bodies to the maximum extent we can help them. We have facilities there to do major surgery. We have all kinds of other support. If they have medical needs that go beyond what we have there available, they are taken elsewhere to get that medical treatment. In fact, I would like to move now to the discussion of what the morale of our troops is. I think as we met there with people at all levels, from the guards to those who ran the hospitals to the managers to everyone else, I could honestly say the morale of our troops there is very high. But there is a concern that was consistently expressed to me by them. I had the opportunity to have lunch with some of those who were literally on the front lines having to go into the cell blocks and to provide the guard service around the clock with these detainees. And they are concerned about what the American people and the international public think about them and about what they are doing because they believe they are treating these detainees with the highest respect and with the most humane treatment possible. They are overseeing it rigorously. If any of them steps out of line, they get handled and they get in trouble. Yet they are subjected constantly to threats and harassment and abuse from the detainees. It is my perspective that if anyone is being abused at Guantanamo, it is not the detainees, it is the good young men and women guards who are there on the front line, who are themselves physically threatened, verbally threatened, and in other ways abused. It has been reported what kinds of things are thrown at them through the cell blocks as they walk through. When they happen to go through and a detainee throws urine or feces on them, they have to go out, be hosed off, and go back into duty. If anyone is being abused at Guantanamo, it is the treatment that is being afforded to our men and women of the military that is causing the abuse to them, rather than the reverse. For those here in this body or anywhere else to accuse our men and women of mistreating those at Guantanamo is a great irony because any abuse or mistreatment that is happening is the reverse. I am proud of our men and women there. They are truly doing a great service for this country and for this world. Let me conclude by talking a little bit about what that is. By the way, I forgot one piece of information. I have talked about the medical facilities and other kinds of support that have been provided to these detainees to make sure they are being properly cared for. In the newest facilities, the prisoners even get air conditioning, which is not something most of the troops get, at least during their working hours. But what does that cost us? What kind of investment has the United States made? To this point, the United States has spent over $241 million in providing these medical facilities, these containment and detention facilities, and for the care and treatment and feeding of these detainees. The annual cost will go on probably at $100 million a year, until we are able to resolve this conflict. The United States has also spent over $140 million in existing or new detention facilities in Afghanistan and Iraq. So we are putting a tremendous amount in here. What benefit does it provide to us? As I indicated, the purpose of this detention, to me, is twofold. First of all, it is to stop dangerous terrorists from being put back into the field so they can go back out and continue to kill Americans and others and train and facilitate other terrorists in doing the same thing. The first thing is to stop them from committing terrorist activity. The second purpose is to be able to gain from them information that will help us better pursue or fight against terrorists around the world. The question of Guantanamo detainees, which I will again state is not the kind of interrogation that one thinks of when they think of a gulag, or what you might see on TV as a threatening interrogation. This is entirely nonthreatening interrogation. It has improved the security of our Nation and coalition partners by helping us to expand our understanding of the operations of the terrorists. It has given us an expanded understanding of the organizational structure of al-Qaida and other terrorist groups. It has given us more knowledge of the extent of the terrorist presence in Europe, the United States, and the Middle East. It has given us knowledge of al-Qaida's pursuit of weapons of mass destruction, of methods of recruitment and location of recruitment centers, terrorist skill sets, general and specialized operative training, and of how legitimate financial activities are being used to hide terrorist operations. The intelligence we are gaining by the interrogations of those who are kept at Guantanamo has prevented terrorist attacks and has saved American lives. Not only has no one died at Guantanamo, not only has the highest health care possible been provided to them, but lives have been saved as a result of our activities there. Detainees have revealed al-Qaida leadership structures and operating funding mechanisms, training and selection programs, travel patterns, support infrastructure, and plans for attacking the United Sates and other countries. Information has been used by our forces on the battlefield to identify significant military and tribal leaders who are engaged in or supporting attacks on coalition forces. Detainees have continuously provided information that confirms other reporting regarding the roles and intentions of al-Qaida and other terrorist operatives. I could get into details, but I will not do that publicly. The fact is, we are getting extensive, detailed information from the terrorists who are kept at Guantanamo, which is saving American lives and helping us to protect our young men and women in the military and people in other nations. I want to conclude my remarks by coming back to the beginning. There has been a lot of debate about what is going on at Guantanamo. What is the United States doing? Why is it doing it? Is the United States creating some type of a new detention circumstance in modern warfare, which parallels some of the most terrible examples that our critics have been able to throw up at us? I went down there wanting to know and wanting to see and to be able to report back to the American people about what truly is happening. What I found was that the U.S. men and women of our Armed Forces are committed, honorable, loyal, duty-bound members of the American military who are following the orders of their Commander in Chief to the letter, following the Geneva Conventions, and providing beyond what the Geneva Conventions even requires in terms of protection to these detainees, in a service to America and to the world. I found a circumstance where I don't believe a valid argument can be made that there is any nonhumane treatment of these detainees. I found a circumstance in which it appears to me that what is being portrayed by some is simply manufactured out of whole cloth in order to perpetuate a broader debate against the United States and our interests. I also became convinced that, far beyond being simply a detention facility, Guantanamo is one of the key strategic interrogation facilities necessary for the United States in pursuit of the war against terror in this world. As we have said in both of our remarks, Guantanamo is where the worst of the worst are taken. They are taken there to be protected so that we can be protected from them and so that we can gain information from them that will help us better protect ourselves as we continue to fight to defend against the likes of Osama bin Laden. I also stand here to commend the young men and women of our fighting forces--not just those who at Guantanamo are suffering the abuse of the detainees and the extremes of the weather and the living circumstances there to defend us, but those who serve throughout this world, whether it be in Iraq or Afghanistan or any of the other points of conflict or in any other of the stations around this world, where we have men and women deployed to defend our interests. The United States is at war against terrorists and we must acknowledge that. The efforts of the men and women in our military should be commended, not discredited. I stand as one Senator to thank the men and women of our Armed Forces for the tremendous job they do. They put their lives on the line daily for us and they should be given our thanks, not our criticism. With that, I yield back the remainder of my time.