Hillary Clinton

Mrs. CLINTON

Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, today, I, along with my colleague Senator Allard, am proud to introduce the Expanding the Promise for Individuals with Autism Act (EPIAA.) This legislation will help to increase the availability of treatments, services, and interventions for both children and adults with autism. Last year, I worked with my colleagues on the HELP Committee to pass the Combating Autism Act into law. This important bill will increase the amount and type of research we are doing to understand the origins of this disease, and help us develop new treatments--and eventually--a cure. It will also help to increase the ability of our health professionals to screen and diagnose autism as early as possible in children, so as to improve our ability to treat this disease. But while we are carrying out the research that will lead us to gain a better understanding of this disorder, we cannot forget those who are and who have been living with this disease today--the families who are desperate for assistance and help with a disorder that so often shuts off individuals from the world around them. The need for this legislation is evident--we continue to see an increasing number of individuals with autism. Last month, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention released numbers that estimate that one in every 150 children are living with an autism spectrum disorder, numbers that are higher than those released even just a few short years ago. And our service delivery system for individuals with autism is being overwhelmed by this increase. The care involved in treating these symptoms often requires hours of intensive therapy every week--regimens that are often inaccessible to many families. While we do not know what causes autism, we do know that with early intervention and concentrated treatment, the symptoms of autism spectrum disorder can be mitigated, enabling individuals with autism and their families to live less isolated lives. Our legislation will provide additional treatment and support resources, increasing access to effective therapies and essential support services for people with autism. This legislation will do the following: Establish a Demonstration Grant Program to Assist States with Service Provision. While the Interagency Autism Coordinating Committee (IACC) is developing a long- term strategy for providing autism care and treatment services, there is currently no effort to plan for improved access to services in the immediate future. The EPIAA would establish a Treatment, Interventions and Services Evaluation Task Force to evaluate evidence-based services that could be implemented by States in the years immediately following enactment. The Secretary would then provide grants to states to help provide the services identified by the Task Force to individuals with autism. Develop a Demonstration Grant Program for Adult Autism Services. While early diagnosis and treatment are critical for children with autism, the need for intervention and services continues across the lifespan. In order to help address the needs of adults living with autism, the EPIAA would establish a grant program for states to provide appropriate interventions and services, such as housing or vocational training, to adults with autism. Increase Access to Services Following Diagnosis. After receiving a diagnosis of autism, many children and families must wait months before gaining access to appropriate treatment. In order to improve the ability to access a minimum level of services during this post- diagnosis period, the EPIAA would mandate that the Secretary develop guidance and provide funding to eliminate delays in access to supplementary health care, behavioral support services, and individual and family-support services. Increase Support for Developmental Disabilities Centers of Excellence. Many families report difficulties in accessing services because of the limited number of health and education professionals who are trained to provide autism-specific services. In order to increase the number of individuals across sectors that can provide adequate care and treatment services for individuals living with autism, the EPIAA would increase the capacity of University Centers for Excellence in Developmental Disabilities Education, Research and Service (UCEDDS) to train professionals in meeting the treatment, interventions and service needs of both children and adults living with autism. Improve Protection and Advocacy Services. Early statistics from 2006 indicate that a quarter of individuals served under already-existing protection and advocacy programs are individuals with autism, a 6 percent increase from the previous year, yet thousands of individuals with autism are unable to access these services due to a lack of resources. The EPIAA will create a program to expand currently existing protection and advocacy services to assist individuals with autism and other emerging populations of individuals with disabilities. Improves Technical Assistance and Evaluation. The EPIAA would establish a National Technical Assistance Center for Autism Treatments, Interventions and Services to act as a clearinghouse for information about evidence-based treatments, interventions and services, and analyze the grant programs under this Act. The organizations supporting this legislation include Autism Speaks, the Autism Society of America, Easter Seals, the Association of University Centers for Disability, the Disability Policy Collaboration, and the National Disability Rights Network, and I have included their letters of support to be printed in the Record. I look forward to working with Senator Allard and all of our colleagues to pass this legislation and help people with autism get the services they need.

