Hillary Clinton

Mrs. CLINTON

Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, on this, the one month anniversary of the horrifying terrorist attacks of September 11, I rise to introduce a bill that I believe will provide protection from future terrorist attacks for the most vulnerable members of our society: children. In preparing for threats ahead, we must also examine what happened to our children on September 11--we must consider the impact of the attacks on children in New York and Virginia, and all of the affected states and regions, as well as the impact on children throughout the Nation. We must do all we can to support and assist these children in their recovery, as well as protect children in the future who, God forbid, may face similarly horrifying attacks. People in New York, and around the country, are looking for information and assurance that their children's needs are being taken into account as we prepare for future terrorist threats. Parents have been coming up to me in New York and asking important questions about how to protect their children in the case of a threat. And, students have been writing to me asking to protect them as we move ahead into a more uncertain world. Sheryl De Los Santos, a student at I.S. 383, a middle school in Brooklyn, writes: During the tragic loss of the Twin Towers my reaction to this loss was why? Why would someone do this to our country? When I saw them come down, I totally lost it. I cried. I cried even more when I heard how many people died. I feel angry, hurt, sad, mad, scared and horrified all at the same time. I even feel confused. I feel scared because if anything else happened I would go crazy. I feel angry for what they did because I have never been to the Twin Towers. I feel sad and hurt because of so many lost lives. Though I am not saying it is your fault because it is not. I am writing to you to tell you that America's safety has been sleeping on the job. Maybe you can have more security. I think it's important that we provide parents and their children with the assurance that we are working to protect them and we must replace fear with facts. As we consider potential terrorist threats, the threat of bioterrorsm has felt all too real particularly as a criminal investigation goes on in Florida on the three individuals who were exposed to anthrax. My bill, Protecting Children Against Terrorism Act, will ensure that as we take steps to prepare for the threat of bioterrorism, we take into account children's health needs. I am extremely concerned that we are not paying a sufficient amount of attention to the unique needs of children in our efforts to plan and prepare for future attacks. Children have special needs relating to bioterrorism. First, they are particularly susceptible to biological and chemical attacks. Some dense nerve gas agents, like Sarin, concentrate lower to the ground, near the breathing zone of children. Also, because children have more rapid respiratory rates and larger surface to mass ratios, they anatomically are more vulnerable to exposures. And yet, the tools of our response to bioterrorism are less effective for children's needs. My legislation, the Protecting America's Children Against Terrorism Act, would create a national task force comprised of: children health experts on infectious disease, environmental health and toxicology; members of esteemed organizations like the American Academy of Pediatrics and the National Association of Children's Hospitals; and representatives of relevant federal agencies. These national children's health experts would look at our health system to ensure that, as we're stepping up our response efforts, the medicine and treatments fit the health needs of children. For instance, as we're making sure we have antidotes to threatening diseases, we need to ensure that these have been tested not just on adults, but on children too. As my colleagues, Senators Dodd, DeWine, Kennedy, and others with whom I have worked closely on the pediatric testing issue know, many pharmaceutical manufacturers have not tested, or properly dosed antidotes, antibiotics, or other agents for use on children. My legislation would insist that we do this testing. And CDC ``push packs'' and other emergency response supply systems do not take into account the special medical needs of children. I am calling for CDC to revise their emergency response supply to take into account the needs of kids. My legislation would also ensure that the expert doctors and health professionals, who would be on the frontlines in responding to an attack, are trained and equipped to treat children too. These doctors need to know whether a certain disease or chemical agent will affect a child differently than an adult and which treatment is most effective for children. The final step is providing parents with information so that they can rest assured that there are doctors and medicine that are specially trained and developed to help their children. We must also ensure that the place in which children spend much of their days are protected, our schools. On September 11, New York's teachers, school personnel and child care providers acted with great bravery and skill as they safely evacuated school children from the schools and child care centers in and around the World Trade Center. As a result, no students were physically harmed during the attacks. Are all schools prepared to safely evacuate students? Did New York do it perfectly? The answers are, of course, ``no.'' Lisa Swovick, a mother from Rochester, wrote the following email to me: Having grown up during the Cold War, I remember practicing drills in school should we become victims of a nuclear attack. I also remember learning about the nearest shelter to go to should the attack happen. It was the neighborhood school and library. We were instructed to go there and there would be food and shelter provided in an emergency. I would like to know, if during the present time of much dialog of possible biological terrorist attacks on America, if it would be a good idea for these shelters to return. There are scary thoughts to have, however, I had to deal with the thought of a nuclear attack from Russia as a child. I only fear that we won't be as prepared as we might have been in the 1960s for the present-day dangers of our very uncertain world. In my bill, I ask that the Secretary of Education develop recommendations and models to help communities develop school evacuation plans, safe places for children to go in case of an attack, partnerships with the medical community to ensure that children get the immediate care they need, and recommendations for notifying parents of evacuation plans and information on how and where to find their child or children in the wake of an attack. As we prepare for threats ahead, we cannot forget the many, many children who have already been severely affected by the terrorism of September 11. Children are especially susceptible to the terrible emotional and mental anguish that terrorist attacks cause, whether they have a parent who was called into military duty, lost a parent in the attack or actually witnessed the violence themselves. My legislation would help address this immense need by providing grants to community groups, and schools to make sure that children's mental health needs are met. And we need to make sure that our disaster relief assistance is tailored to help children who have been orphaned or lost a parent in an attack. We do not yet know the numbers of children who lost a parent in the September 11 attacks, but some have speculated that it could be as high as 10,000 children. My legislation would create an office of children's services within FEMA for helping children who lose a parent in a disaster by offering them many different types of support, such as counseling and legal services for adoption. And, finally, I believe we must shore-up our social services infrastructure. In the wake of the September 11th terrorist attacks, over 400 hotline numbers were established in order to provide help and information for families and victims of the terrorist attacks. These numbers were on top of the thousands of existing non-profit organizations and Federal, State and city governmental agencies that provide human and social services to help children and families in crisis. My legislation would also include funding to implement 2-1-1, a universal hotline designed by the United Way and approved by the Federal Communication Commission to be used to connect children and families with the help they need. I appreciate the support I have already received for this legislation and I am proud to have co-sponsorships from: Senators Dodd, Murray, Mikulski, Schumer, Bingaman, and Corzine. Today, I ask my colleagues to consider the needs of children and co-sponsor my Protecting America's Children Against Terrorism Act. I ask unanimous consent that the text of my bill on ``Protecting Children Against Terrorism'' be printed in the Record.