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, during Senate vote No. 139, pertaining to amendment No. 779, I was necessarily absent. Had I been present, I intended to vote ``yes.'' I ask that the Record reflect this.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, as we wind down from a Presidential election year and gear up for yet another cycle of congressional elections, it seems appropriate to take a moment and consider how important an educated electorate is to this country. It is the bedrock upon which our Founding Fathers built a fledgling government, creating a Constitution that functions with protean efficiency--inextricably bound to the necessity of knowledgeable and civic-minded citizens. I am proud to make public mention of the Moscow, ID, chapter of the League of Women Voters, which has won an award from the League of Women Voters of the United States for its efforts to educate future voters in north Idaho. The League of Women Voters promotes a mock election program through its State and local chapters across the Nation. The Moscow chapter conducted what can only be described as a phenomenal month-long series of events and outreach that culminated in late October in the most successful ``mock election'' in Idaho and one of the top in the Nation. They were able to register and have almost 2900 first through twelfth- graders in the Moscow area vote. And I am relieved to add that I was reelected by these young people. The chapter worked to bring together local, county, and State officials, teachers, parents, and volunteers to provide these students with a comprehensive and highly educational election experience. The students were given issues ballots, information about the candidates, Web site curriculum, sample ballots and had to abide by all of the State voting laws. Students were taught their voting rights under the Help America Vote Act, and the overall efforts were so successful that the League of Women Voters of Idaho and the Idaho Secretary of State's office asked them to share their mock election handbook for instruction and use by other organizations in the State. The Moscow chapter went above and beyond in its outreach efforts, bringing in students from an alternative high school and made voting accessible for handicapped students under Americans For Disabilities Act laws. In the successful aftermath, the effect has been felt throughout the community as private schools and home-schooling parents have expressed interest in becoming involved in the future. Even more noteworthy, although parents were not required to participate, more parents volunteered than in past years, and it could be surmised that this ``mock election'' contributed to the historically high voter turnout in that area of Idaho for the real elections in November. Thomas Jefferson said: ``If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be.'' I congratulate the outstanding efforts of the League of Women Voters of Moscow on its remarkable effort to reinforce civic education and voter responsibility in Idaho's children.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, there is a small town in Idaho that celebrates a very special anniversary this year. Fifty years ago in 1955, the St. Anthony, ID Chamber of Commerce paid for travelers to have coffee and donuts at any of the local cafes to celebrate the opening day of fishing season. The effort, which encouraged fishermen and women to stop in St. Anthony for supplies, was so successful that this tiny town decided to prepare and serve a full breakfast of pancakes, sausage, hash browns and beverages for hungry travelers every year. By 1966, 10,000 people were served over the course of one day, more than three times the current population of the town. Today, about 5,000 people a year get to enjoy the great food and super hospitality of this small town in southeast Idaho that serves as a gateway to the Snake River and some of the best fishing in the West. I congratulate the St. Anthony Chamber of Commerce and all of the volunteers who this year and in years past have come together to give people a smile, laughter and a delicious hot breakfast.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, today I would like to recognize the outstanding efforts of a group of young Idahoans from Madison High School in Rexburg, ID. These young men and women came to Washington, D.C., to represent my State in the national finals of the ``We the People: the Citizen and the Constitution'' program. They represented Idaho well and are a tribute to our State's youth. The national finals include a mock congressional hearing which gives the students the opportunity to translate their specialized learning in history, social studies, government and civics into action. As they use their newly-gained knowledge of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights to examine, counter and defend issues facing America today, they come to appreciate the timeless nature of this great document. This experience gives students the opportunity to apply civic values to real-life challenges and will serve them in whatever they choose to do after they graduate from high school. Idaho can be proud of the growth of civic virtue in these young people. As they look beyond themselves to the realm of the public good, Idaho and America will benefit as these individuals develop into responsible, intelligent citizens who practice discernment in judgment in matters of concern to our State and Nation. In the future, these student citizens will be more inclined to exhibit leadership faithful to the ideals upon which our country was built and consonant with the notions of liberty, freedom, justice and rule of law.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, Idaho's small businesses make up over 95 percent of total businesses in the State. New companies launch their products and services every day. These businesses are the lifeblood of Idaho's economy and their existence indicates the overwhelming entrepreneurship that abides in our communities large and small. A unique public-private partnership between the Idaho National Lab, Boise State University, and the Idaho Department of Commerce and Labor is helping these vital organs of Idaho's economy grow and function to their best potential. The Small Business Administration recently recognized this effort, giving Idaho TechConnect a national ``Best Practices'' award at an economic development conference here in Washington. Idaho TechConnect has been instrumental in providing small high tech business entrepreneurs with development assistance, and facilities and services to assess the progress and direction of their business expansion. The partnerships with industry and higher education provide these ventures with inspiration, innovation, outside experience and consultation from those in academia as well as the established and thriving high tech industry in Idaho. Sharing resources, whether intellectual or tangible, provides outcomes that are productive and long lasting. The people and organizations involved with Idaho TechConnect are to be commended on their commitment to our State's economy and by extension, communities and families. This tremendous honor by SBA is most certainly well deserved.