Hillary Clinton

Mrs. CLINTON

Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, the recently passed amendment did try to improve upon the status quo, and I commend Senators Collins and Lieberman for attempting to do so. But the answer is we need to restore the independence of FEMA. We need to give back to it Cabinet-level status with a direct line to the President. My amendment will allow us to do that. I urge you to vote for this amendment even if you voted for the last amendment because it improves the status quo vote which gets us back to the kind of independent FEMA that can actually respond to disasters and mitigate and help us prepare for them. Thank you, Mr. President.

Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, I thank my colleague, the Senator from Hawaii, who has been a strong voice on behalf of our Nation's security and joins with me in putting before the Senate one of the most important issues we face: How will we manage our emergency preparedness and response? I have the greatest respect and regard for my colleagues, Senator Collins and Senator Lieberman. They have done an extraordinary job in leading a committee that has had so much responsibility over the last months for the well-being and the homeland security of our Nation. I respectfully disagree with the solution they are putting forth, but I know it comes after not only many hearings but incredible thought and extraordinary attention to the details about how best to rescue the situation in which we find ourselves. We had a functioning, effective Federal Emergency Management Agency 5\1/2\ years ago. By all accounts, on all sides of the political spectrum, we had a crown jewel, an agency where performance was highly regarded not only in our own country but literally around the world. Unfortunately, that agency became a victim of the governing philosophy of the current administration. We have seen, in stark terms, the failures of the existing Federal Emergency Management Agency, so-called FEMA. We saw it in the disastrous failures in the days and weeks, continuing until this day, along our gulf coast when people lost everything--their homes, their neighborhoods, their churches, even their loved ones. Our Nation lost something precious as well: we lost faith in our Federal Government and in the response capabilities of the organization that until 5\1/2\ years ago we could count on. When we created the Department of Homeland Security after September 11, I warned, along with others, that moving FEMA into that large bureaucracy was a mistake. I said that on the basis of what I thought was the mission of the Department of Homeland Security, which was, first and foremost, to deal with the potential for terrorism and to deter and prevent terrorist attacks like the horrific attacks of September 11. The decision was made to move FEMA into the Department of Homeland Security, and my worst fears came true. It became a stepchild. It became a holding pen for political cronies. It was no longer viewed as the crown jewel of the Federal Government but as a stepchild that did not really deserve the attention and the resources of this administration. Our worst fears about what would happen to FEMA in the Department of Homeland Security came true when we saw the images on television coming out of New Orleans and up and down the gulf coast. I applaud Senator Collins and Senator Lieberman for the extraordinarily thorough investigation they did. We got even more sickening detail of e-mails from FEMA officials at the time the disaster struck, what their concerns were--which were hardly focused on saving the people who were suffering. We have seen thousands of people displaced. We see 10,000 mobile homes sitting empty at the Hope, AR, Municipal Airport, and on and on. We have a GAO report that says there may have been up to $1 billion--yes, that is billion with a ``b''--$1 billion in Federal assistance that has been misspent. It is not only the facts about Katrina that bring me to urge we restore FEMA to an independent status, give it back Cabinet-level access, make it independent of the behemoth that the bureaucracy of the Department of Homeland Security has become, but it is also my worry about the future. Hurricane Katrina was a foreseen disaster. We watched it on the Weather Channel. We saw it coming across the gulf. It was not a sneak attack by suicide bombers in airplanes, it was a huge storm. I worry, as incompetent as FEMA has become, how would they handle the unforeseen? It is tragic to me that we have come to this position, and I think the new leadership at FEMA is laboring mightily to try to turn the situation around. But I worry it will be impossible, if FEMA stays within the Department of Homeland Security. If it stays within the Department and is renamed and reconfigured, I do not think that eliminates the primary problem, which is that it is stuck in a department with a focus and mission that cannot help but be to try to prevent and deter terrorist attacks. Believe me, I am all for that. We are about to come up on the fifth anniversary year of the attacks of 9/ 11. Although I really respect what Senators Collins and Lieberman are trying to do, I think they are trying to fit a square peg into a round hole. They are stuck with the Department of Homeland Security, and so they are trying to figure out a way to shoehorn it in, to detour around the dysfunctional organization and leadership that the Department has. And I do not think that will work. The amendment Senator Akaka and I and others have offered would do three things: first, reinstitute FEMA as an independent Cabinet-level agency; second, require the Director and Deputy Director to have the appropriate emergency service qualifications; and third, require the FEMA Director to report directly to the President of the United States. During Katrina, who was in charge? Was it our President? Was it the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security? Was it the FEMA Director? I do not know who it was. And one of the problems is that no one was. If we just sort of move the deck chairs on the Titanic, I do not think that solves the problem. FEMA's response capabilities have been degraded since Katrina even, because people are not there. They are not able to have the same sense of morale and commitment. When you look at all the reports that have been done--one from the White House, one from the Senate, one from the House, as well as the various reports from the Government Accountability Office--you can see all of the things that went wrong. Unfortunately, these reports have not been coordinated, and it is very difficult to figure out how we are going to get ourselves back on the right track with a functioning world-class FEMA, and I just do not believe the answer is for it to operate as a subagency within the Department. Now, I know there are those who are rightly concerned that if we take FEMA back to an independent status, then we will have duplicative efforts, we will not have coordination. I think the amendment tries to specifically say this does not detract in any way from the Department of Homeland Security's mission to secure the homeland. But I believe having it back in an independent status, with full accountability to the President, statutory authority under the Stafford Act to carry out all of the necessary mitigation, response, and recovery actions, is the way to go. If under our amendment we make FEMA report directly to the President, then the FEMA Director will have more authority under Stafford Act designation than if he is a sub- Cabinet official within DHS. My bottom line is we should get FEMA back to a functioning, effective agency again, and there is a difference of opinion about how best to do that. Obviously, we are back in hurricane season. We do not want to do anything, either within a reorganization or an independent status, that would further disable FEMA from responding. But if we reempower FEMA, restore its independence, and staff it with qualified people, we will be back on the right track. We have a regional structure for FEMA, and it is not clear from the proposal from the committee how that will work, who appoints those regional directors, who has to be in charge. I do not want people exchanging business cards at the site of a disaster, which is what has been happening. I believe we have to build on the strong track record FEMA had during the 1990s. I know the committee has said this would be comparable to the Coast Guard, but I think that is a slightly different role and mission. The Coast Guard is a military, multimissioned maritime service. It is one of our Nation's five armed services. Its mission is to ``protect the public, the environment, and U.S. economic interests--in the nation's ports and waterways, along the coast, on international waters, or in any maritime region as required to support national security.'' They did a superb job with respect to Katrina and Rita. But FEMA has a different role. It is supposed to be managing dollars of considerable numbers in advance of catastrophic events, coordinating Federal agencies, carrying out the President's statutory authority for emergency response. It is supposed to be the go-to entity for full management. I believe we have a better chance of getting back the FEMA we should have, that the people should be able to count on, that can work with State and local governments, that can help to mitigate disasters, by returning it to independence. So, Mr. President, I ask our colleagues to support the amendment to restore FEMA to an effective, independent, Cabinet-level agency once again and send a message to the country that FEMA is back--it is back, it is ready for business, and people can have trust in it once again. Thank you, Mr. President.