Mrs. CLINTON

Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, on this, the one month anniversary of the horrifying terrorist attacks of September 11, I rise to introduce a bill that I believe will provide protection from future terrorist attacks for the most vulnerable members of our society: children. In preparing for threats ahead, we must also examine what happened to our children on September 11--we must consider the impact of the attacks on children in New York and Virginia, and all of the affected states and regions, as well as the impact on children throughout the Nation. We must do all we can to support and assist these children in their recovery, as well as protect children in the future who, God forbid, may face similarly horrifying attacks. People in New York, and around the country, are looking for information and assurance that their children's needs are being taken into account as we prepare for future terrorist threats. Parents have been coming up to me in New York and asking important questions about how to protect their children in the case of a threat. And, students have been writing to me asking to protect them as we move ahead into a more uncertain world. Sheryl De Los Santos, a student at I.S. 383, a middle school in Brooklyn, writes: During the tragic loss of the Twin Towers my reaction to this loss was why? Why would someone do this to our country? When I saw them come down, I totally lost it. I cried. I cried even more when I heard how many people died. I feel angry, hurt, sad, mad, scared and horrified all at the same time. I even feel confused. I feel scared because if anything else happened I would go crazy. I feel angry for what they did because I have never been to the Twin Towers. I feel sad and hurt because of so many lost lives. Though I am not saying it is your fault because it is not. I am writing to you to tell you that America's safety has been sleeping on the job. Maybe you can have more security. I think it's important that we provide parents and their children with the assurance that we are working to protect them and we must replace fear with facts. As we consider potential terrorist threats, the threat of bioterrorsm has felt all too real particularly as a criminal investigation goes on in Florida on the three individuals who were exposed to anthrax. My bill, Protecting Children Against Terrorism Act, will ensure that as we take steps to prepare for the threat of bioterrorism, we take into account children's health needs. I am extremely concerned that we are not paying a sufficient amount of attention to the unique needs of children in our efforts to plan and prepare for future attacks. Children have special needs relating to bioterrorism. First, they are particularly susceptible to biological and chemical attacks. Some dense nerve gas agents, like Sarin, concentrate lower to the ground, near the breathing zone of children. Also, because children have more rapid respiratory rates and larger surface to mass ratios, they anatomically are more vulnerable to exposures. And yet, the tools of our response to bioterrorism are less effective for children's needs. My legislation, the Protecting America's Children Against Terrorism Act, would create a national task force comprised of: children health experts on infectious disease, environmental health and toxicology; members of esteemed organizations like the American Academy of Pediatrics and the National Association of Children's Hospitals; and representatives of relevant federal agencies. These national children's health experts would look at our health system to ensure that, as we're stepping up our response efforts, the medicine and treatments fit the health needs of children. For instance, as we're making sure we have antidotes to threatening diseases, we need to ensure that these have been tested not just on adults, but on children too. As my colleagues, Senators Dodd, DeWine, Kennedy, and others with whom I have worked closely on the pediatric testing issue know, many pharmaceutical manufacturers have not tested, or properly dosed antidotes, antibiotics, or other agents for use on children. My legislation would insist that we do this testing. And CDC ``push packs'' and other emergency response supply systems do not take into account the special medical needs of children. I am calling for CDC to revise their emergency response supply to take into account the needs of kids. My legislation would also ensure that the expert doctors and health professionals, who would be on the frontlines in responding to an attack, are trained and equipped to treat children too. These doctors need to know whether a certain disease or chemical agent will affect a child differently than an adult and which treatment is most effective for children. The final step is providing parents with information so that they can rest assured that there are doctors and medicine that are specially trained and developed to help their children. We must also ensure that the place in which children spend much of their days are protected, our schools. On September 11, New York's teachers, school personnel and child care providers acted with great bravery and skill as they safely evacuated school children from the schools and child care centers in and around the World Trade Center. As a result, no students were physically harmed during the attacks. Are all schools prepared to safely evacuate students? Did New York do it perfectly? The answers are, of course, ``no.'' Lisa Swovick, a mother from Rochester, wrote the following email to me: Having grown up during the Cold War, I remember practicing drills in school should we become victims of a nuclear attack. I also remember learning about the nearest shelter to go to should the attack happen. It was the neighborhood school and library. We were instructed to go there and there would be food and shelter provided in an emergency. I would like to know, if during the present time of much dialog of possible biological terrorist attacks on America, if it would be a good idea for these shelters to return. There are scary thoughts to have, however, I had to deal with the thought of a nuclear attack from Russia as a child. I only fear that we won't be as prepared as we might have been in the 1960s for the present-day dangers of our very uncertain world. In my bill, I ask that the Secretary of Education develop recommendations and models to help communities develop school evacuation plans, safe places for children to go in case of an attack, partnerships with the medical community to ensure that children get the immediate care they need, and recommendations for notifying parents of evacuation plans and information on how and where to find their child or children in the wake of an attack. As we prepare for threats ahead, we cannot forget the many, many children who have already been severely affected by the terrorism of September 11. Children are especially susceptible to the terrible emotional and mental anguish that terrorist attacks cause, whether they have a parent who was called into military duty, lost a parent in the attack or actually witnessed the violence themselves. My legislation would help address this immense need by providing grants to community groups, and schools to make sure that children's mental health needs are met. And we need to make sure that our disaster relief assistance is tailored to help children who have been orphaned or lost a parent in an attack. We do not yet know the numbers of children who lost a parent in the September 11 attacks, but some have speculated that it could be as high as 10,000 children. My legislation would create an office of children's services within FEMA for helping children who lose a parent in a disaster by offering them many different types of support, such as counseling and legal services for adoption. And, finally, I believe we must shore-up our social services infrastructure. In the wake of the September 11th terrorist attacks, over 400 hotline numbers were established in order to provide help and information for families and victims of the terrorist attacks. These numbers were on top of the thousands of existing non-profit organizations and Federal, State and city governmental agencies that provide human and social services to help children and families in crisis. My legislation would also include funding to implement 2-1-1, a universal hotline designed by the United Way and approved by the Federal Communication Commission to be used to connect children and families with the help they need. I appreciate the support I have already received for this legislation and I am proud to have co-sponsorships from: Senators Dodd, Murray, Mikulski, Schumer, Bingaman, and Corzine. Today, I ask my colleagues to consider the needs of children and co-sponsor my Protecting America's Children Against Terrorism Act. I ask unanimous consent that the text of my bill on ``Protecting Children Against Terrorism'' be printed in the Record.

Mrs. CLINTON

Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, I expect to consume 5 minutes or less.

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

Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, I do not want to impinge upon the time of my good friend, Senator Rockefeller.

Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, I rise again in support of the amendment offered by Senator Carnahan to provide immediate assistance to the over 100,000 airline workers and those in aviation-related industries who have been laid off and lost their jobs as a direct result of the terrorist attacks of September 11. I just came from a very moving ceremony of commemoration at the Pentagon, where the lives of those military and civilian employees at the Pentagon, as well as the lives of the crew and passengers of the airplane that was mercilessly driven into the Pentagon, were honored. I know we are working on other kinds of relief, and I am grateful to the President, the administration, and my colleagues for the work that is being done on the economic stimulus package and for the work that is being done with respect to unemployment insurance and dislocated workers' assistance, but I believe we have an obligation to move quickly with respect to the workers who have been laid off through no fault of their own or of their industry, and we cannot wait for the larger packages to be put together and negotiated. Just as we must provide security to all Americans who are flying in our skies, we also should provide economic security to those who have supported us in the hundreds of thousands and millions of flights that were a matter of course before September 11. They were doing an important job in maintaining our free travel and supporting an important economic activity, and now they are confronting the cruelest kind of questions: How will they make their next car payment? How will they be able to afford the clothes their children might need? How will they know whether to go out and look for another job or hope and wait that business picks up on our airlines? I do not think we should be leaving our workers who have already been laid off. They need our help right now. I do agree we have to address the need to help all workers. In New York, for example, the State labor department is estimating that 285,000 workers throughout New York will lose their jobs as a result of the attack we suffered. I do not think we should leave any of these workers behind. If we are trying to build confidence--confidence in consumers, confidence in citizens--then we should address the needs of those people who have been economically harmed by these attacks. I respect the work that others are undertaking. I will support that. I ask this Chamber to send a message by voting in favor of Senator Carnahan's amendment that we are not going to just bail out airlines; we are not just going to protect the traveling public. We are going to help protect economically those who we hope will be back in the skies, back behind the counters, handling the baggage. I met yesterday with a group of executives from the travel and tourism industry. Stories from them about the low occupancy rates, the fact that people are not traveling for business or pleasure, were very disturbing to me. Everyone knows we have real economic challenges. The last thing in the world we need is people who are scared to go about their daily business, who are scared to take that long-planned trip to Disney World, who are scared to fly across the country to show off their new baby to their mother or grandmother. Until we can get that confidence up--and I applaud our wonderful leadership of Chairman Hollings and Ranking Member McCain on the aviation security bill--until we can get that confidence once again moving forward so people will fly, we can't turn our backs on those men and women who were the backbone of this airline industry. I hope every Senator will support the Carnahan amendment and do everything possible to demonstrate our concern and commitment to those who were on the front lines and lost their jobs and livelihood because of the terrorist attacks.