Mrs. CLINTON

Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, today, I, along with my colleague Senator Allard, am proud to introduce the Expanding the Promise for Individuals with Autism Act (EPIAA.) This legislation will help to increase the availability of treatments, services, and interventions for both children and adults with autism. Last year, I worked with my colleagues on the HELP Committee to pass the Combating Autism Act into law. This important bill will increase the amount and type of research we are doing to understand the origins of this disease, and help us develop new treatments--and eventually--a cure. It will also help to increase the ability of our health professionals to screen and diagnose autism as early as possible in children, so as to improve our ability to treat this disease. But while we are carrying out the research that will lead us to gain a better understanding of this disorder, we cannot forget those who are and who have been living with this disease today--the families who are desperate for assistance and help with a disorder that so often shuts off individuals from the world around them. The need for this legislation is evident--we continue to see an increasing number of individuals with autism. Last month, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention released numbers that estimate that one in every 150 children are living with an autism spectrum disorder, numbers that are higher than those released even just a few short years ago. And our service delivery system for individuals with autism is being overwhelmed by this increase. The care involved in treating these symptoms often requires hours of intensive therapy every week--regimens that are often inaccessible to many families. While we do not know what causes autism, we do know that with early intervention and concentrated treatment, the symptoms of autism spectrum disorder can be mitigated, enabling individuals with autism and their families to live less isolated lives. Our legislation will provide additional treatment and support resources, increasing access to effective therapies and essential support services for people with autism. This legislation will do the following: Establish a Demonstration Grant Program to Assist States with Service Provision. While the Interagency Autism Coordinating Committee (IACC) is developing a long- term strategy for providing autism care and treatment services, there is currently no effort to plan for improved access to services in the immediate future. The EPIAA would establish a Treatment, Interventions and Services Evaluation Task Force to evaluate evidence-based services that could be implemented by States in the years immediately following enactment. The Secretary would then provide grants to states to help provide the services identified by the Task Force to individuals with autism. Develop a Demonstration Grant Program for Adult Autism Services. While early diagnosis and treatment are critical for children with autism, the need for intervention and services continues across the lifespan. In order to help address the needs of adults living with autism, the EPIAA would establish a grant program for states to provide appropriate interventions and services, such as housing or vocational training, to adults with autism. Increase Access to Services Following Diagnosis. After receiving a diagnosis of autism, many children and families must wait months before gaining access to appropriate treatment. In order to improve the ability to access a minimum level of services during this post- diagnosis period, the EPIAA would mandate that the Secretary develop guidance and provide funding to eliminate delays in access to supplementary health care, behavioral support services, and individual and family-support services. Increase Support for Developmental Disabilities Centers of Excellence. Many families report difficulties in accessing services because of the limited number of health and education professionals who are trained to provide autism-specific services. In order to increase the number of individuals across sectors that can provide adequate care and treatment services for individuals living with autism, the EPIAA would increase the capacity of University Centers for Excellence in Developmental Disabilities Education, Research and Service (UCEDDS) to train professionals in meeting the treatment, interventions and service needs of both children and adults living with autism. Improve Protection and Advocacy Services. Early statistics from 2006 indicate that a quarter of individuals served under already-existing protection and advocacy programs are individuals with autism, a 6 percent increase from the previous year, yet thousands of individuals with autism are unable to access these services due to a lack of resources. The EPIAA will create a program to expand currently existing protection and advocacy services to assist individuals with autism and other emerging populations of individuals with disabilities. Improves Technical Assistance and Evaluation. The EPIAA would establish a National Technical Assistance Center for Autism Treatments, Interventions and Services to act as a clearinghouse for information about evidence-based treatments, interventions and services, and analyze the grant programs under this Act. The organizations supporting this legislation include Autism Speaks, the Autism Society of America, Easter Seals, the Association of University Centers for Disability, the Disability Policy Collaboration, and the National Disability Rights Network, and I have included their letters of support to be printed in the Record. I look forward to working with Senator Allard and all of our colleagues to pass this legislation and help people with autism get the services they need.