Mrs. CLINTON

Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, it gives me pride and pleasure to introduce revised legislation to establish the Champlain Quadricentennial Commemoration Commission and the Hudson-Fulton 400th Commemoration Commission. I began this effort with legislation I introduced 4 years ago during the 107th Congress. Because my colleagues in the other body and I were not able to enact our bill that time, we returned in the 108th Congress with new legislation including needed revisions. I now lay down the next version of the bill that incorporates welcomed input and reflects a consensus reached among key leaders who share the goal of honoring important events in our Nation's and New York State's history. The United States of America has long been celebrated for its leadership in innovation, exploration, and ingenuity. These qualities have been evident dating back as far as 1609 when Englishman Henry Hudson became the first European to sail up the river later named for him in the vessel Half Moon. Also in 1609, French explorer Samuel de Champlain became the first European to see the lake later named for him, as well as the shores in Northern New York and Vermont. These explorations led to the establishment of trading posts, military posts, and settlements as far south as Lake George. From these early establishments came trade, commerce, cultural, and religious impact deep into the Mohawk Valley and as far west as Lake Erie. These settlements influenced our Nation's history, culture, law, commerce, and traditions of liberty that extend to the present day. Almost 200 years later, in 1807, Robert Fulton navigated the Hudson River from the city of New York to Albany in the steamboat Clermont, successfully inaugurating steam navigation on a commercial basis. This event helped revolutionize waterborne commerce on the great rivers of the United States and fostered international relations through transoceanic travel and trade. We are now almost 400 years removed from the voyages of Hudson and Champlain and 200 years removed from the voyage of Fulton. If America intends to continue in its role as a world leader in innovation, exploration, and ingenuity, it is important that we provide a suitable observance of those before us who have contributed to what our nation is today. The Champlain Quadricentennial Commemoration Commission and the Hudson-Fulton 400th Commemoration Commission represents a unique opportunity to celebrate New York, Vermont and America's glorious heritage. In 1909, Americans celebrated the 300th anniversaries of these events with maritime celebrations and art exhibitions. The Dutch built the first replica of Hudson's ship, the Half Moon, and sent it up the Hudson River for the observance. In 1959, Congress recognized the 350th anniversary by establishing a similar commission to coordinate federal participation in the celebrations. I ask that the Senate come together not only to honor these events that have contributed to our past, but to celebrate the effects they will have on our future.

Mrs. CLINTON

Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, as we recognize the 100th anniversary of the establishment of the Food and Drug Administration, I would like to rise and express my concern about the current direction of this agency. There is no doubt that, since the agency's founding, the employees of the FDA have made an enormous contribution to protection the health of our Nation, and I believe that we should recognize the efforts of the thousands of civil servants who have helped to ensure the safety of our food and medicine. Yet while the FDA has long represented the gold standard of consumer protection, I am afraid that this standard is being tarnished by the current activities of the agency. Under this administration, we have seen ideology placed before science, and politics before the public health. Consider the way in which the FDA has sought to block wider access to Emergency Contraception, also known as Plan B, a tool that can prevent unintended pregnancy. Two successive FDA commissioners--Bush administration political appointees--blocked Plan B from being sold over the counter, overruling the FDA's medical experts, advisors, and the recommendations of over 70 organizations, induding the American Medical Association and the American Academy of Pediatrics. The Government Accountability Office has confirmed that the FDA's 2004 decision not to approve over-the-counter sales was politically motivated. And despite the years that have passed since the original recommendation to approve Plan B for over the counter use, we still have no action, other than delay after delay, on that recommendation. American women deserve an answer from the FDA. With Senator Patty Murray, I have placed a hold on the nomination of current acting Commissioner Dr. Andrew Von Eschenbach's to lead this agency, and I will continue to hold the nomination of Dr. von Eschenbach until the FDA issues a decision on Plan B, yes or no. The FDA was founded in 1906 to protect the interests of the American consumer. One hundred years later, I fear that politics and ideology may triumph over the agency's original mission. I believe the best way to celebrate the FDA centennial is to make a commitment to reforms that will restore this agency's reputation as the gold standard of consumer protection.

Mrs. CLINTON

Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, it gives me pride and pleasure to introduce revised legislation to establish the Champlain Quadricentennial Commemoration Commission and the Hudson-Fulton 400th Commemoration Commission. I began this effort with legislation I introduced 4 years ago during the 107th Congress. Because my colleagues in the other body and I were not able to enact our bill that time, we returned in the 108th Congress with new legislation including needed revisions. I now lay down the next version of the bill that incorporates welcomed input and reflects a consensus reached among key leaders who share the goal of honoring important events in our Nation's and New York State's history. The United States of America has long been celebrated for its leadership in innovation, exploration, and ingenuity. These qualities have been evident dating back as far as 1609 when Englishman Henry Hudson became the first European to sail up the river later named for him in the vessel Half Moon. Also in 1609, French explorer Samuel de Champlain became the first European to see the lake later named for him, as well as the shores in Northern New York and Vermont. These explorations led to the establishment of trading posts, military posts, and settlements as far south as Lake George. From these early establishments came trade, commerce, cultural, and religious impact deep into the Mohawk Valley and as far west as Lake Erie. These settlements influenced our Nation's history, culture, law, commerce, and traditions of liberty that extend to the present day. Almost 200 years later, in 1807, Robert Fulton navigated the Hudson River from the city of New York to Albany in the steamboat Clermont, successfully inaugurating steam navigation on a commercial basis. This event helped revolutionize waterborne commerce on the great rivers of the United States and fostered international relations through transoceanic travel and trade. We are now almost 400 years removed from the voyages of Hudson and Champlain and 200 years removed from the voyage of Fulton. If America intends to continue in its role as a world leader in innovation, exploration, and ingenuity, it is important that we provide a suitable observance of those before us who have contributed to what our nation is today. The Champlain Quadricentennial Commemoration Commission and the Hudson-Fulton 400th Commemoration Commission represents a unique opportunity to celebrate New York, Vermont and America's glorious heritage. In 1909, Americans celebrated the 300th anniversaries of these events with maritime celebrations and art exhibitions. The Dutch built the first replica of Hudson's ship, the Half Moon, and sent it up the Hudson River for the observance. In 1959, Congress recognized the 350th anniversary by establishing a similar commission to coordinate federal participation in the celebrations. I ask that the Senate come together not only to honor these events that have contributed to our past, but to celebrate the effects they will have on our future.

Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, I am proud to introduce legislation which would designate the United States Postal Service located at 2951 New York Highway 43 in Averill Park, NY, as the Major George Quamo Post Office Building. MAJ. George Quamo was a highly decorated Green Beret who served in the Special Forces Unit of the Army in the Vietnam war. In the years George Quamo served, he established himself as one of the Army's most highly respected field commanders. Quamo commanded three reconnaissance teams, leading a number of covert missions and saving the lives of 14 of his men. During his distinguished career he was awarded 26 medals which included the Distinguished Service Cross, Two Silver Stars, Bronze Star, Legion of Merit and Presidential Unit Citations. While conducting a mission in Vietnam, Major Quamo's helicopter crashed. He was killed at the young age of 27. He was the youngest major ever to have served in the Special Forces Unit. MAJ. George Quamo was a Class of 1958 graduate of Averill Park High School in upstate New York. A natural leader, he was president of his high school junior class and a quarterback on the football team. After joining the Army he attended Officer Candidate School. While he died at a young age, it is clear that his presence was profound on those around him. ``I still receive phone calls from guys who served under him,'' said his brother James Quamo, now of Spencerport, Monroe County, NY. ``Some of them even cry telling me how they felt about my brother.'' I ask that the Senate come together and honor this brave American hero for his service to our Nation.

Mrs. CLINTON

Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, I am proud to introduce legislation which would designate the United States Postal Service located at 2951 New York Highway 43 in Averill Park, NY, as the Major George Quamo Post Office Building. MAJ. George Quamo was a highly decorated Green Beret who served in the Special Forces Unit of the Army in the Vietnam war. In the years George Quamo served, he established himself as one of the Army's most highly respected field commanders. Quamo commanded three reconnaissance teams, leading a number of covert missions and saving the lives of 14 of his men. During his distinguished career he was awarded 26 medals which included the Distinguished Service Cross, Two Silver Stars, Bronze Star, Legion of Merit and Presidential Unit Citations. While conducting a mission in Vietnam, Major Quamo's helicopter crashed. He was killed at the young age of 27. He was the youngest major ever to have served in the Special Forces Unit. MAJ. George Quamo was a Class of 1958 graduate of Averill Park High School in upstate New York. A natural leader, he was president of his high school junior class and a quarterback on the football team. After joining the Army he attended Officer Candidate School. While he died at a young age, it is clear that his presence was profound on those around him. ``I still receive phone calls from guys who served under him,'' said his brother James Quamo, now of Spencerport, Monroe County, NY. ``Some of them even cry telling me how they felt about my brother.'' I ask that the Senate come together and honor this brave American hero for his service to our Nation.