Mrs. CLINTON

Mrs. CLINTON. I thank the chairman of the committee who has done such a tremendous job of leadership in the wake of the terrible attacks of September 11. I commend him and the ranking member, the distinguished Senator from Arizona, and thank them for their tireless work and their constant reminders of the challenges we face and the sacrifices that are needed. I rise in support of the chairman's hard work on behalf of this bill, and I particularly appreciate the inclusion of the clear understanding that we have to face a direct threat to our national security and we have to do it by joining together and establishing a commonsense set of solutions to the problems now before us. The Aviation Security Act the chairman has worked so hard on is the result of many years of his labors and understanding of the difficulties we confront. I certainly commend him and thank him for his hard work. I also rise as a cosponsor of the Carnahan amendment to provide critical assistance to airline workers and those in aviation-related industries who were laid off as a direct result of the terrorist attacks. At the time we considered the so-called airline bailout bill, many of us made very clear in our statements on the floor that we were disappointed that some concerns for the workers who were going to lose their jobs were not included in the bailout bill. We come today to reinforce our deep concern and to ask our colleagues to support the Carnahan amendment. The numbers are overwhelming. We know that 100,000 workers have been laid off in the airline industry. At least 30,000 more have been laid off in airline manufacturing. We are concerned that if the American traveling public and visitors from overseas don't resume flying, as I urge everyone to do--I have flown numerous times already, and I encourage everyone to begin again to travel for business and pleasure-- if for whatever reason that return to the air is delayed, then the numbers will undoubtedly grow. Many of these airline workers are based in New York. They have been supporting our air transportation system out of JFK and LaGuardia. They have been literally handling some of the busiest air traffic corridors in the world. We know that reductions in flight schedules at both of these airports have put thousands of New Yorkers out of work: pilots and flight attendants, baggage and passenger service representatives. This has had a ripple effect throughout New York. For example, in Syracuse, in upstate New York, a call center for US Airways that had been there for many years was shut down, throwing more than 400 employees out of work. These airline and aviation-related industry layoffs are not just numbers. They represent the lives and livelihoods of hard-working Americans. I have heard many stories, as my colleagues have, of the hardships that are being imposed because out of the skies on September 11 came these dreadful, horrible acts of terrorism, where people who were willing to commit suicide brought about the deaths of thousands and thousands of our fellow citizens and people from all over the world and also wreaked havoc on our airline industry and the economy in general. I hope as we consider this Aviation Security Act, for which I support and again thank the chairman and the ranking member, we will also support Senator Carnahan's amendment. Her aid package for dislocated workers is modeled after the successful trade adjustment assistance. It will allow airline workers to extend their unemployment insurance while they receive needed job training and support services or while, hopefully, they wait to be called back to work because we will all start flying again. This amendment will also enable families to receive health care benefits as they go through this difficult period. No story more sums up the anguish and pain of the losses we are discussing and the need to improve security than one that comes out of JFK. A TWA flight attendant at that airport received her furlough notice while awaiting news of her husband, a New York City firefighter missing at the World Trade Center. New Yorkers and Americans have paid a very heavy price. We are summoning our resolve. We are preparing our responses individually and throughout our Nation. We are following the leadership of our President. We are supporting our men and women in uniform. I urge my colleagues to support the act that Chairman Hollings and Senator McCain have crafted and support the Carnahan amendment on which she has worked so hard to pay some attention and provide assistance to those Americans who woke up on September 11 thinking that it was any other workday and went to bed on that terrible day knowing that they might lose their jobs as a result of this horrific attack. I thank my colleagues and yield back the remainder of my time.

Mrs. CLINTON

Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, I come to the Chamber to discuss further the need for transportation security that encompasses not only our airlines but also our rail lines and our ports. Others with their own experiences and perspectives have already spoken to these issues and I am sure will continue to do so because as we address these critical needs of transportation security, it is imperative we look at all the means of transportation our people require and that we found to be particularly important in responding to the events of September 11. I want to focus my remarks on Amtrak and our rail transportation system. I think anyone who followed the events of September 11 is well aware that Amtrak played a critical and essential role in responding to this national disaster. We know that without Amtrak being able to respond, New York would have been cut off. The natural flow of commerce and passengers between Boston and Washington, the busiest rail corridor in our country, would have been severely undermined. We know, too, that Amtrak did its part to make sure people not only could reach their destinations but, for example, those who had planned to fly by air when our air system was shut down, their tickets were honored and they were part of the continuing and increasing flow of people and goods that demonstrated that America was still moving. Ridership on Amtrak has been up 17 percent across the Nation and certainly in the Northeast corridor, which was so devastated by the attack on the Pentagon, the closure of our airports, the attack in New York City, the continued, until thankfully today, closure of our Washington National Airport. We know that Amtrak's increase here was up by 30 percent. How do we make sure this critical mode of transportation is safe and secure in the future? We cannot be in a position of looking backwards. We have to look forward and say, what do we need to do to make sure our transportation system is redundant and safe? I believe we have to focus, as we look at transportation security, on ensuring that our thousands and thousands of rail passengers are safe. I am grateful Amtrak has come forward with a specific plan to address the needs of those passengers. We need, for example, more police officers on our trains, more canine units to inspect the trains, more power and switch upgrades to ensure they absolutely run without any delay or disruption. In New York, we have immediate safety concerns which demand we act now, not later--hopefully in time to make sure we are always moving-- and, if there is any natural or other disaster, that we keep our people moving. I want to bring to the attention of my colleagues some specific safety concerns. Anyone who has ever been on a train in or out of New York knows, I assume, that there are four tunnels under the East River and two tunnels under the Hudson River that serve as vital links between New York City and the surrounding area and the rest of America. These tunnels were built in 1910, and now almost a century later they have not undergone any serious security upgrade. Under today's regulations, the tunnels would never be allowed to be constructed in the same shape in which they currently exist. Penn Station in New York City is the busiest railroad station in the United States. More than 500,000 passengers, from all parts of our Nation, on more than 750 trains pass through Penn Station each day. As many as 300,000 commuters pass through the East River tunnels on the Long Island Railroad trains each day. So these tunnels are essential to our national railroad network and to the moving of people who commute every day in and out of New York City. The tunnels are so essential that we must turn our attention to ensuring they are safe for the hundreds of thousands of people who use them every single day. If for some reason a train were to become incapacitated in one of our tunnels, the only means of escape would be through one of two antiquated spiral staircases on either side of the river or by walking in the dark almost 2 miles out of the tunnels. These are also the only routes by which firefighters and other emergency workers can get into the tunnels. I have a picture, and it shows a narrow 10-flight spiral staircase which serves as the evacuation route for passengers as well as the means for rescue workers to enter the tunnels. I can barely even imagine what the situation would be like under the ground, under the rivers, if some kind of disaster were to occur, with passengers and crew trying to move up this narrow spiral staircase and rescue workers trying to move down; or, in the alternative, people being, in some instances, carried or trying to get out on their own going 2 miles in whatever conditions existed at the time. I bring this to the attention of my colleagues because I think it is imperative, as we look at transportation security, that we do not turn our backs on the hundreds of thousands of people every single day who use our railroads. I fully support adding air marshals on our flights. I support federalizing the inspection that passengers and cargo and luggage must go through, and I support doing everything we humanly can think of that will guarantee to the American public we are doing all that can be imagined to make our airlines safe. I also want to be able to stand in front of the people in my State who rely on these trains to get to and from work, who rely on these trains to commute, who travel out of New York City, and people all over our country who similarly rely on our trains, that they also will be secure. We don't want to leave any American out of our security efforts. This is an opportunity to do right what is required, what we now know will prepare America for any future problems. The airline security bill, which I hope we will be considering soon, calls for the creation of a Deputy Secretary of Transportation Security who will be responsible for the day-to-day operations of all modes of transportation. I applaud this provision. I think it is long overdue. It certainly will be a strong endorsement of the kind of broad-based security required for our millions of airline passengers, for those who use our ports, for those who come in and out of our transportation network, and for the 20 million passengers who rode Amtrak last year. Over a week ago--it is hard to keep track of time in the last weeks-- 40 of our colleagues took the train to New York City. I am so grateful. For some, it was the first time they had been on the train. It was fun to see their surprise and enjoyment provided by the ride to and from New York City. They were, in a sense, following in the footsteps of the hundreds of thousands of people who either have used trains out of necessity or out of choice for years or who were forced to use trains in the wake of September 11. And, thank goodness, the trains were there. I cannot even begin to calculate the economic and psychological costs we would have suffered had we been totally shut off. We could not have moved people as easily as we did if Amtrak had not responded as well as it did in putting on additional equipment and personnel. I hope my colleagues will remember this picture of this spiral staircase. I hope they will think about everyone they have ever known who perhaps has been a passenger, as I have been many times on these trains, through these tunnels. I hope they will join in the commitment we must make to every single American that we will guarantee the highest possible level of security for all transportation. It is the least we can do. I look forward to working with my colleagues to make sure it happens.