Mrs. CLINTON

Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, I was proud to help create the State Children's Health Insurance Program during the Clinton Administration. It has provided health insurance for 6 million children, including more than 425,000 in New York. SCHIP was the biggest expansion in providing health insurance coverage in more than 30 years--a big first step to providing quality health care coverage for all children. And now it is time to take the next step. Today, I am introducing new legislation with my colleague from the House of Representatives, Chairman Dingell: a plan to make quality affordable health care available to every child in America. The Children's Health First Act will make quality, affordable health care available to all children, and will pave the way to cover the more than nine million children in our country without health coverage. Our bill cuts red tape to allow States to provide affordable healthcare options for all families to cover their children. It gives States the financial incentives and resources to expand--existing State coverage and find and enroll the 6 million children who are currently eligible for health coverage but are not enrolled. And it provides incentives to expand employer sponsored coverage for children. As individuals and as a Nation, an ounce of prevention is truly worth a pound of cure. Health care accessible and affordable for all children will keep kids healthy, save lives, control costs, and end heartache and worry for so many parents. This plan is practical and fiscally responsible--it will honor our values and prevent kids from needing more costly healthcare in the future. Our bill will provide incentives for States to expand SCHIP to more children and provide health coverage for children up to 400 percent of poverty, about $70,000 for a family of three. Parents whose incomes are above their State's SCHIP eligibility levels and employers who want to provide coverage to dependents will also have the option to buy-in to the SCHIP program. This will ensure that all families have access to affordable coverage and aren't forced into the private insurance market where affordable options for their children are often out of reach. And while expanding coverage is critical, enrolling children who are already eligible must also be part of our efforts to ensure every child has health insurance. Currently, there are 6 million uninsured children who are eligible for public programs but not enrolled. In order to receive expanded Federal funding under our bill, States must undertake strategies designed to enhance outreach and enrollment of currently eligible children. In addition, the Children's Health First Act would prevent funding shortfalls like those that 14 States are currently facing. Unlike the original SCHIP bill our legislation would determine funding based on State spending and indexed to medical inflation and child population growth so that states will get the funds they need. Every child deserves a healthy start in life. This goes to the heart of our values, our responsibility to one another, the promise of our country. Far too many children in our Nation--more than 9 million--do not have health care. And, for the first time in nearly a decade, between 2004 and 2005, the number of uninsured children in New York increased by 61,000--part of a trend nationally. It's simply wrong that there are working parents who worry about their children playing sports because they can't afford a doctor if their child gets hurt. I've met parents who when their children get sick fret and worry about their children's illness--but have the added anxiety of wondering how they are going to pay for the doctor visit. That just shouldn't happen. No child in America, the greatest, richest Nation on Earth home to so much promise, should lack for the care he or she needs to grow up to be a healthy, happy adult. We can tackle this challenge--and provide access to quality, affordable health care for all children in America. It's the right thing to do, and it's the smart thing to do. I am proud to introduce this legislation. It will help us honor our values, protect our children. We can meet this challenge and that's what I'll be working with Chairman Dingell and my Senate colleagues to achieve this year.

Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, I am pleased to introduce the Gestational Diabetes Act of 2007 with my colleague Senator Collins, to bring attention to an important health issue facing women and children. I don't need to tell anyone that we have an obesity epidemic in the United States. Many of us realize that as parents, it is our responsibility to pass on good nutritional habits to our children. But many women may not realize that watching what you eat, exercising regularly, and having control of your blood sugar levels are serious health considerations during pregnancy. In fact, these factors are serious enough that they can affect both the health of the mother and the life of the child into adulthood. More women than ever are entering their pregnancies overweight but without an understanding of how their own weight and nutritional habits can trigger gestational diabetes--a type of diabetes that only occurs during pregnancy. Women who are overweight before pregnancy are not only at greater risk of having gestational diabetes but are also more likely to have a c-section and are at an increased risk for other serious pregnancy complications. In New York, gestational diabetes is on the rise. In New York City alone, gestational diabetes has risen by nearly 50 percent in about 10 years. This means that gestational diabetes affects 1 in 25 women, about 400 women per month. But across the Nation, between 4 and 8 percent of pregnant women in the United States are affected by gestational diabetes. Infants of women who have gestational diabetes are at increased risk for obesity and developing type 2 diabetes as adolescents or adults. As women, we need to pay attention to our health. We are always worrying about the health of our children, our husbands, and our parents, but we often forget to take care of ourselves. Today, I am introducing the Gestational Diabetes Act, also known as the GEDI Act. This legislation will increase our understanding of gestational diabetes by determining the factors that contribute to this condition and help mothers who had gestational diabetes reduce their risk of developing type 2 diabetes post-pregnancy. The GEDI Act will provide funding for projects to assist health care providers, as well as for communities to find ways to reach out to women so that they understand how their own good health during pregnancy can decrease serious health risks for their children. The GEDI Act would expand research to determine and develop interventions to lower the incidence of gestational diabetes. We need to alert women to the risk before this condition becomes an epidemic and, as we have seen so many times before, education is critical. We should be doing everything we can to address the impact of obesity during pregnancy and to reduce the prevalence of gestational diabetes in pregnant women. The GEDI Act is an important step in assuring that women understand this critical issue and that we fully understand how to equip pregnant women to make the best choices for their health. The GEDI Act is supported by the American Diabetes Association, American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, National Research Center for Women & Families, International Community Health Services, American Association of Diabetes Educators, and the American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy.

Mrs. CLINTON

Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, I was proud to help create the State Children's Health Insurance Program during the Clinton Administration. It has provided health insurance for 6 million children, including more than 425,000 in New York. SCHIP was the biggest expansion in providing health insurance coverage in more than 30 years--a big first step to providing quality health care coverage for all children. And now it is time to take the next step. Today, I am introducing new legislation with my colleague from the House of Representatives, Chairman Dingell: a plan to make quality affordable health care available to every child in America. The Children's Health First Act will make quality, affordable health care available to all children, and will pave the way to cover the more than nine million children in our country without health coverage. Our bill cuts red tape to allow States to provide affordable healthcare options for all families to cover their children. It gives States the financial incentives and resources to expand--existing State coverage and find and enroll the 6 million children who are currently eligible for health coverage but are not enrolled. And it provides incentives to expand employer sponsored coverage for children. As individuals and as a Nation, an ounce of prevention is truly worth a pound of cure. Health care accessible and affordable for all children will keep kids healthy, save lives, control costs, and end heartache and worry for so many parents. This plan is practical and fiscally responsible--it will honor our values and prevent kids from needing more costly healthcare in the future. Our bill will provide incentives for States to expand SCHIP to more children and provide health coverage for children up to 400 percent of poverty, about $70,000 for a family of three. Parents whose incomes are above their State's SCHIP eligibility levels and employers who want to provide coverage to dependents will also have the option to buy-in to the SCHIP program. This will ensure that all families have access to affordable coverage and aren't forced into the private insurance market where affordable options for their children are often out of reach. And while expanding coverage is critical, enrolling children who are already eligible must also be part of our efforts to ensure every child has health insurance. Currently, there are 6 million uninsured children who are eligible for public programs but not enrolled. In order to receive expanded Federal funding under our bill, States must undertake strategies designed to enhance outreach and enrollment of currently eligible children. In addition, the Children's Health First Act would prevent funding shortfalls like those that 14 States are currently facing. Unlike the original SCHIP bill our legislation would determine funding based on State spending and indexed to medical inflation and child population growth so that states will get the funds they need. Every child deserves a healthy start in life. This goes to the heart of our values, our responsibility to one another, the promise of our country. Far too many children in our Nation--more than 9 million--do not have health care. And, for the first time in nearly a decade, between 2004 and 2005, the number of uninsured children in New York increased by 61,000--part of a trend nationally. It's simply wrong that there are working parents who worry about their children playing sports because they can't afford a doctor if their child gets hurt. I've met parents who when their children get sick fret and worry about their children's illness--but have the added anxiety of wondering how they are going to pay for the doctor visit. That just shouldn't happen. No child in America, the greatest, richest Nation on Earth home to so much promise, should lack for the care he or she needs to grow up to be a healthy, happy adult. We can tackle this challenge--and provide access to quality, affordable health care for all children in America. It's the right thing to do, and it's the smart thing to do. I am proud to introduce this legislation. It will help us honor our values, protect our children. We can meet this challenge and that's what I'll be working with Chairman Dingell and my Senate colleagues to achieve this year.