Mrs. CLINTON

Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded. The ACTING PRESIDING pro tempore. Without objection, it is so ordered.

Mrs. CLINTON

Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, last week, the Democratic women of the Senate, led by our dean, Senator Barbara Mikulski, held an event at the Sewall Belmont House, which I am very proud to say put forth what we are calling the checklist for change. We came together around the importance of an agenda in Congress that meets the needs of all of the American people. We have been given an hour this morning to discuss these issues. Our first speaker, our leader, is the Senator from Maryland, who has paved the way for women not only in the Senate but in our country on so many issues. I am, with great pride, yielding to the Senator from Maryland.

Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, I applaud my friend and colleague, Senator Mikulski, who is speaking out eloquently and strongly about the importance of pension and retirement security and pointing out the dangers of the legislation--coming out on a totally party-line vote-- coming out of the Budget Committee that we believe would once again raise the specter of Social Security privatization. So we are sounding the alarm, and we are making clear that the Democratic women of the Senate will stand sentry, as Senator Mikulski said, and we will stand firmly to protect Social Security because we know how many women depend on Social Security. Part of our effort is to in very simple terms put forth this checklist for change. We know we have to secure our economy in a more competitive world and secure our energy supplies in that competitive world. Our current energy policy is weakening our national security, hurting our pocketbooks, violating our common values, and threatening our children's futures. Right now, instead of our national security dictating our energy policy, our failed energy policy dictates our national security. We want and need a fundamental change in direction to secure our Nation's energy future. I believe a strong, balanced national energy policy is a key to strong economic and environmental policies as well. It is time we decide do we allow our economic security and our national security to be weighed down by a failed energy policy or do we choose a new path? We think, the Democratic women of the Senate, that we need a new path. Here is a concrete goal. Let's reduce our dependence on foreign oil by at least 50 percent by 2025. How will we get there? It starts by getting back our American can-do attitude and a new commitment, such as the Apollo project that sent a man to the Moon. We know how to do this. Americans are better at setting goals and solving problems than any people in the history of the world, but we are acting as though we can't control our own destiny when it comes to energy, that we can't possibly do what needs to be done to break our addiction to foreign oil. I have introduced legislation to create a strategic energy fund, to commit our Nation wholly to a new energy future, to invest in alternatives and efficiency, to create jobs, to strengthen our economy, and to free our hands fully to protect our Nation in the world. I don't want to see one more year go by where we are not doing what it takes to prevent us from being blackmailed and extorted by oil regimes that have us literally over a barrel. The strategic energy fund will invest in renewable energy, such as wind and solar, transform America's vehicles by expanding consumer tax credits, and making sure we have more hybrids and other advanced clean diesel automobiles and trucks. We will accelerate home-grown biofuels by investing in research and loan guarantees for cellulosic ethanol production. We will speed fuel infrastructure by pairing increased tax incentives for installation of E-85 pumps with a mandate to have them at 50 percent of our gas stations within 10 years. And we will unleash American ingenuity by investing $9 billion in a new energy research agency modeled on DARPA, which was created in the Defense Department after Sputnik went up and has given us so much, including the Internet. We challenge the Republican Congress to make energy independence a priority by passing meaningful energy legislation, such as a strategic energy fund, this session. I am so proud to stand with my Democratic women colleagues and put forth this checklist for change. It will make a difference in America's future. Let's get about doing the business of America. I yield the floor for my distinguished colleague from California, Senator Boxer.

Mrs. CLINTON

Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, I am proud to stand here today and speak out for protecting the American flag and the Constitution, of which our flag is a revered and honored symbol. Whenever I see the flag of our country, I am reminded of how fortunate I am to have been born an American, born into a country that, at her best, nurtures our strengths and gives each of us the freedom to express our ideas, display our talents, and become the best we can be, to live up to our God-given potential. That is what the flag means to me. It represents the best of us--our ideals, our sense of duty and sacrifice: the American spirit. Those values transcend party, ethnicity, age, race, gender. Indeed, those values transcend even nationality. Around the world, our flag is a symbol of hope and freedom. I understand the outrage that is expressed today by my colleagues, and I agree wholeheartedly that maliciously burning or destroying an American flag is a deeply offensive and despicable act. It disrespects our Nation. It belittles the sacrifices of our brave veterans. It even sends a message to the soldiers who fight today protecting our freedom that their service is in some way to be disrespected and discounted. I have met with many veterans over the last many years, and I have heard the sense of betrayal that comes from those who risked their lives under that flag to protect our freedoms. That is why I support Federal legislation like the Durbin-Bennett amendment. When we think of all the flag symbolizes, I urge that we consider the very freedom and liberty the flag embodies. It is, in effect, a visual symbol of our Constitution and particularly our Bill of Rights. Our Founding Fathers were keenly aware that if the Constitution was to remain the cornerstone of our Government and laws, then changing it should be difficult. That is the system they set up. The infrequency of amendments in our long history is telling. Constitutional amendments have historically met two sets of objectives. The first deals with the structure of our Government and the relationship between the executive, legislative, and judiciary branches--our system of checks and balances. The second protects fundamental rights, including the 13th amendment that bans slavery and the 15th, 19th, 23rd, 24th, and 26th amendments, all of which expanded the right to vote. The amendment we debate today meets neither of these compelling objectives. The Constitution to which we all have sworn an oath is about protecting our rights. I believe we do that by honoring the Constitution, which has never been amended to deny or limit the Bill of Rights. I don't think we should start doing that today. Fortunately, we have an opportunity to protect our flag in a bipartisan and constitutional way. Senator Durbin's amendment, the Flag Protection Act of 2006, which I am cosponsoring, would among other things prohibit people from destroying a flag with the intent of inciting imminent violence, threatening someone by burning a flag, damaging a flag owned by the United States and damaging a flag that belongs to another while on Federal land. I believe, as do many legal scholars, this legislation will stand up to constitutional scrutiny. It is different from previous bills that have been voted on in this Chamber before. It adds a new provision that follows Supreme Court precedent, from the case Virginia v. Black decided in 2003. In that case, the Supreme Court held that the Government may prohibit people from burning crosses with the intent to intimidate. That should be a pretty straightforward proposition, but it was called into question. So the case made its way to the Supreme Court. The Court concluded that laws may, in fact, ban cross burnings meant to intimidate ``because burning a cross is a particularly virulent form of intimidation.'' Burning a flag, to me, is also despicable, and I believe that there is no denying that when we talk about our flag, Americans' emotions run deep. We know when we look at a flag that is deliberately, maliciously destroyed, that is an intimidating experience in many instances. I agree that this burning, this desecration that can happen to our flag, is something that people have a right to ask this body to try to prohibit and prevent. I hope we can pass a law that criminalizes flag burning and desecration that is constitutional and can survive Supreme Court scrutiny. I appreciate all the New Yorkers, especially the veterans whom I represent, many of whom have come to see me here and in my State. They expressed feelings both pro and con. I assure them that I will join with my colleagues to stand up for their needs and to stand up for the needs of those young men and women wearing the uniform today. For those reasons, I am a proud cosponsor of Senator Durbin's amendment, and I hope that we can come together and pass a constitutional law that protects our flag and reaffirms our commitment to our Nation's Constitution. I yield the floor.