Mrs. CLINTON

Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, I, too, thank the chairman and ranking member and a number of our distinguished colleagues who have risen to support and oppose the Bunning amendment. I believe many Members in this Chamber either had no well-informed or formed opinion prior to September 11, or, perhaps, were inclined to support a new round of base realignment closings. It is with some regret that I rise in support of the amendment from the Senator from Kentucky. I believe after September 11, it is imperative we have more information available than we currently have. There are many arguments that have already been made on the floor, very good ones, from our colleagues from Arizona, Rhode Island, Delaware, and Florida, as to what efficiency issues should take precedence. I agree we need to constantly be evaluating our defense budget and expenditures, to become as efficient as possible. Yet I also believe there are serious security concerns we are only beginning to address. I take very seriously the Secretary's letter which has been referred to and which has been read into the Record. I believe my colleague from New Mexico, Senator Bingaman, is correct in saying the President and the Secretary have inherent power to realign, depending upon the needs we face in any kind of strategic or emergency situation. We are about to engage in a broad-scale reevaluation of our homeland defense and security. We are going to be asking ourselves some very tough questions about our readiness, about the proper intersection between our domestic policing agencies and functions and our military. At this point, I think there are several factors that have to be addressed in addition to the request of the Department of Defense and the recommendation from the Armed Services Committee before many Members would be comfortable voting for a new round. I am not sure the new round, if it is only a Defense Department review, will adequately look at some of these other broader issues that may have implications for both physical infrastructure and force deployment. Some have said the QDR, which is expected by the end of this month, is out of date now. I don't believe that is the case, at least from what I am told and read in the paper; that the quadrennial review that the Department has been undertaking will have some very significant recommendations that should be digested and taken into account with respect to moving forward on another round of base realignments and closings. It is important we integrate our domestic and military capacities in a way we have never had to think about before. Many were deeply concerned when we read reports of the short time, but nevertheless, unfortunately delayed time, that it took to scramble fighters into the air to try to deal with the impending threat and the potential threat that might have still been out there from additional hijackers. I don't know that the BRAC round has the same substantive understanding or impact that we have had in years past, given the new threats we have so tragically suffered. I would be very confident and supportive of our chairman and ranking member and members of the Armed Services Committee, working with the administration, coming up with a proposal that does make some sense. I listened very carefully to the comments of the Senator from Arizona--maybe certain bases should be taken off the table. Maybe they should. That is something we have never talked about before, but in the context of the new threats we face, I think we have to think differently. It may be we may have a BRAC round where some bases would be off the table, some of the assets that we have would be put to one side and we say they are essential to homeland security and they are essential to our projection of force abroad. Therefore, any BRAC round would not look at those. That might be an idea worth considering because I think everything changed on September 11. A threat that was not understood as being so deadly and imminent has caused such terrible destruction and tragedy. I, for one, will support the Bunning amendment at this time because I think we have to reevaluate what we mean when we think about closing bases and realigning our forces. No one should argue about the efficiency measures that need to be taken, so that we do, No. 1, get the most effective use of our dollars; and, No. 2, provide the kind of infrastructure and resources that our all-volunteer military deserves to have. I am concerned at this point we may not be ready for the ``son of'' BRAC. There may be the need to rethink how we get to the level of bases that are required. I think perhaps for the first time we have to seriously take into account the new mission that the President has given for homeland security, to make sure there is, if necessary, the kind of integration that will make us safe at home as well as abroad in terms of America's values, interests, and security. I rise with some regret because I have the greatest of respect for our chairman, our ranking member, and those who support this request for another round. I probably will very much end up supporting it, but only after we give the kind of thought I think is required today, to take into account the new threats and perhaps do it differently than we have done it before after we carefully evaluate what kind of presence we need, taking into account homeland security. I would support that kind of approach. That is not what is being proposed at this time. I urge my colleagues to support the Bunning amendment. I yield the floor.

Mrs. CLINTON

Mrs. CLINTON. Madam President, I thank the Senator from West Virginia. I rise to join the comments of my colleague, Senator Schumer. Many of us recognize the need for immediate action to aid our struggling airline industry and are prepared to do so. We also appreciate greatly the continuing bipartisan cooperation that is helping this body address the needs of our country in the wake of the terrible attacks of September 11. I am very grateful that the long negotiations in the House and the Senate over the last several days, along with the White House, have resulted in a process to provide relief to families who have either lost a loved one or sustained significant personal injury. We are also grateful that the legislation provides more support for essential air services, particularly in many of our more rural areas, such as Watertown, NY, that are totally reliant on air service which still comes in to serve those communities. The passage of this legislation can only be a beginning. We also must make our airports as secure as possible. I am honored to join in legislation Senator Hollings and Senator Rockefeller and others are putting forward to address the security issues so that Americans have the confidence I know they should have in flying once again, resuming our normal life. We also will have to work together to develop a process so the many businesses that have sustained losses will be able to seek relief in some expedited process and not get buried and even bankrupted by an extensive round of litigation. I just learned that the litigation that was filed following the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center is still ongoing. Businesses have no certainty, no resolution of what their liability, if any, might be. We need to avoid that in the wake of this tragedy and do everything we can to come up with a process that deals with the needs of other businesses as well as the airline industry. I also hope that the assurances we have received with respect to the airline workers who have been laid off or displaced will be addressed as soon as possible. I am well aware that a package being considered to help the workers was stripped out of this bill. We have to revisit it. It is something that is growing in importance day by day. There are now at least 74,000 people affected. We expect in the next few days that number to grow to 100,000. I suggest we look at some kind of an aid package modeled after trade adjustment assistance to extend unemployment insurance, job training, support services to airline workers and other workers who have been directly affected by the attacks on our country. We also will have to look at the way our entire transportation system operates. I am very proud of the way Amtrak stepped in to fill the need for the movement of passengers and goods. Their ridership is up nationwide. They have honored airline tickets of stranded airline passengers and shipped relief and medical supplies. Amtrak has also made security upgrades on trains and in stations. But we need to do much more to address the critical needs in the Northeast corridor as well as the rest of the country. I look forward to working with my colleagues. I see my good friend Senator Hutchison from Texas who led the fight on the high speed rail bonding act. That is just one of the many issues we need to consider as we look at transportation, again, as part of national defense. I well recall how President Eisenhower obtained the funding for the Interstate Highway System because it was part of national defense. Our highways, our airways, and our railways are all part of our national defense infrastructure. Finally, I say once again how grateful we in New York are for the tremendous and continuing outpouring of support from the American people. I particularly thank the President for his strong support. I was overcome by his absolute resolute commitment to rebuilding New York in his speech last night as well as the other very strong words of reassurance and resoluteness he delivered with respect to the challenges we face. I appreciate greatly his leadership and his support throughout this crisis.