Mrs. CLINTON

Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, I am pleased to introduce the Gestational Diabetes Act of 2007 with my colleague Senator Collins, to bring attention to an important health issue facing women and children. I don't need to tell anyone that we have an obesity epidemic in the United States. Many of us realize that as parents, it is our responsibility to pass on good nutritional habits to our children. But many women may not realize that watching what you eat, exercising regularly, and having control of your blood sugar levels are serious health considerations during pregnancy. In fact, these factors are serious enough that they can affect both the health of the mother and the life of the child into adulthood. More women than ever are entering their pregnancies overweight but without an understanding of how their own weight and nutritional habits can trigger gestational diabetes--a type of diabetes that only occurs during pregnancy. Women who are overweight before pregnancy are not only at greater risk of having gestational diabetes but are also more likely to have a c-section and are at an increased risk for other serious pregnancy complications. In New York, gestational diabetes is on the rise. In New York City alone, gestational diabetes has risen by nearly 50 percent in about 10 years. This means that gestational diabetes affects 1 in 25 women, about 400 women per month. But across the Nation, between 4 and 8 percent of pregnant women in the United States are affected by gestational diabetes. Infants of women who have gestational diabetes are at increased risk for obesity and developing type 2 diabetes as adolescents or adults. As women, we need to pay attention to our health. We are always worrying about the health of our children, our husbands, and our parents, but we often forget to take care of ourselves. Today, I am introducing the Gestational Diabetes Act, also known as the GEDI Act. This legislation will increase our understanding of gestational diabetes by determining the factors that contribute to this condition and help mothers who had gestational diabetes reduce their risk of developing type 2 diabetes post-pregnancy. The GEDI Act will provide funding for projects to assist health care providers, as well as for communities to find ways to reach out to women so that they understand how their own good health during pregnancy can decrease serious health risks for their children. The GEDI Act would expand research to determine and develop interventions to lower the incidence of gestational diabetes. We need to alert women to the risk before this condition becomes an epidemic and, as we have seen so many times before, education is critical. We should be doing everything we can to address the impact of obesity during pregnancy and to reduce the prevalence of gestational diabetes in pregnant women. The GEDI Act is an important step in assuring that women understand this critical issue and that we fully understand how to equip pregnant women to make the best choices for their health. The GEDI Act is supported by the American Diabetes Association, American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, National Research Center for Women & Families, International Community Health Services, American Association of Diabetes Educators, and the American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy.