Mrs. CLINTON

Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, I am honored and delighted to join my voice along with my colleagues, Senator Graham and Senator Chambliss, and thank them for their efforts. Today, we have made further progress in improving benefits for National Guard members and reservists. This bill makes great strides in improving retirement benefits for reservists and Guard members who serve for longer periods. For every consecutive 90 days a member spent in an active Federal status, the age at which they receive their retirement annuity would be decreased by 3 months. The lowest a member could collect retirement pay as a result of this provision would be age 50. The age at which they would qualify for health care benefits would not decrease. Any Guard or Reserve member who is called or ordered to active duty, or volunteers for active duty, would qualify. This will greatly help us with recruitment and especially retention. We have a problem in our Reserve component which has been under great stress over the last several years. Last year, thanks to the leadership of Senator Graham, we made great progress in expanding access to TRICARE. All members of the Selected Reserve are eligible to enroll in TRICARE, and we created a separate category based on whether a Guard member or reservist had been deployed. Category one, for members of the Selected Reserves who have been activated: Members would accumulate 1 year of TRICARE coverage for every year of service and would only have to pay 28 percent of the cost. Category two established a 50-50 cost share for those without health insurance owing to unemployment or lack of employer-provided coverage. And category three was for the remainder of members of the Selective Reserve who did not fit in the other categories, allowing them to buy into coverage at an 85 percent cost share. Our improvements this year will allow small businesses with fewer than 20 employees to qualify for the 50-50 cost share. And it reduces the amount paid, by those who qualify for category three, to 75 percent. This is not only a win-win for Guard members and reservists. This is a win-win for our military services and for our country. We are sending a clear message--not just rhetoric, not just rah-rah--but a very clear, solemn message to those who volunteer to be our citizen soldiers. Perhaps in the past they might have thought they would have a weekend a month, 2 weeks in the summer. Well, now they know they are part of the war against terrorism. They are on call literally at any moment. What we found is that when we began to activate those Guard and Reserve members, 20 to 25 percent of them were found to be medically unready. They had physical problems. They had dental problems. They were not ready because they did not have health insurance. They fell into the category of Americans who go without health care because they cannot afford it or their employer does not provide it. So in addition to the work I have been privileged to do with Senator Graham on health care benefits, and under the leadership of Senator Chambliss with respect to retirement, we have really sent a great message to our men and women in the Guard and Reserve that we care about you. We care about your families. We value your service. And we want you to know that when it comes to retirement and health care, your country is grateful. Thank you very much, Mr. President.

Mrs. CLINTON

Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Jenny Davis, a fellow in my office, be granted the privileges of the floor for the duration of this bill.

Mrs. CLINTON

Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, I rise in support of the Levin amendment of which I am proud to be an original cosponsor. At a moment when 130,000 soldiers, sailors, Marines, airmen, active duty, Guard and Reserve are serving bravely in Iraq and when the debate in Congress over our Nation's Iraq policy has grown particularly divisive and heated, I believe it is time for the Members of this body to put politics aside and choose between success and the status quo. By playing politics and blindly following the President, too many are deaf to the hue and cry about the failures of this administration in the execution of its policies. And too often, our colleagues on the other side of the aisle in both Chambers are asking politically motivated questions, not engaging in the kinds of fruitful discussion that asks the tough national security questions we need to address and answer. I think it is time to choose whether we believe we have the right roadmap for success in Iraq. While our troops are serving bravely and with our national security in the balance, it is time to choose what is more important--a strategy to win in Iraq or a strategy for Republicans to win elections here at home. There are no easy answers as to how we solve the problems created by this administration. There are no easy answers as to how we work to enable the Iraqis to hold their country together and to keep it from becoming a terrorist refuge and launching pad. I simply do not believe it is a strategy or a solution for the President to continue declaring an open-ended and unconditional commitment, nor do I believe it is a solution or a strategy to set a date certain for withdrawal without regard to the consequences. Instead, I support this responsible way forward, a roadmap for success that will more quickly and effectively take advantage of Iraqi oil revenues, build up Iraqi infrastructure, foster Iraqi civil society, challenge Iraq's neighbors to do more to ensure stability in Iraq, and allow our troops to begin coming home. We all know that our troops are in harm's way right now in a volatile region of the world for which America has significant interests at stake. We are at a profound turning point for our Nation. We are entrusted by our constituents, both those who serve and those who do not, to do what we think is right for them, for our States, and our country. Let's be clear about what this debate is about. My friends on the other side of the aisle believe that the status quo is working in Iraq. They do not believe we need a fundamental change in policy. They choose to continue blindly following the President. We Democrats disagree. We believe we need a new direction in Iraq that will increase the chances for success on the ground. I may disagree with those who call for a date certain for withdrawal, but I do not doubt their patriotism. I may disagree with those who believe in an unconditional commitment without end, but I do not doubt their patriotism either. Sadly, however, there are those who do doubt the patriotism of many who raise serious questions about this war. They choose to tar all who disagree with an open-ended, unconditional commitment as unpatriotic, as waving the white flag of surrender. They may not have a war strategy, but they do have an election strategy. This is the road they took America down in 2002. It was a dead end for our country then; it is a dead end now. The politically motivated resolutions put forth by leading Republicans to gain tactical partisan advantage are a disgrace. In so doing, they have broken faith with those who serve and those of us who support our troops and who work for the success of this mission. It is wrong, plain and simple, to turn this serious debate about our policies and national security into a partisan squabble designed to mislead voters. This is politics at its worst, played over war. And that is no way to honor the service and sacrifices of our troops and their families or to find a better way forward in Iraq. Like many in this Chamber, I have traveled to Iraq and to Afghanistan. I have met there and here with tough, smart, patriotic men and women who fill me with tremendous pride. They have been performing magnificently under difficult conditions. They have paid a heavy price since the war began in 2003. Last week we had a moment of silence to mark the day that the number of American servicemembers killed in Iraq reached 2,500. And more than 18,000 others have been wounded. As of June 17, New York has lost 116 soldiers. The combined number of New York soldiers killed and wounded is 1,038. I have spent time with wounded soldiers and Marines. I spent time on Saturday with grieving families, mourning lost loved ones. I have tried to answer the questions they ask. I have shared the grief they feel. Those who have not lost a loved one or seen him or her return injured still are anxious every day while a parent or a child or a spouse serves far from home. Not a day goes by that I do not pray for the safe return of every man and woman now stationed in dangerous places around the world--not a single day. This is not a time for partisanship. It is past time for this administration to level with the American people, for this Congress to find its voice and fulfill its constitutional duties to check and balance the executive branch, and for the Iraqis to chart a clear and responsible path to stability and peace. I call on our colleagues on the other side of the aisle to fairly and honestly consider the Levin amendment as an alternative to the status quo, when we know that the status quo has not, is not, and will not create the conditions needed for the Iraqis to achieve the stability and security they seek and for us to bring home our troops. The conflict in Iraq has now gone on longer than U.S. fighting in the Korean war before the armistice. We ought not to attack one another for asking the tough questions and presenting alternatives about how to achieve success, limit the loss and sacrifice of our young men and women. As we debate our next steps in Iraq, it is critical that we recognize and fix, as best we can, the mistakes that have already been made and not repeat them. The Bush administration misused the authority granted to it, choosing to act without allowing the inspectors to finish the job in order to rush to war, without a plan for securing the country, without an understanding of the insurgency or the true human, financial, and strategic cost of this war, all the while viewing the dangerous and unstable conditions in Iraq through rose-colored glasses and the prism of electoral politics here at home. It is time to put policy ahead of politics and success ahead of the status quo. It is time for a new strategy to produce what we need, a stable Iraq Government that takes over for its own people so our troops can finish their job. That is what the Levin amendment does. It calls for a comprehensive roadmap to achieve peace and stability. It also sets into motion the steps that should be taken for Iraq to move itself forward and become more capable of defending its territory, ending the sectarian violence, and purging the insurgency. The Levin amendment does put us on a responsible path by calling for stronger nonmilitary actions, such as a conference of neighboring nations, greater rebuilding efforts, and better internal political reconciliation, by requiring the Iraqis to disarm road militias and take over more of their own security. The only way the new Iraqi Government can gain credibility is by proving they can handle an increasing share of the security of the country with fewer, not more, U.S. troops. It is clear in the Levin amendment that we recognize the President's role as Commander in Chief. It is the President who will make these decisions. What the amendment attempts to do is to provide a different roadmap, to set some conditions in contrast to the unconditional, open- ended commitment that we have had for the last 3 years and 3 months. In yesterday's Washington Post, one expert laid out such a roadmap which described the importance of reducing our military presence in Iraq so as to enhance the legitimacy of the Iraqi Government in the eyes of both Iraqis and Iraq's neighbors. That expert was Iraq's own national security adviser. I commend the entire article to be read because as the national security adviser sets forth a roadmap for the way out of Iraq, he makes very clear that the removal of foreign troops will legitimize Iraq's government in the eyes of its people. That is not an American. That is not a Democrat. That is an Iraqi in this new government who recognizes what some, apparently, in this Chamber refuse to, which is, yes, we need conditions. The current policy has no conditions. It is unconditional. The Levin amendment sets forth conditions, sets forth the kind of steps and benchmarks that we as Americans in positions of responsibility have every right to expect that the Iraqis will step up and meet. Clearly, that is also the position of the new Iraqi Government. In fact, one can read this statement and find much in the Levin amendment that supports the position put forth by the Iraqi national security adviser. No war since Vietnam has stirred the emotion to the extent of our people as this one. I hear it all the time as I travel from one end of New York to the other. People stop and ask if there will be an end to the loss of American lives. They wonder what the goal is; how do we define success? The rhetoric on the other side is all about symbols and slogans, but how do we define success? They believe that we in Congress should not be wasting this country's time with partisan political slogans while we have troops in the field. They grieve over the mistakes that have been committed by an administration that failed at every turn to see the difficulties ahead of it or the benefits of using all the nonmilitary means available to it. Of course, there are always unexpected events in war that can change the best plan or put some detours into the roadmap. The Levin amendment takes that into account. But I believe we must end the current open- ended, unconditional policy and focus on clear goals on all fronts and to make that absolutely clear to the Iraqi Government. If we do that, we can begin to bring our troops home this year. That is why I fervently believe members of both parties should support this resolution. How much time do I have left, Mr. President?