Mrs. CLINTON

Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, I wanted to take just a few minutes of morning business to report to my colleagues about my visit, along with Senator Schumer, to New York yesterday, to convey the appreciation that New Yorkers feel, starting with our Governor and our mayor but going down through the people whom I saw--whether they were a firefighter, or police officer, or emergency medical technician, or someone standing on the street--for the unified and extraordinary support that has been demonstrated by our entire country, starting with our President. Senator Schumer and I flew to New York with Administrator Joe Allbaugh, the director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, for the purpose of assessing the damage and attending a very long briefing with the Governor and mayor and their respective staff who are on the front lines dealing with this tragedy. We took a military plane from Andrews and flew to LaGuardia where we got into helicopters. The helicopters flew us to the tip of Manhattan where we circled from the East River toward the Hudson and were close enough in to see the burning debris, to see the wreckage, the crumpled destruction of the buildings that had once stood there--a sight that the only comparable basis I think most living Americans would have, such as our distinguished senior Member, Senator Inouye, is what war was like in World War II, or Korea, or Vietnam. We took another pass so we could get in a little bit closer. As we did, we saw dozens and dozens of people running away from the site. We later learned that the continuing danger from these structurally damaged and unsafe buildings had driven our rescue workers out. We landed at the heliport on the East Side and went in to meet with the mayor and the Governor. We had some time to talk with the press, where everyone expressed the solidarity and unity that the people of New York are certainly feeling between and among themselves, and that we are grateful for the support that our President, our Congress, our entire Government, and people have given New York. We then went in a convoy down to the site. I wish every one of my colleagues could have been with us, because the streets were lined with people holding American flags and signs expressing their gratitude and their thanks to the many workers and volunteers who had come to help, and a real sense of resolve and demonstration of support for our Nation. Because of the difficulties with the buildings, we were not able to go in as close as we had originally planned. So we stopped at a place short of the immediate area that one could approach and still not interfere with the search and rescue mission or be in danger. We put on our masks because the acrid smell of the still burning debris is extraordinarily oppressive. We got a briefing on the spot from some of the people who were directly in charge of the work that is being done. I felt as though I were on the edge of hell. I watched the smoke rising. I could see the twisted wreckage, and I had a much clearer visual image because of my helicopter view. I saw the people who have been there hour after hour since this vicious attack occurred coming toward me. Their shift was over. They were seeking some respite-- firefighters in their uniforms covered from head to toe with dust and debris, exhausted, and dragging their fire axes with them. The impression and feeling that one gets from actually being even as close as I was is so much greater with respect to the devastation than we see on our television screens. The television in a sense contains a miniaturized view of what has happened in New York. When we then stood there for a few minutes--and that is all we were able to spend there--we visited with people who were looking for their lost loved ones. One mother in particular had just come down to the area hoping against hope to hear something about her son. Residents who had lost their apartments, their offices, and their businesses were standing on the side of a familiar street in a totally awful, inexplicable new circumstance. We then went to the police academy which has been set up to be the command center since the city's command center was lost in the collapse of one of the ancillary buildings to the two towers, and we had a very long and very informative briefing from the mayor, from the Governor, and from all of the people on the front lines--the police commissioner and others who talked about where they were in the struggle that they are engaged in against this massive mountain of debris. Just that night they had moved out more than 120 dump trucks filled with debris. The estimate from the Army Corps of Engineers is that there will be at least 500,000 tons of debris. In addition to the immediate search and rescue and cleanup work that has to go on, the power situation, the loss of energy and telephone and communication services, has meant that the New York Stock Exchange could not open for business yesterday. It has meant that there are still many offices of our major financial institutions unable to reopen. The humanitarian needs are enormous. There is an armory down on Lexington Avenue at about 25th or 26th Street that will be open for those whose family members and loved ones and friends are missing so that they can go down and identify, and have that registered, and provide additional information that may be required for identification. The overall impression that I certainly take from that experience yesterday is of the pride I feel in the work that is being done, of the leadership given by our mayor and our Governor, of our police and fire and emergency personnel, the extraordinary readiness of our hospitals to care for the injured, the tragedies--there are not as many injured as they had expected--and the realization that we have a very big job ahead of us, a job of cleaning up and rebuilding and reconstructing. I asked for some estimate from the mayor and the Governor as to what we were looking at because this is something for which we have to plan. They were obviously unable to say what the total estimate would be of the costs that have already been incurred and will necessarily have to be incurred in the future, but they know that they could immediately explain and justify $20 billion of direct costs. We will be asking our colleagues for a show of support, as a way of recognizing that the epicenter of this attack on our country occurred in New York City. I took a late train back last night because I needed to be here to work with my colleagues on not only the further understanding of the level of devastation and need that has occurred but to answer questions and to be available as we continue to try to sort out what kind of national response is required. I am very pleased that the President will be going to New York tomorrow afternoon. I applaud and salute him for that decision. I know it was a difficult decision because of the security issues that surround the movement of any President. I personally, on behalf of my constituents, thank him. I will be meeting, along with Senator Schumer, and others, at the White House this afternoon with the President, where I will personally not only convey my appreciation for his leadership, his commitment, and his visit tomorrow, but also the specifics about the requests that the Governor and the mayor have made for additional and specific Federal assistance. In addition, I introduced legislation earlier today that will be cosponsored by many colleagues on both sides of the aisle. It has an identical companion bill in the House. It is S. 1422, which will expedite the process by which the Federal Government provides benefits to the families of public safety officers, firefighters, police officers, emergency service personnel, and others who lost their lives in the line of duty. I am very pleased, once again, that the President, in his video-phone conversation with the mayor and the Governor, stated his strong support for this legislation. It has been said that more public safety officers lost their lives in the terrorist attack against the United States on September 11 than in any other single event in modern history. We may not know exactly how many rescuers gave the ultimate sacrifice yet, but I was told by the acting commissioner yesterday that they are missing 300 firefighters. I just was handed a note that is a very good piece of news, that they have just found two firefighters and one citizen still alive, which is why the search and rescue mission has to continue. We cannot give up. We know from cell phone communication and from the experience and intuition of our firefighters and rescue personnel on the scene that it is still possible--as we just learned--for people to be alive buried under that rubble. We will not give up until we find every single person. Yet when we look at who is on the front lines, it is not me carrying the ax. It is not me as one of the ironworkers who rushed down to volunteer their services to help remove some of the debris. It is not me as a police officer who is on the front lines. It is these men and women who have made the sacrifice to protect us, and to respond as they would have at a time of battle. And, in effect, when this act of war took place, they were our front-line soldiers. The Federal Government provides a one-time benefit payment to the families of public safety officers lost in the line of duty through the public safety officer benefit program. Unfortunately, these benefits are often delayed for long periods of time because of very burdensome regulatory applications. In fact, I stood in this Chamber back in May to commend the sacrifice of brave New York City firefighters who lost their lives in a Father's Day blaze in Queens. Their families are still struggling to complete the application process. They fill it out and they are told they need more information. It is imperative that we take action now to ensure that the family members of those brave men and women who lost their lives in this terrorist attack are not confronted with the same onerous process. So the legislation that I have introduced today would direct the Department of Justice to expedite the process for these families of those who lost their lives while responding at the World Trade Center in New York City, the Pentagon in Virginia, or in Stonycreek Township, PA. Given what I heard on television from the President, and the extraordinarily broad support that I have for this already in the Senate, I do not think this will be a controversial piece of legislation. But I hope it can be considered as soon as possible to send a tangible message to our firefighters, our police officers, and our emergency personnel that we are with them and their families in their time of loss. Finally, Mr. President, we are just realizing the full depth of the humanitarian crisis and grief and loss that has occurred. For the children who have now been orphaned, the husbands and wives who have been widowed, the parents who are facing what no parent should have to face ever--the loss of their son or their daughter--there are no words adequately to describe or express our sense of loss as a society. I am very grateful that the city, the State, and FEMA will be on the ground with grief counseling, with psychological help, with mental health services because having been to more disasters in my life than I wished, I know that those who do not bear any visible injuries or scars carry deep and lasting wounds. We will, as a nation, not only seek out the enemy wherever he may be, but we will also care for the grieving and the wounded. We will, I know, do everything required to provide whatever help and assistance we can as a nation. I also hope that for those who were far away from any of the attacks on September 11, they, too, will talk with one another and comfort each other. I was very grateful and proud to see Laura Bush, Mrs. Bush, on television today talking about the need to have an open conversation with our children, depending upon their ages, to reassure and comfort them because the binding up of our wounds as a nation goes far beyond lower Manhattan, or Arlington, VA. We have all been stricken by this cowardly act of terrorism, but I am confident that we will respond with the same resolute purpose that has always defined us as a nation, with the same compassion that marks us as a people, and with the same resolve to not only defend ourselves wherever and whenever that is necessary, but to rebuild and reconstruct the human spirit and the physical terrain of America. Thank you, Mr. President.