Mrs. CLINTON

Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, over 5 years ago, on September 11, terrorists murdered nearly 3,000 people in the single deadliest attack on American soil in our history. What all Americans witnessed and what too many families experienced personally and tragically was the dawn of a new era. We knew it then. National Guard patrolled Federal buildings and airports. The military patrolled the skies over New York and Washington, DC. The United States had been attacked by a new kind of enemy in a new and more dangerous world. We faced tough questions as a nation: How do we defeat this enemy? How do we fight terror abroad and protect America at home? What was clear that day and remains so today is that the threat posed to us by terrorism requires a great mobilization of American might, muscle, resources, and ingenuity. Armed with this mandate, many of us fought alongside those who lost loved ones on September 11 to compel an unwilling Bush administration to create the 9/11 Commission. The determination and steadfastness demonstrated by the families hardest hit by the September 11 tragedy made the 9/11 Commission a reality. We applauded when the bipartisan Commission concluded its investigation and released its thorough report detailing recommendations to protect this Nation from another attack, confident that the Congress and the administration would in short order implement their recommendations. Shamefully, for some in our Federal Government, the sense of urgency and resolve faded in the months and years that followed. Some of the Commission's most commonsense recommendations went ignored. Even in the face of dangerous incompetence in our emergency preparedness and response to Hurricane Katrina, we received tough rhetoric instead of much needed reform. Five years after the 9/11 attacks and 2\1/2\ years after the 9/11 Commission released its initial report, much of the work of properly securing our homeland has gone undone. That is why this legislation to implement many of the remaining recommendations of the 9/11 Commission is long overdue. I have long supported the Commission's recommendation that ``homeland security assistance should be based strictly on an assessment of risks and vulnerabilities.'' With our homeland security resources limited, we need to be smart about how we distribute funding to guard against terrorism. Sadly, all too often, funding decisions have been made based on politics in Washington instead of the reality in our cities and neighborhoods. It is why I introduced the Homeland Security Block Grant Act as well as the Domestic Defense Fund Act, both of which would provide direct and threat-based homeland security funding to our communities and first responders to help them improve our homeland defense. But even funds supposedly distributed based on risk have been administered incompetently. Last spring, the Department of Homeland Security, DHS, announced its 2006 homeland security grants. Cities and States across the country facing high terrorist threats suffered considerable funding cuts, a decision which can be largely attributed to a series of highly questionable risk assessments. New York City and Washington, DC, both already the targets of attacks, were slated for drastic reductions. Funding under the Urban Area Security Initiative, UASI, alone was slashed in New York City by more than 40 percent and in Washington, DC by 43 percent. We clearly need to get smarter about how we assess risk. It would surprise most people to learn that until now, the process of assessing risk has been done on an ad hoc basis within DHS, with several different offices tasked with contributing to the analysis. This seemingly haphazard process has led to constantly changing grant guidance and formulas, wide fluctuations in yearly grant awards, and a failure to develop a long-term strategy for risk assessment. What we need is a full-time staff of methodologists whose sole responsibility it is to assess risk. That is why I offered an amendment to bill that would create a Risk Assessment Center within DHS. While the funding proposal contained within Improving America's Security Act moves us closer toward a threat-based funding model, it still falls shorts of what the 9/11 Commission recommended. Specifically, the State minimum funding requirements contained within the bill are still too high and there is still too much reliance on population-based formulas that bear little relation to risk. My hope is that during conference committee negotiations to reconcile the House and Senate bills, efforts will be made to ensure that our limited homeland security funds are directed toward mitigating our most significant vulnerabilities and that political formulas are abandoned. As we discuss the importance of homeland security and how critical it is to provide adequate funding for our first responders, we cannot leave the 43,000 transportation security officers, TSOs, in this country out of the conversation. Every day, TSOs are on the national security frontlines, keeping our airports safe and protecting countless citizens as they travel. Despite the significant training, experience, and patience required to execute these duties, TSOs have lacked the basic workers rights and protections for over 5 years, including whistleblower protections and the right to collectively bargain. As a result, the officers we task with protecting our airplanes from another terrorist attack now have the highest injury rate of any Federal agency, a high attrition rate of almost 30 percent, and, according to a recent report, the lowest morale of any agency in the Federal Government. It is why I supported Senator McCaskill's amendment that would guarantee to TSOs collective bargaining and other basic labor rights that other Federal law enforcement officers already enjoy. This amendment would promote our Nation's security by providing a stable workplace structure for the resolution