Mrs. CLINTON. I yield the floor.

Mrs. CLINTON

Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Public Mental Health Emergency Preparedness Act of 2006. This bill would take several important steps toward preparing our nation to effectively address mental health issues in the wake of public health emergencies, including potential bioterrorist attacks. Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, the events of September 11, other recent natural and man-made catastrophes have sadly taught us that our current resources are not sufficient or coordinated enough to meet the mental health needs of those devastated by emergency events. We need a network of trained mental health professionals--including first responders, local and state leaders, a well-developed infrastructure, and a mechanism--through which to mobilize and deploy mental health resources in a rapid and sustained manner in times of public health emergency. It is clear that the consequences of emergency events like hurricanes or terrorist attacks result in increased emotional and psychological suffering among survivors and responders, yet we must do more to assist all who are affected. That is why I have introduced the Public Mental Health Emergency Preparedness Act of 2006. This bill would require the Secretary of Health and Human Services to establish the National Center for Public Mental Health Emergency Preparedness--the National Center--to coordinate the development and delivery of mental health services in collaboration with existing Federal, State and local entities when our Nation is confronted with public health catastrophes. This legislation would charge the National Center with four functions to benefit affected Americans in our local communities, particularly vulnerable populations like children, older Americans, and persons with disabilities. First, the Public Mental Health Emergency Preparedness Act would make sure we have evidence-based curricula available to meet the diverse training needs of a wide range of emergency health professionals, including mental health professionals, public health and healthcare professionals, emergency services personnel, county emergency managers, school personnel, spiritual care professionals, and State and local government officials responsible for emergency preparedness. By using these curricula, the National Center would build a network of trained emergency health professionals at the State and local levels. Second, this legislation would establish and maintain a clearinghouse of educational materials, guidelines, and research on public mental health emergency preparedness and service delivery that would be evaluated and updated to ensure the information is accurate and current. Technical assistance would be provided to help users access those resources most effective for their communities. Third, this bill would create an annual national forum for emergency health professionals, researchers, other experts and Federal, State and local government officials to identify and address gaps in science, practice, policy and education related to public mental health emergency preparedness and service delivery. Finally, the Public Mental Health Preparedness Act would require annual evaluations of both the National Center's efforts and those across the Federal Government in building our Nation's public mental health emergency preparedness and service delivery capacity. Based on these evaluations, recommendations would be made to improve such activities. We must not wait until another disaster strikes before we take action to improve the way we respond to the psychological needs of affected Americans. I look forward to working with all of my colleagues to ensure passage of this bill that would take critical steps toward preparing our Nation to successfully deal with the mental health consequences of public health emergencies. I would ask unanimous consent to insert the text of this legislation in the Record.

Mrs. CLINTON

Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, I am pleased today to introduce the Heroes at Home Act of 2006. This legislation would take several important steps toward assisting our brave men and women in uniform in transitioning back home to their families, workplaces, and communities after deployment in Iraq and Afghanistan. Hundreds of thousands of troops have rotated through Iraq and Afghanistan as part of Operation Iraqi Freedom, OIF, and Operation Enduring Freedom, OEF, including thousands of courageous men and women from New York. More military service members than ever are surviving these conflicts because of better body armor and helmets and improved battlefield medicine. But surviving these wars and transitioning home can be an uphill battle. Many OIF and OEF service members, including the unprecedented number of National Guard and Reserve members, face readjustment challenges after war, such as medical, mental health, relationship, and work problems. Family members also are affected by the transition as they struggle to reconnect with their war heroes, some who may be deployed two, three, if not more times. As I meet with returning service members and their families around the State of New York and the country, I hear about the real hardships they battle after deployment--just how difficult it can be to adjust back to life at home. Several articles and reports have highlighted these struggles. According to a March 2006 study, 19 percent of Iraq veterans and 11 percent of Afghanistan veterans reported mental health problems. Among the OIF and OEF veterans seeking care at Department of Veterans Affairs, VA, hospitals, nearly a third have been diagnosed with mental disorders, with over 40 percent of those posttraumatic stress disorder, PTSD. Another report found that 10 to 30 percent of National Guard members come home from Iraq searching for work. Others return to civilian jobs dissatisfied with old tasks that pale in comparison to wartime responsibilities. In addition to these challenges, a large number of service members are coming home from Iraq and Afghanistan with life-threatening brain injuries from roadside blasts that can cause brain damage. It is estimated that traumatic brain injuries, TBI, affect more than 25 percent of bomb blast survivors--a percentage thought to be higher than in any other past U.S. conflict, making TBI the ``signature'' injury of Iraq. The diffuse but debilitating symptoms of TBI can leave service members with cognitive and emotional problems, including the inability to adapt to civilian life. However, TBI frequently goes undiagnosed because returning troops may show no visible wounds or may not realize they suffered a concussion. Lessons from past wars have taught us that identifying and dealing with problems like PTSD and TBI right away is vital for overcoming them. Yet just last month, a GAO report found that only 22 percent of OIF and OEF service members who may have been at risk for developing PTSD based on post deployment screenings were referred on for further mental health evaluations. In another report from May 2005, the GAO identified that, despite DOD efforts, the needs of demobilizing Reserve and National Guard members for transition assistance were still unmet. We must do more today to reach out and help our newest generation of war heroes as they transition home after serving bravely in Iraq and Afghanistan. And we must do more to shore up their families, who have courageously maintained family life on the home front during their deployment. That is why I am introducing this legislation today. The Heroes at Home Act would help address returning service members' readjustment to work, PTSD, TBI, and other problems, as well as provide support to their family members. This bill would involve partnerships with employers and community organizations because--despite more services and resources offered at DOD facilities, VA hospitals, and Vet Centers--returning service members are often reluctant to go to traditional mental health clinics due to stigma and concerns about confidentiality and their military careers. Only 29 percent of the approximately 500,000 separated OIF and OEF veterans have sought VA health care services, including mental health services. This legislation would identify ways to better assist National Guard and Reserve members in returning to civilian jobs, who are often hurled from civilian life into combat with less preparation and are then expected to reenter the civilian workforce. It would develop an assistance center for employers, employee assistance programs, and other organizations to provide them with best practices and education for ensuring the success of Guard and Reserve members in resuming civilian work after deployment, a win for our businesses, our employers, and our troops. Under this legislation, demonstration grants would be awarded to organizations in community setting for providing mental health education and assistance to National Guard and Reserve members and their families. Since many of these troops return to local communities scattered across the country far away from military bases and VA hospitals, these pilot projects would help reach them and their loved ones in more convenient places like community colleges, public schools, community mental health clinics, and family support organizations. With more and more troops injured by improvised explosive devices, IEDs, and bombs in Iraq, we must do more to understand the effects of these blasts on those impacted by them. That is why this legislation also calls for a study on the long-term physical and mental health consequences and rehabilitation needs of traumatic brain injured service members of OIF and OEF. This study would examine ways to help prevent future generations of service members from sustaining such injuries while assessing what types of programs and services are available to treat those who have already been injured in the years ahead. To further assist the mushrooming number of traumatic brain injured service members and their families, this legislation would establish a TBI family caregiver training curricula. Health professionals at DOD and VA hospitals would use this training to teach family members how to care for traumatic brain injured service members after they leave the hospital. It is crucial that we give family members the tools they need to effectively assist their loved ones at home in their communities. Those who have proudly served our Nation in OIF and OEF have made extraordinary sacrifices in the battlefield in defense of democracy and freedom. Back home, these heroes deserve our best resources and support to make sure they once again are vibrant and welcomed members in our neighborhoods, our towns, and our cities, at our work sites, and in our families. None of our returning service members should suffer alone in silence. Nor should their families. We all must do our part. I look forward to working with all of my colleagues to ensure passage of this bill that champions the successful transition of our newly returning heroes to their families, workplaces and communities. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mrs. CLINTON

Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, I am pleased today to introduce the Heroes at Home Act of 2006. This legislation would take several important steps toward assisting our brave men and women in uniform in transitioning back home to their families, workplaces, and communities after deployment in Iraq and Afghanistan. Hundreds of thousands of troops have rotated through Iraq and Afghanistan as part of Operation Iraqi Freedom, OIF, and Operation Enduring Freedom, OEF, including thousands of courageous men and women from New York. More military service members than ever are surviving these conflicts because of better body armor and helmets and improved battlefield medicine. But surviving these wars and transitioning home can be an uphill battle. Many OIF and OEF service members, including the unprecedented number of National Guard and Reserve members, face readjustment challenges after war, such as medical, mental health, relationship, and work problems. Family members also are affected by the transition as they struggle to reconnect with their war heroes, some who may be deployed two, three, if not more times. As I meet with returning service members and their families around the State of New York and the country, I hear about the real hardships they battle after deployment--just how difficult it can be to adjust back to life at home. Several articles and reports have highlighted these struggles. According to a March 2006 study, 19 percent of Iraq veterans and 11 percent of Afghanistan veterans reported mental health problems. Among the OIF and OEF veterans seeking care at Department of Veterans Affairs, VA, hospitals, nearly a third have been diagnosed with mental disorders, with over 40 percent of those posttraumatic stress disorder, PTSD. Another report found that 10 to 30 percent of National Guard members come home from Iraq searching for work. Others return to civilian jobs dissatisfied with old tasks that pale in comparison to wartime responsibilities. In addition to these challenges, a large number of service members are coming home from Iraq and Afghanistan with life-threatening brain injuries from roadside blasts that can cause brain damage. It is estimated that traumatic brain injuries, TBI, affect more than 25 percent of bomb blast survivors--a percentage thought to be higher than in any other past U.S. conflict, making TBI the ``signature'' injury of Iraq. The diffuse but debilitating symptoms of TBI can leave service members with cognitive and emotional problems, including the inability to adapt to civilian life. However, TBI frequently goes undiagnosed because returning troops may show no visible wounds or may not realize they suffered a concussion. Lessons from past wars have taught us that identifying and dealing with problems like PTSD and TBI right away is vital for overcoming them. Yet just last month, a GAO report found that only 22 percent of OIF and OEF service members who may have been at risk for developing PTSD based on post deployment screenings were referred on for further mental health evaluations. In another report from May 2005, the GAO identified that, despite DOD efforts, the needs of demobilizing Reserve and National Guard members for transition assistance were still unmet. We must do more today to reach out and help our newest generation of war heroes as they transition home after serving bravely in Iraq and Afghanistan. And we must do more to shore up their families, who have courageously maintained family life on the home front during their deployment. That is why I am introducing this legislation today. The Heroes at Home Act would help address returning service members' readjustment to work, PTSD, TBI, and other problems, as well as provide support to their family members. This bill would involve partnerships with employers and community organizations because--despite more services and resources offered at DOD facilities, VA hospitals, and Vet Centers--returning service members are often reluctant to go to traditional mental health clinics due to stigma and concerns about confidentiality and their military careers. Only 29 percent of the approximately 500,000 separated OIF and OEF veterans have sought VA health care services, including mental health services. This legislation would identify ways to better assist National Guard and Reserve members in returning to civilian jobs, who are often hurled from civilian life into combat with less preparation and are then expected to reenter the civilian workforce. It would develop an assistance center for employers, employee assistance programs, and other organizations to provide them with best practices and education for ensuring the success of Guard and Reserve members in resuming civilian work after deployment, a win for our businesses, our employers, and our troops. Under this legislation, demonstration grants would be awarded to organizations in community setting for providing mental health education and assistance to National Guard and Reserve members and their families. Since many of these troops return to local communities scattered across the country far away from military bases and VA hospitals, these pilot projects would help reach them and their loved ones in more convenient places like community colleges, public schools, community mental health clinics, and family support organizations. With more and more troops injured by improvised explosive devices, IEDs, and bombs in Iraq, we must do more to understand the effects of these blasts on those impacted by them. That is why this legislation also calls for a study on the long-term physical and mental health consequences and rehabilitation needs of traumatic brain injured service members of OIF and OEF. This study would examine ways to help prevent future generations of service members from sustaining such injuries while assessing what types of programs and services are available to treat those who have already been injured in the years ahead. To further assist the mushrooming number of traumatic brain injured service members and their families, this legislation would establish a TBI family caregiver training curricula. Health professionals at DOD and VA hospitals would use this training to teach family members how to care for traumatic brain injured service members after they leave the hospital. It is crucial that we give family members the tools they need to effectively assist their loved ones at home in their communities. Those who have proudly served our Nation in OIF and OEF have made extraordinary sacrifices in the battlefield in defense of democracy and freedom. Back home, these heroes deserve our best resources and support to make sure they once again are vibrant and welcomed members in our neighborhoods, our towns, and our cities, at our work sites, and in our families. None of our returning service members should suffer alone in silence. Nor should their families. We all must do our part. I look forward to working with all of my colleagues to ensure passage of this bill that champions the successful transition of our newly returning heroes to their families, workplaces and communities. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mrs. CLINTON

Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, I rise today to honor a longtime friend and colleague, the esteemed senior Senator from West Virginia, Senator Robert Byrd. This is a historic day in his career and a historic day in the history of the Senate. Today Senator Byrd adds to his many accomplishments and honors the distinction of becoming the longest- serving Member in Senate history. Senator Byrd's years of service to this country are an inspiration to all of us. His lifelong devotion to the institution of the Senate sets an example that we can only try to emulate. For almost half a century, he has been a tireless advocate for the people of West Virginia and the Nation. He believes that government can improve the lives of the citizens that it serves, and that we can all be advocates for justice. We are better Senators and better citizens when we attempt to live up to the legacy that he has established. I first worked with Senator Byrd during the early days of my husband's administration. At the time, he had already served in the Senate for 34 years. I remember him being stately and silver-haired when we met. He was already the unofficial historian of the Senate, famous for standing in the well of the Chamber and dazzling his colleagues with quotations from the classics. I also learned then that he was a strict disciplinarian when it came to procedural rules and decorum, a quality that he retains to this day. It is his devotion to the institution of the Senate that has made him a mentor to so many of us, and I am honored to include myself among the ranks of those who he has counseled. When I was elected to the Senate, it took me only a minute to conclude that I should start my preparation by going to see the great sage and historian of the Senate, Senator Byrd. To this day I still very fondly remember the visit that I paid to Senator Byrd's office in the Capitol in late November of 2000. I will be forever indebted to him for the guidance that he provided when I first came to the Senate. Of course, I am not the only recipient of his kind advice and guidance. In fact, Senator Byrd has codified his vast knowledge of the history of the Senate into a multi-volume book. The four volumes published in 1989, 1991, 1993 and finally in 1995 were a labor of love for Senator Byrd. They will continue to be a resource and a treasure for many generations to come. And let me tell you what Senator Robert Byrd did for the people of New York in the aftermath of the attack on lower Manhattan in 2001. After that terrible day, the White House sent up a supplemental spending bill to finance the war, and there was not a single penny in it for New York. I told the President of the United States in the Oval Office that we were going to need at least $20 billion to rebuild Ground Zero. And thanks to the leadership and dedication of Senator Byrd, who chaired the Appropriations Committee at that time, we got that funding for New York. Thanks to his commitment, our firefighters, police officers, first responders, and volunteers who came to the rescue that day will have some help as they continue to cope with the health effects of exposure to the site. Because of Senator Byrd's efforts, where once a pile of rubble stood, one day a tower will stand. Because of Senator Byrd, our businesses and homeowners who lost everything are on the road to recovery. As Senator Byrd has himself said, New York gained a third Senator on that day, and we are unquestionably better off for it. Robert Byrd was born in North Wilkesboro, NC, and raised in West Virginia by his aunt and uncle. He is an avid fiddler, steeped in the rich musical traditions of the Appalachian folk life. He grew up in the coal mining community that he proudly defends today. As a member of the HELP Committee, I continue to be impressed by his vigilance on behalf of the coal miners of West Virginia and elsewhere in the Nation. He was first elected to this Senate in 1958. He became a member of the Senate leadership in 1967, when he was selected to be secretary of the Democratic Conference. He was chosen to be Senate Democratic whip in 1971 and Democratic leader in 1977. He has held more leadership positions in the Senate than any other Member in Senate history. Through all of his years of Senate service, there was one person who was always by his side, as his partner, friend, and as he said on many occasions, his teacher. Erma Ora James was born in Floyd County, VA, and moved from there to the coal mines of West Virginia with her family. It was there that she met Robert Byrd at Mark Twain High School over 70 years ago. He first tried to woo her with gifts of bubble gum that he took from a classmate and stored up for her. And apparently it worked, because they became high school sweethearts and were married on May 29, 1937. Over the years, their family grew to include two daughters, six grandchildren and six great-grandchildren. It is a tradition of Senator Byrd's to go to the floor of the Senate each Mother's Day and pay tribute to the Nation's mothers. When he does that he has often mentioned Erma and the joy that they shared together for so many years. They had been married nearly 69 years when she passed away 3 months ago on March 15, 2006, after a long illness. Theirs has been called one of the great American love stories. On his 63rd wedding anniversary he went to the Senate floor and said of her, ``I have to frankly say that what little I have amounted, if it is anything much, I owe for the most part to [Erma.]'' I know that today, as his colleagues who respect and admire him so very much come to the floor to praise his service in the Senate, Erma is looking down on us as well. It is truly an honor to serve in the Senate with Senator Byrd. I wish him all the best on this day and I look forward to continuing our work together on behalf of the American people.

Mrs. CLINTON

Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, in the wake of yet another contentious debate over the size and scope of the Republican tax cuts, I believe that it is high time that this Chamber engages in a serious discussion about the fiscal condition of our Nation and that Senators make an objective assessment of what the economic policies of the last 5 years have wrought on our Nation's long-term economic security. It is critically important that we realize that every tax cut we debate or enact today, will have a cost for workers and future generations down the road. Despite the best wishes of some Senators, there is no such thing as a tax cut that pays for itself and the fiscal profligacy of the last few years will have a dramatic effect on the economic opportunities for the next generation of Americans. Indeed, what has made this Nation great is only the result of the commitment of each generation of Americans to leave a country for their children and grandchildren that was a little better than they found it. We need to ask whether our economic choices today will enable us to fulfill that commitment. A recent article in U.S. News and World Report magazine has clearly laid out what is at stake with the fiscal decisions that we have made and will continue to make in the months and years to come. Therefore, I ask unanimous consent that this article be printed in the Record.

Mrs. CLINTON

Mrs. CLINTON. Senator Roberts and I also believe that reforming the flu vaccine system requires increasing demand for vaccinations. This bill increases the funding for CDC's educational initiatives and sets up grants through State and local health departments, in collaboration with health care institutions, insurance companies, and patient groups, to increase vaccination rates among Americans but particularly among priority populations--the elderly, the chronically ill, and those for whom the seasonal flu is a particular risk. We have made progress. Between 1989 and 1990, flu vaccination rates among senior citizens doubled from 33 percent to 66 percent of the population. But we need to get those numbers up even higher to try to meet the Healthy People 2010 goal of having 90 percent of our seniors receive an annual flu vaccine. We have to get more information out to people about why this is important. This is especially critical if we are confronted with pandemic flu. Many people last year wanted to get a seasonal flu vaccine, because they thought it would protect them against pandemic flu. The information was not clear. It wasn't getting out in the right ways. We need to do more to help find reliable sources of information in communities. I want to add another point about the funding for research that we are advocating. We think we should have new vaccine-based technologies, such as cell-based technology. We rely on production methods that haven't kept pace with the advances in medical science. In order to make a vaccine today, strains of influenza virus are cultivated in chicken eggs. That is a nonsterile environment. Many of the contamination problems we have seen over the last several years have resulted because of this cultivation process. Although we still have to rely on this technology, Senator Roberts and I would like to expedite the efforts to increase research into safer, faster, more reliable methods of vaccine production. I have to emphasize again, however, it is not research alone that will help us. We can't do great research in the laboratory but then not know where the vaccine is, how to track it and to get it where it needs to be, how to have good information sources. Senator Roberts discussed the war game he participated in. There was a lot of confusion. We are trying to cut through that to couple research efforts with the development of a system to track and distribute both seasonal and pandemic influenza vaccine.

Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, I thank Senator Roberts. He brings to this issue the concern that he faces every day on the Intelligence Committee. I agree with him absolutely. This is a national and homeland security issue, as well as a health and economic one. I hope, working with our colleagues on both sides of the aisle in the HELP Committee, we can ensure that the provisions from our legislation will be included within the reauthorization of the bioterrorism and public health emergency legislation. We believe an ounce of prevention is truly worth a pound of cure. We stand ready to work to move this as quickly as possible so we can get a system in place that we can then work on during seasonal influenza time and be prepared for a pandemic flu. I thank Senator Roberts and yield the floor.