Mrs. CLINTON

Mrs. CLINTON. Thank you, Mr. President. I thank my colleagues for their outpouring of support, their concerns, and their many offers of additional aid that has come to the rescue of our people as a result of this devastating tragedy. Yesterday dawned a beautiful day in New York. My daughter told me it was one of those days where the sky was totally clear, there was a breeze, people were starting to line up at the polling places to vote because it was primary day, an election day, a continuation of the commitment to democracy and self-government that has set us apart from every society that has ever existed because of the longevity of our democracy and the will of our people to constantly renew themselves. New Yorkers went from standing in line to vote to standing in line to donate blood in just a few hours. I do not think any of us will ever get out of our minds the images we saw on television of the plane going into the first tower, the plane going into the second tower, and the plane going into the Pentagon, but there were tens of thousands of our fellow Americans, people who live in New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut, people literally from every part of our country and, indeed, the world for whom this was not an event they watched in horror on television but lived through and in too many instances did not survive. We are beginning to find out what that was like. Chuck and I have a lot of friends who worked in those towers, who worked in the center, and worked nearby. We are hearing the stories of husbands and wives grabbing cell phones and calling home to say: I love you; goodbye. We know, and I assure every person in this body, in the House, and many, many of our fellow citizens, when we finally know the names of those killed and injured, they will know someone. This was an attack on New York, but it was really an attack on America. I have been very gratified, as I know that Chuck has and all of our colleagues in the House, by the strong support we have received from the President. I am very grateful. We have expressed our appreciation. Chuck and I will be going to New York this afternoon with FEMA, and we could not ask for more than we have received in the immediate aftermath of this horrific attack. We are by no means anywhere near the end of what it will take to continue the search and rescue efforts. We are finding people even as we speak. Yet we know there is a very grim task ahead to do everything we can to find every person, to account for every single person who went to work. That is all they did. They went to work on a beautiful September day in New York. We will also stand united behind our President as he and his advisers plan the necessary actions to demonstrate America's resolve and commitment, not only to seek out an exact punishment on the perpetrators but to make very clear that not only those who harbor terrorists but those who in any way give any aid or comfort whatsoever will now face the wrath of our country. I hope that message has gotten through to everywhere it needs to be heard: You are either with America in our time of need or you are not. We also stand united behind our resolve, as this resolution so clearly states, to recover and rebuild in the aftermath of these tragic acts. New York was not an accidental choice for these mad men, these terrorists, these instruments of evil. They deliberately chose to strike at a city which is a global city. It is the city of the 21st century. It epitomizes who we are as Americans. So this in a very real sense was an attack on America, on our values, on our power, on who we are as a people. I know, because I know America, that America will stand behind New York, that America will offer whatever resources, aid, comfort, or support that New Yorkers and New York require because the greatest rebuke we can offer to those who attack our way of life is to demonstrate clearly we are not cowed in any way whatsoever. I hope that within a short period of time, I say to Senator Warner, we see scaffolding on the side of the Pentagon. After we finish the search and rescue and recovery work that is being carried out heroically there, I hope we all see a clear signal that we are rebuilding, that our defenses are more resolute than ever. I hope similarly that lower Manhattan has the same kind of image to project because the reality will be that we are rebuilding and reconstructing and making clear that just as our military might is unchallenged and uncowed, so are our economic, our social, our political values epitomized by New York. I have expressed my strong support for the President, not only as the Senator from New York but as someone who for 8 years had some sense of the burdens and responsibilities that fall on the shoulders of the human being we make our President. It is an awesome and at oftentimes awful responsibility for any person. I know we are up to it, I know we are ready for it, and I know that everyone in this body represents every American in making clear that we are united and stronger than ever. It is with a heavy heart--really a sense of heartbreak--that I rise today in support of this resolution, but it is also with a great sense of pride, first in the people of New York who responded as New Yorkers always do when times get tough. There was not a sense of panic. There was order, and there was an immediate outpouring of help. Those men and women whom we sent in to rescue our fellow Americans--there is no way adequately to express our gratitude to our firefighters, our police officers, our emergency personnel, our doctors and nurses and medical personnel. They responded at the height of a tragic, unexpected attack with the kind of grit and courage we expect from New Yorkers. To all of those who are missing a loved one, there are no words any of us can express except to tell you in the clearest possible terms: We will in a united American response support you, offer assistance to you, stand with you, and pursue those who reached deep into your families and homes yesterday and took someone you loved away from you. There will be a lot of work ahead of us in this body and in the House, and we will pursue that. I am grateful for the support we have received. Thank you very much. (Applause.)

Mrs. CLINTON

Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, I rise to join the senior Senator from New York, Mr. Schumer, in paying tribute to the late Paul R. Carey. I was also honored to have been invited to speak at the memorial service for Paul here in Washington last week, and I wish every Senator could have been there to share in the outpouring of emotion and affection for this wonderful young man. My husband and I knew Paul Carey well and we considered him a dear friend. Paul made many important contributions to President Clinton's work in the White House, and he remained a close friend after he left the White House to become a Commissioner of the Securities and Exchange Commission. He touched so many of us with his wonderfully passionate attitude toward life and his truly special gift for friendship. I join Senator Schumer in paying tribute to Paul Carey, and in expressing condolences to Governor Carey, to Paul's 11 brothers and sisters, and to his many friends. He was a great New Yorker and we will never forget him.

Mrs. CLINTON

Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, it is an honor to be here today to submit a resolution to recognize the contributions of minority women to women's suffrage and to the history of our country. This resolution establishes an Advisory Committee and directs the Architect of the Capitol to enter into a contract for the design and construction of a monument commemorating the contributions of minority women. I was so pleased when Congressman Davis introduced this resolution. His decision was inspired by the observations of a young woman working in his office who noticed, as she toured the Capitol, that there are so few women, and even fewer minority women, represented in these sacred halls. The under-representation of women and minorities does a disservice to the thousands of schoolchildren who tour the Capitol every year. I believe the time has come, and is in fact long overdue, to create a statute honoring the contributions of minority women who were instrumental in building our country and leaders in extending equal rights to all people. I can cite many examples of minority women who I would like to see considered for recognition. Women with New York roots such as Harriet Tubman, Sojourner Truth and Maud Nathan have made considerable contributions to our nation's history. Harriet Tubman, whose home was in Auburn, NY, escaped slavery and then risked her life again and again to return and lead so many others to freedom. Harriet Tubman's motto was, ``keep going.'' She would encourage escaped slaves in their journey by saying, ``Children if you are tired, keep going; if you are scared, keep going; if you are hungry, keep going; if you want to taste freedom, keep going.'' Harriet Tubman went on to be an active leader in the women's movement, to work for schools for freed slaves and to establish services for the elderly and destitute. Her actions were selfless and her courage is of heroic proportions. Sojourner Truth was born enslaved in Upstate New York. After her release from slavery, she went on to work as an abolitionist and then as a leader in the women's movement. She was a highly effective speaker, and used her voice to see that equal rights would be extended to all people regardless of the color of one's skin or one's gender. Maud Nathan is another example of a New Yorker who was influential in the women's suffrage movement and served as an early and innovative consumer advocate, organizing for better conditions for working women. I often think of the courage and vision of these women and so many others who put their lives on the line in the abolitionist, suffrage, civil rights and women's movements, and it is a great sense of pride to me that so many women leaders were from New York. It is our responsibility to make sure that the contributions of minority women with stories similar to Truth, Tubman, Nathan, and so many others, are told in our schoolrooms, at our dinner tables and yes, celebrated in the halls of Congress. In 1997, after more than 75 years of storage in the crypt, a monument recognizing suffragists Susan B. Anthony, Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Lucretia Mott was moved to a visible location in the Rotunda. This was the right decision then, and no doubt has aroused the interest of so many people who have had the opportunity to view it since the move. Now we have an opportunity to make significant strides toward telling a far more accurate story of our Nation's collective history by celebrating the minority women who were behind so many of our nation's important social movements. Their commitment, resilience and courage can be a great source of strength to the next generation of women who will assume the struggles shaping our time.

Mrs. CLINTON

Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, I am pleased to introduce today a bill to support the efforts of the many companies in New York and elsewhere who grant stock options to their employees. Over the past three decades, companies have increasingly used stock options to attract and motivate employees. These companies give their workers the right to purchase company stock, at a small discount from the listed price, through Employee Stock Purchase Plans, ESPP and Incentive Stock Options, ISO. Employees stock ownership has been shown to motivate workers and enhance relationship between management and workers. Indeed, for many workers, these plans are the only way to amass any assets. For nearly thirty years, the Internal Revenue Service, IRS has taken the position that income from these stock options is not subject to employment taxes. However, recent audits and rulings on individual companies have raised the troubling prospect that the IRS may now reverse its policy. ESPPs and ISOs were created by Congress to provide tools to build strong companies through increased employee ownership of company stock. The purpose of the bipartisan bill I am introducing today, with Senator Roberts, is to clarify that it was not the intent of Congress to dilute these incentives by requiring employment tax withholding when the stock is purchased. While the IRS has in place a moratorium until January 1, 2003 on assessing employment taxes on stock options, we must take action to eliminate any uncertainty for companies and workers as to whether options are subject to withholding taxes. Again, the legislation I am introducing would clarify that the difference between the exercise price and the fair market value of stock offered by the ISO and ESPP is excluded from employment taxes. In addition, wage withholding is not required on disqualifying dispositions of ISO stock or on the fifteen percent discount offered to employees by ESPPs. I urge my colleagues to join me in cosponsoring this legislation.