of disputes and the reduction of turnover, as well as allow TSOs to expose threats to aviation security without fear of retaliation. The amendment also includes provisions that make explicit that TSOs would not enjoy the right to strike, the right to bargain for higher pay, or the right to reveal classified information, and that the TSOs must follow all orders during an emergency. This was a smart and carefully tailored amendment that correctly recognizes that we will not be able to effectively safeguard our Nation's security if we do not stand with and support its security workers. It is also past time to secure our ports and transportation systems. Unscanned cargo containers that pass through our ports pose a substantial risk to our homeland security, threatening not only the gateways to our national economy but also the larger American public. We learned the painful lesson on September 11 that those intent on destroying our American way of life are keenly focused on exposing our vulnerabilities. Because our ports serve as the gateway to our country and its economy, they remain attractive targets susceptible to terrorist attack. In 2005, more than 84 million tons of cargo with a value greater than $132 billion passed through the Port of New York and New Jersey alone. The sheer scope of commerce at our ports means the threat carries grave consequences--and will take a great deal of hard work and our smartest strategies to meet. And while we took important steps toward addressing these concerns last year with the passage of the SAFE Ports Act, we still need to act with more urgency. It is why I supported efforts to expedite the implementation of new scanning requirements during consideration of the Improving America's Security Act. I am encouraged that the bill does take steps to secure our rail and mass transit systems. Given the lessons of London, Madrid, and Mumbai, it is unbelievable that not more has been done to secure our mass transit. Passenger rail systems--primarily subway systems--here in the United States carry about 5 times as many passengers each day as do airlines. Instead of forcing an impossible decision, between protecting one form of transportation over another, we should invest in the resources and tools necessary to secure our entire transportation infrastructure--before terrorists strike our rail systems here at home. Importantly, the bill provides grants through TSA to Amtrak, freight railraods, and others to upgrade security across the entire freight and intercity passenger railroad system. Additionally, the bill provides funding through the Department of Transportation, DOT, to upgrade and to fortify Amtrak railroad tunnels in New York, Washington, and Baltimore. Furthermore, the legislation requires the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, FMCSA, to provide recommendations to both motor carriers and States on how to coordinate hazardous materials routing. The bill also requires DHS to develop a program to encourage equipping trucks that carry hazardous materials with communications and tracking technology. These steps are in addition to those in the bill that bolster aviation security standards. Importantly, the bill requires the Transportation Security Administration, TSA, to develop and implement a system, within 3 years of the date of enactment, to provide for the screening of all cargo being carried on passenger aircraft, a security measure that is long overdue. The bill also takes several important steps to address our emergency communications systems before we face another crisis. Chaotic, real- world disasters, whether manmade or natural, do not obey borders. They require close coordination of Federal, State and local agencies, firefighters, police officers and EMTs, and others. Yet often these different entities use different communications devices, frequencies, even languages. On September 11, police officers could not effectively talk to firefighters at Ground Zero; at the Pentagon, first responders from Virginia and Washington, DC faced the same problem. After Katrina, we had responders exchanging business cards at the site of the disaster along the gulf. That is why the 9/11 Commission recognized our crucial need to have interoperable communications, so that all of our first responders can communicate with each other at the scene of an emergency. It is why I introduced legislation last year that would give our first responders an interoperable emergency communications system coordinated under Federal leadership. I am pleased that the bill provides funds to improve interoperable emergency communications and gives the National Telecommunications and Information Administration, NTIA, greater direction regarding how to distribute these funds. This bill also contains a provision offered by Senator Stevens and me which will provide immediate and critical funding to help upgrade and improve our Nation's 9-1-1 call centers. This funding will help ensure that 9-1-1 call centers can be an effective part of an emergency response plan and will make certain they have the technological upgrades to handle and process all the emergency calls that come into them so that our first responders know where to go and what situation they are walking into. Nearly 5 years ago, America suffered a brutal terrorist attack that stole nearly 3,000 lives and changed America forever. What was required here in Washington was leadership. Leadership to inspire Americans to meet the threat head on. Leadership to mobilize our resources and respond effectively. Leadership to keep our country safe in a new and more dangerous world. Sadly, the Bush administration failed to match the urgency and resolve of the American people in this great struggle to secure our homeland. Today, with passage of this important legislation, we will demonstrate the leadership that we have been sorely missing for too long in the fight to safeguard our Nation and its citizens.