Mrs. CLINTON. Senator Roberts is absolutely right. We believe it is critical to ensure that our basic seasonal flu vaccine production and distribution system is capable of delivering vaccines to all who need them, especially with the threat of an avian flu pandemic moving over us. Thousands of people die in our country every year from seasonal flu. It makes sense to us that we need to get that system absolutely as efficient as it needs to be so that then we could handle a rapid vaccine production, mobilization, and delivery challenge in the event of pandemic flu. Because we don't have a system through which to track vaccines, we cannot ensure that supplies reach the highest priority populations--including seniors and the chronically ill, those who should get vaccinated as early as possible in any given flu season. Many physicians and other providers have contacted us to express frustration at their continuing inability to accurately predict at which point they may be able to provide needed supplies of influenza vaccine to their patients. We do this in other parts of our economy. We routinely use tracking devices to trace deliveries of other goods in the private market. But yet we still cannot predict when a vaccine order placed in the summer might actually be provided to a doctor's office or a hospital or another place where the flu vaccine can be administered. Our legislation, the Influenza Vaccine Security Act, would establish a tracking system through which we could better trace the distribution of vaccine from the factory to the provider, and we could identify counties with high numbers of priority populations. Then with that system in place, we could easily determine, in times of shortage, where the vaccine was most needed and facilitate distribution to those areas. All of this could take place in a matter of hours, rather than days or weeks, as it does now. The tracking system in our legislation builds upon the current private system of distribution. It has received support from vaccine manufacturers and public health groups. Linking information through a national database can be done in a manner that does not jeopardize free-market competition but actually assists it. It simply makes sense to establish a tracking system for vaccine distribution that can be used in both seasonal and pandemic events, to have that system already operational rather than to rely on untried mechanisms in emergency situations when we would already be facing all the multiple challenges of delivering health care. We recognize that many entities in our States as well as around the country may not have the technology or infrastructure in place for a vaccine tracking system. That is why our bill also creates a demonstration program that authorizes the Centers for Disease Control, working together with State and local health departments, to provide demonstration grants to health care institutions to assist them in information technology upgrades to allow these institutions to improve their ability to report and track flu vaccine dissemination.

Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, I thank my colleague. Senator Roberts has outlined the impact the 1918 flu outbreak had on Kansas, our Nation, and the world. It is almost unimaginable that starting with that one company cook, 50 million people worldwide died. I will tell a different story about a public health success. In March of 1947, the City of New York faced an outbreak of smallpox when three cases appeared at a local hospital. On April 4, New York City began a mass vaccination campaign to prevent further cases from occurring. Behind me is a photograph of Red Cross volunteers waiting to receive a vaccination against this deadly disease. Over the next month, more than 6 million people were inoculated against smallpox, the largest mass vaccination in United States history. Even President Truman, who was scheduled to visit New York during this time, received a vaccination. Through the cooperative efforts of local government employees, public health workers and an army of volunteers, an outbreak was averted. Vaccinations took place at hospitals, schools, and police stations. Frequent press bulletins helped to ensure that people knew what was happening and where they could go to have themselves and their families vaccinated. Our national public health system was able to respond both quickly and efficiently to contain this disease. As the New York City Health Commissioner reported in the American Journal of Public Health later that year, never before had so many people in one city been vaccinated in such a short time and on such short notice. Thanks are due to the press and radio for giving so generously of their space and time to bring necessary information to the public. Had it not been for them and the intelligent cooperation of the public, the generosity of private physicians and volunteer workers, notably from the American Red Cross, the American Women's Voluntary Services and former Air Raid Warden groups from World War II, it would have been impossible to have achieved this remarkable record. Senator Roberts and I are here today because we believe, half a century later, we face a similar public health issue. The looming threat of pandemic influenza has caused our Federal Government to begin mobilizing for when--not if--avian flu hits our shores. We are investing in research for a vaccine, stockpiling medications, and trying to develop plans for mass vaccinations. If recent history is any indication, we may not be able to muster the same response as we did in 1947 when Americans were still on a war footing or had a mentality of working together. What is worrisome to me when I think about our country's preparedness is the fact we are not even prepared to deal with the seasonal influenza we face every single year. Since 2000, we have had four shortages of seasonal influenza vaccine. We have seen senior citizens line up for hours to get flu shots. Unfortunately, we have seen some unscrupulous distributors trying to sell the flu vaccine to the highest bidder. Millions of Americans have chosen not to get vaccinated, despite the clear preventive effects of the vaccine. This is something we want to stress and that Senator Roberts and I have been working on together to try to come up with some practical solutions. This is a matter of preparedness, not a partisan issue. This is a matter of planning. It is a matter of ensuring that our health care system can respond both to the annual flu outbreak and to the threat of a pandemic flu. We believe we have a lot of work to do.

Mrs. CLINTON

Mrs. CLINTON. Despite the fact that there has been progress on the issue of interoperability, such as the transfer of much needed spectrum for first responder communications and the allocation of $1 billion for interoperability grants that passed last year, it is clear that incidents like Hurricane Katrina demonstrate that there remains more work to be done. What I am concerned about is that 5 years after 9/11, I do not believe that there has been the leadership role at the Federal level to give this issue the full attention and high profile that it demands. I believe we need an office at DHS that will be charged with continually analyzing, continually assessing, and continually thinking about how to coordinate not only the Federal agencies that manage and operate communications systems, but the local and State governments, who often have very different ideas of what interoperability means. Additionally, we also need to give that office the resources and authority it needs to carry out its mission. We have ostensibly given the leadership role of one of the most critical issues to emerge from 9/11 and Katrina to the SAFECOM Office within DHS. However, it is my understanding that this office has fewer than 10 full-time employees and for all intents and purposes is buried within the DHS bureaucracy. While I understand that this office is headed and staffed by dedicated professionals, how do we provide the Federal leadership necessary with fewer than 10 people? SAFECOM, according to its own Director, needs more authority in funding decisions and its interactions with other agencies. We have got to get serious about this matter, and I believe that legislation I have recently introduced, S. 3172, the Federal Interoperable Communications Act of 2006, takes us a step in that direction and I would like to thank Senators Salazar and Durbin for cosponsoring my legislation. My bill is not radical in how it is put together nor does it espouse to have the latest technology that will solve the interoperability problem once and for all. But it does put forth a blueprint in how the Federal Government can utilize all of the assets at its disposal and ensure that there is clear accountability and leadership on this issue at the Federal level. It creates an interoperability czar who would report directly to the Secretary of Homeland Security. It also puts that czar in charge of a central interoperability office and gives it a clear mission, outlines responsibilities and expectations, and allows it to get the resources it would need to carry out its mission. It requires the development of a national strategy, which would include an inventory that identifies the channels and frequencies used in every Federal agency and keeps track of what is being used by the State and local officials, so that when first responders from the Federal Government or other jurisdictions respond to an incident, they will know what frequencies and radios are being used. This strategy sets clear benchmarks to ensure that we are constantly evaluating our capabilities and adjusting our strategies accordingly to changes in threats, advancements in technology and other factors. My bill would also help ensure that the money that we are spending now on interoperability grants is being spent wisely and efficiently by ensuring that the grant guidelines are consistent with the goals and mission of the Office of Emergency Communication and that grant recipients have submitted a statewide interoperability plan or have adopted national consensus standards of how their platforms will work. There have been dozens of first responders, emergency support providers, and Federal, State, and local officials who have testified before Congress, where they have cited the need for consistency in Federal grant guidelines and clarity in the DHS mission for a national emergency communications plan, and my bill seeks to address those concerns. My bill also will help ensure that there is always an open line of communication between the State and local governments, the private sector, and the Interoperability Czar by creating regional working groups that include virtually every entity with an interest in communications policy that can report the specific needs and progress in a region. Finally, the bill also creates an Emergency Communications Preparedness Center which will be a consortium of all the Federal agencies that have focused on interoperable communications, namely the FCC, DHS, Commerce, DOD, and the Justice Department. I envision that this would be the Federal clearinghouse which would help ensure that these agencies which have access to the latest technologies and innovative strategies in interoperable communications can share and coordinate that information and technology to the benefit of the State and local agencies they work with. I also have provisions that will help facilitate the creation of a national and interoperable alert warning system. Basically, this bill boils down to providing the leadership needed at the top level to ensure that the technologies, best practices, and resources are flowing to the men and women on the ground. One of the key recommendations of the 9/11 Commission was to deploy interoperable communications for all of our Nation's first responders. Indeed, this is an enormous, difficult, and complicated task, which requires and demands the immediate and coordinated attention of our Federal Government. My legislation will help ensure that this critical issue gets the attention that it deserves.