Mrs. CLINTON

Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, I am pleased to introduce today a bill to support the efforts of the many companies in New York and elsewhere who grant stock options to their employees. Over the past three decades, companies have increasingly used stock options to attract and motivate employees. These companies give their workers the right to purchase company stock, at a small discount from the listed price, through Employee Stock Purchase Plans, ESPP and Incentive Stock Options, ISO. Employees stock ownership has been shown to motivate workers and enhance relationship between management and workers. Indeed, for many workers, these plans are the only way to amass any assets. For nearly thirty years, the Internal Revenue Service, IRS has taken the position that income from these stock options is not subject to employment taxes. However, recent audits and rulings on individual companies have raised the troubling prospect that the IRS may now reverse its policy. ESPPs and ISOs were created by Congress to provide tools to build strong companies through increased employee ownership of company stock. The purpose of the bipartisan bill I am introducing today, with Senator Roberts, is to clarify that it was not the intent of Congress to dilute these incentives by requiring employment tax withholding when the stock is purchased. While the IRS has in place a moratorium until January 1, 2003 on assessing employment taxes on stock options, we must take action to eliminate any uncertainty for companies and workers as to whether options are subject to withholding taxes. Again, the legislation I am introducing would clarify that the difference between the exercise price and the fair market value of stock offered by the ISO and ESPP is excluded from employment taxes. In addition, wage withholding is not required on disqualifying dispositions of ISO stock or on the fifteen percent discount offered to employees by ESPPs. I urge my colleagues to join me in cosponsoring this legislation.

Mrs. CLINTON

Mrs. CLINTON. Madam President, I also thank the chairman and ranking member for not only the work they have done on this bill but the work they will do on the farm bill this fall. I know this is a difficult matter. Both the chairman and the ranking member have outlined the challenges ahead of us, but I know everyone in this Chamber is ready and willing to work together to get a result that will be not only fair to our farmers but will recognize the full extent of both agricultural and conservation needs that go hand in hand with agriculture throughout our country. I rise today to say a few words about agriculture in New York because I have noticed many of my colleagues are surprised there is agriculture in New York. Many people, perhaps some in the gallery today, think of New York and think of New York City. They may fly into LaGuardia or out of JFK. They do not get a chance to travel throughout the State to see the beauty of the scenery and to know how important agriculture is to the livelihood, the economy, and the future of New York. In every section of New York, even surprisingly in some of the boroughs of New York City, there are still some agricultural interests. Much of the State, from St. Lawrence to Orleans, to the entire southern tier out into Long Island, agriculture remains a critical part of the fabric of life in New York and is a crucial livelihood for countless New Yorkers. In fact, agriculture still is the No. 1 economic sector in New York, which would come, I suppose, as a surprise to many people from the Midwest or the South. I have been fortunate, having grown up in the Midwest--actually in Illinois, right between the chairman and the ranking member of the Agriculture Committee--to know a little bit about Midwest agriculture. Then I have been honored to have lived in Arkansas, for which good friend Senator Lincoln, having come from a farming family, is a champion, so I know full well how critical agriculture is in the Midwest, in the South, in the West, but I do not want anyone in this Chamber or anyone in our country to overlook or forget how important agriculture is in the Northeast and particularly in the State of New York. I received a letter from a farmer in Kent, NY. What he has written could be written from the chairman's State or the ranking member's State. I want to read what he said: I am writing this letter with great concern on behalf of our family farm. Our family farm was started in early 1900 by my grandfather and grandmother when they came to America from England. I started working on the farm as a young man at the age of 7 by riding with my father and watching how to work and how to make a living, by providing food for the world in which we live. Now at age 46, I sit back and try to evaluate what is wrong with our agriculture picture. Our cost of production has gone through the roof as fuel, labor and growing mandates are taking our profit out of the picture. Our fresh fruit apples, after being packed out of storage, have a slim chance to exceed the cost of production. Our vegetable operation, along with our grain crops, are in the same position, due to commodity prices that are lower than 25 years ago, but yet fuel prices alone have more than doubled in 15 months. He goes on to write: Usually, there is always one commodity that excels each year to offset the poorer priced ones, but that has not happened in the past year. Your first response is to get your cost of production down and to establish a higher yield, but we have exhausted all of these options. Every time we have a potential for a commodity price increase, one of our competitors ship across the borders, keep prices low and here we sit in New York just trying to survive. I have a great deal of pride and want to do my part to keep agriculture the number one industry in our County of Orleans, State of New York. Let us get agriculture out of this situation and back on track immediately. I could not agree with this gentleman more. What I hope we are going to be able to do, as the chairman, the ranking member, and the committee members craft their farming bill for this fall, is to make sure those of us who may not be on the committee but who represent farmers and a farming State, no matter how difficult that may be for some to believe, will also be at that table because we have to be heard on behalf of our farmers. I want to point to this chart. In 1964, there were 66,510 family farms. In 1997, we are down to 31,757. Certainly, some of those farms were lost because New York grew. The county I live in became pricey, choice real estate for people who wanted to live near New York City. We are fighting to preserve the farmland we still have left in Westchester County. We know there were inevitable changes. No one is arguing against the inevitability of change that is going to take farmland out of production, but in many parts of our State we lost population. There was not population pressure forcing people into the country, therefore doing away with available farmland. We lost farmland because our farmers were not given a fair shake, were not given the tools with which to compete. As we look at the farm bill, I hope we are going to also look at the important essential role farmers play in conservation, preserving our rural countryside, making it possible to have high water quality and wildlife habitat. I know if it were not for farmers all up and down the Midwest and the South, there would not be as many ducks to hunt every year. I know farmers have played a critical role in preserving wildlife habitat for hunters and for the enjoyment of so many other people. Farmers have a role not only in producing quality, affordable food, but also improving water quality and wildlife habitat, restoring wetlands, and protecting farmland from further development. I hope we are going to get some of that conservation assistance in the farm bill coming this fall. I would have preferred by far the bill that came out of the committee in the Senate. That was not possible because of the President's veto threat. That is what the ranking member just explained. I deeply regret that. As the chairman, Senator Harkin, pointed out, this would not have busted the budget. This was forward funding that would have gone into next year. The dollars then could have been distributed not only to help our farmers but also to do the conservation work that they do for all of us. I want to mention also that we have some crops in New York that do not produce a lot of money, less than $10,000, but we are proud of them. We have a lot of orchards in New York, going from 6,931 in 1964 to 2,436 in 1997. We still are proud of our apple growers. We are proud of our speciality crops. In May, there was an article in the Washington Post about the plight of apple growers in Albany, NY. It told how this past March Susan and Gary Davis auctioned off the machinery they used to tend orchards and vegetables on a farm that had been in their family for a century. They said: You feel like you are letting them down, both past generations and your own children. But they just could not keep up with the costs, and their farm manager finally said he could not do it anymore. The grower gave up and moved to find a livelihood somewhere else. We know we have to do more to make farming a viable alternative for those who are willing to put in the long hours, are willing to do the work that gives us a safe food supply. I consider food security part of national security. Certainly that is true when it comes to the speciality crops and also when it comes to dairy in New York. Our dairy farmers are down to 8,732 farms. I bet a lot of people did not know there were 8,700 dairy farms in New York. We are the third largest dairy producing State in America, and we are proud of that fact. But we have to have some help. We have to be able to compete with our neighbors to the north, with our neighbors to the south, and with our neighbors to the west. Milk is New York's leading agricultural product, creating almost $2 billion in receipts. We rank third behind California and Wisconsin. Our dairy farmers are probably the hardest working farmers, maybe the hardest working small businesspeople, one will find anywhere. It is a 24-hour-a-day, 7-day-a-week job. I was visiting with some of our dairy farmers on the shores of Lake Champlain. They have been there for seven, eight, and nine generations. This is a difficult, tough job. We should not make it any harder. We should be proud of those who are willing to do this work, and we should find ways to support them because it helps all of us. Finally, I hope my colleague, Senator Schumer, and I are able to convey as clearly and, hopefully, persuasively as possible that when agriculture is discussed, New York should be at the table. I thank everyone in this Chamber for giving us the opportunity to have our farmers receive the same help that all of our farmers in America need. I thank the Chair.

Mrs. CLINTON

Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, I rise in support of the amendment offered by the Senator from Florida. This is an issue that he brought to my attention some months ago following the initial debate over the arsenic standard. We had a good debate last night, with a very strong vote, to ensure that we get the right kind of standard as soon as possible so people will know what to expect from their drinking water. We also made it very clear that we want to help communities be able to meet these standards. It should not be an unfunded mandate to take care of your health. We ought to have the best scientific information, made available through the studies that are done or commissioned, to provide the help that communities need to be able to protect themselves, particularly their children. Senator Nelson came upon a problem I never knew existed. I cannot tell you how many times I have been around playground equipment that is wooden. I always thought it was really attractive. It is the kind I preferred. It is what I bought for my own daughter. It certainly never crossed my mind that--for good reasons, to prevent pest and termite infestations--manufacturers would want to treat that wood. I never thought about it. But what Senator Nelson has determined--and I applaud him for this because it became an issue in Florida, and he brought it to our attention--is that something called CCA, chromated copper arsenic, is widely used as a preservative in pressure-treated wood, including playground equipment. This CCA is 22 percent arsenic. I remember when I used to practice law, which seems as if it was a very long time ago, I had a case that involved treated wood that was treated at a plant in Tennessee. I went to visit it. The wood was treated with all kinds of chemicals, but it was used for telephone poles; it was used for railroad tracks; it was not used in playground equipment. What Senator Nelson has learned is that, through rain and natural deterioration, the arsenic that is in this compound, CCA, to treat this wood, can leach into the ground and can even come off on one's hands. You think about all those little hands and all those little mouths and those little bodies kind of rolling around this playground equipment. I really commend the Senator for bringing this problem to our attention. Because of his hard work, the EPA and the Consumer Product Safety Commission are conducting reviews of the health and safety risks to children playing on and around CCA-treated wooden playground equipment. I believe the Senator's amendment is necessary because, again, it sets a deadline. Otherwise, folks can just keep studying and talking and avoiding making a decision. But he is trying to put some teeth into this appropriations bill, which I commend and support because just the other day I had a friend of mine say she heard Senator Nelson speak on this issue in relation to playground equipment. She was just about ready to buy some playground equipment for her grandchildren. She does not know whether to buy it or not. She does not know whether it is safe or unsafe. If you live in a State that gets as much rain as the good Senator's State of Florida, you have to be even more worried. If it is as humid as it is down there, you have to be more worried. We do not want to make a decision that is not scientifically based, so we need to get these science studies done and the EPA and the Consumer Product Safety Commission making their decision. They have asked for public comment. But we should pass this Nelson amendment because it really directs the EPA to report to Congress as soon as possible--which is, in effect, a report to the public--so my friend can decide whether or not she is going to buy wooden playground equipment or plastic or steel, or whatever choice she is going to make. I commend the Senator for understanding this is an issue that is not one of these abstract issues that only concerns somebody sitting in some ivory tower somewhere. This is an issue that concerns every mother and father who takes their child to play at a playground or anybody who is thinking about buying equipment for their backyard. We need to look to a nonpartisan, independent source such as the scientists who will examine this issue, find out whether this CCA is or is not a health hazard, or whether it can be fixed, and if it can, so it can be a problem that can be prevented. This is one of those public service issues to which I really think we owe the people of this country an answer; otherwise, we may be unfairly tarring this industry. We may be preventing people from buying playground equipment that is totally safe. We don't know. We just know this CCA has arsenic in it. We need to get to the bottom of whether that is harmful or not. I commend the Senator for his approach. I hope my colleagues on both sides of the aisle will support this amendment so we can get an answer sooner instead of later. Mr. President, I yield back whatever time I might have been given.

Mrs. CLINTON

Mrs. CLINTON. Will the Senator yield? I would be honored to be an original cosponsor of that legislation.

Mrs. CLINTON

Mrs. CLINTON. I want to make very clear to the Senator, and to everyone who represents large and small water systems, we need to give more help to communities to comply with water standards. This is one of those issues where the Federal Government must help our communities. I certainly will work with the Senator from New Mexico and everyone on both sides of the aisle to make sure a standard is put into place, to protect the public health and well-being of our people, that is matched by funds from the revolving fund aimed at cleaning up drinking water and any other resource available, so we do not leave people hanging on their own, not knowing what to do once the standard is set. I appreciate the financial challenge confronting some of our communities in meeting this standard. I went to Fallon, NV, with my good friends Senator Reid and Senator Ensign, a community that has 100 parts per billion of arsenic in the water. We know we have to deal with this. This amendment puts us on record to enforce a statutory requirement and does the right thing for the public health, but then we have to come back and make sure we have the resources to clean up the water supply so people can meet the standard.

Mrs. CLINTON. I thank Senator Boxer for bringing this amendment up for debate and vote, and I want to add my words of strong support because it is clear we have a public health issue with respect to the level of arsenic in too many of our water supplies, particularly in the West but not exclusively. Unfortunately, the Bush administration has taken steps to delay rather than enforce new rules requiring less arsenic in America's drinking water. That is a step in the wrong direction. It is wrong from a legal perspective since the new standard was required to be in place as of June 22 of this year, and that was a statutory requirement put into place by the Congress. Perhaps most important, it is wrong from a public health perspective. The administration says it needs to examine further arsenic in drinking water, but while they continue to study arsenic, the American people continue to be exposed to this carcinogen. Senator Boxer has already talked about the studies that have been done affirming over and over again the public health issues relating to arsenic in our drinking water. The National Academy of Sciences found chronic ingestion of arsenic causes bladder, lung, and skin cancer. Another study released this past March, by researchers at Dartmouth University, shows low concentrations of arsenic in drinking water can have hormone-disrupting effects. In March, a report in the American Journal of Epidemiology revealed that compared to the general population, people who drink water with arsenic levels between 10.1 and 50 parts per billion are twice as likely to get certain urinary tract cancers. The science is clear, and do not take our word for it. I went and looked on the EPA's Web site. On its Web site, right beside an April 18 news release stating the Administrator wants to review the arsenic standard, there is another report issued the very next day with this headline: ``Arsenic Compounds May Cause Genetic Damage.'' Clearly, the EPA's own scientists have discovered a possible link between genetic damage and arsenic compounds. The science is not in question, but the safety and health of the American public have been put into question because of the delay this administration has brought about. The amendment being offered by Senator Boxer, which I strongly support, requires the EPA to immediately put a new standard in place that will adequately protect public health, and it gives the American people the right to know how much arsenic is in their water. The House of Representatives passed a similar amendment this last week. I say to my good friend, the distinguished Senator from New Mexico, who has done so much on so many issues that affect the quality of life of the people he represents, I understand Albuquerque is one of the largest cities in our country that has this kind of arsenic issue. I ask Senator Boxer for 1 more minute.

Mrs. CLINTON

Mrs. CLINTON. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the resolution and preamble be agreed to en bloc, the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table, and that any statements relating thereto be printed in the Record.

Mrs. CLINTON

Mrs. CLINTON. As the majority leader well knows, I am new to this body and I think what we have just seen raises, in my mind, serious questions about what it is we are trying to accomplish for the people of our States and our country. As I understand the response of the distinguished Senator from Idaho, the delay is because somebody ``unnamed'' delayed something last year. That, to me, is a strikingly inadequate explanation for a delay that is holding up our efforts to help our oldest industry and our newest industry. With the fact that New York's largest economic sector is agriculture, which most people outside New York would have no idea of, I have a great interest in the Agriculture supplemental bill because we have some aid in there for farmers who are following in the tradition of those having farmed in New York for more than 400 years. Our apple farmers are on the brink of extinction if they do not get some emergency help. We had hail last year that destroyed the crop in the Mid-Hudson River Valley; it took out orchards in the north country. So this is not any geographic issue. This is a national issue that has to be addressed. At the same time, in New York, we have some of the cutting edge high- tech industries that are begging for the kind of direction the Export Administration Act will give them, the certainty about what they can and cannot export, whether we can be competitive globally. Both of these important pieces of legislation have to be addressed in the next week. It is regrettable that instead of doing the people's business, dealing with the agricultural needs and the high-tech needs that really cut across every geographic and political line we have in our Nation, we see this kind of delay. But I would ask the majority leader, is it your intention to do everything you can possibly do, as our leader, who has done, in my view, an absolutely tremendous job since assuming the leadership, to make sure that the people's needs are met? And that includes the Agriculture bill and the Export Administration bill. Speaking just as one Senator, I do not think there is anything more important than doing the work we were sent here to do, casting the votes that will help people, and it is striking that we do not seem to have the cooperation we need on the other side. But I would ask the leader if it is his intention to make sure that we do the people's business before we leave for the recess that is scheduled.

Mrs. CLINTON. Will the Senator yield?

Mrs. CLINTON

Mrs. CLINTON. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that there now be a period of morning business, with Senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each.