Mrs. CLINTON

Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation to help ensure that State and local educational agencies implement an effective certification process for school leaders. My legislation will address the need to effectively train and retain school leaders to prepare our children to compete in the global economy. The Fordham Foundation conducted a study on the effectiveness of current state licensing procedures and noted that they have ``little relevance to the task at hand [and] discourage the leaders we need from entering our public schools.'' As a result, school leaders, particularly those in under-performing schools, are often unprepared to foster student success. That is why I am sponsoring the Improving the Leadership and Effectiveness of Administrators for Districts (I LEAD) Act. As the number of openings for school leaders is expected to increase by 20 percent in the next five years, districts will find it increasingly difficult to recruit and retain effective principals. We need to ensure outgoing school leaders are replaced with effective, well-trained school leaders who are prepared to raise student achievement. The I LEAD Act would allow State and local educational agencies to evaluate the effectiveness of their current school leadership licensure requirements by examining the impact on student achievement, graduation rates, parental involvement, and safety within their schools. It also provides grants to implement a plan to recruit and effectively train school leaders by providing on-the-job experience during the licensure process, financial incentives, ongoing professional development, and mentors during their first two years on the job. Under this bill, the Department of Education would conduct a study on the effectiveness of these grants on student achievement. Upon successful implementation of new procedures, state education agencies may apply for additional grant money through the Department for assistance in replicating the success of this ``model leadership zone'' throughout the state. Grants would also be used to reform the state certification process. School leaders have a significant impact on student achievement. An effective and capable school leader can make the difference in providing the tools and instructional support staff needed to foster the type of school environment conducive to student academic success. This legislation would ensure that our principals are given the training and support they need to foster student success. The I LEAD Act addresses the need to effectively train and retain school leaders to prepare our children to compete in the global economy. I am hopeful that my Senate colleagues from both sides of the aisle will join me today to move this legislation to the floor without delay.

Mrs. CLINTON

Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation to help ensure that State and local educational agencies implement an effective certification process for school leaders. My legislation will address the need to effectively train and retain school leaders to prepare our children to compete in the global economy. The Fordham Foundation conducted a study on the effectiveness of current state licensing procedures and noted that they have ``little relevance to the task at hand [and] discourage the leaders we need from entering our public schools.'' As a result, school leaders, particularly those in under-performing schools, are often unprepared to foster student success. That is why I am sponsoring the Improving the Leadership and Effectiveness of Administrators for Districts (I LEAD) Act. As the number of openings for school leaders is expected to increase by 20 percent in the next five years, districts will find it increasingly difficult to recruit and retain effective principals. We need to ensure outgoing school leaders are replaced with effective, well-trained school leaders who are prepared to raise student achievement. The I LEAD Act would allow State and local educational agencies to evaluate the effectiveness of their current school leadership licensure requirements by examining the impact on student achievement, graduation rates, parental involvement, and safety within their schools. It also provides grants to implement a plan to recruit and effectively train school leaders by providing on-the-job experience during the licensure process, financial incentives, ongoing professional development, and mentors during their first two years on the job. Under this bill, the Department of Education would conduct a study on the effectiveness of these grants on student achievement. Upon successful implementation of new procedures, state education agencies may apply for additional grant money through the Department for assistance in replicating the success of this ``model leadership zone'' throughout the state. Grants would also be used to reform the state certification process. School leaders have a significant impact on student achievement. An effective and capable school leader can make the difference in providing the tools and instructional support staff needed to foster the type of school environment conducive to student academic success. This legislation would ensure that our principals are given the training and support they need to foster student success. The I LEAD Act addresses the need to effectively train and retain school leaders to prepare our children to compete in the global economy. I am hopeful that my Senate colleagues from both sides of the aisle will join me today to move this legislation to the floor without delay.

Mrs. CLINTON

Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, last month marked the 14th anniversary of the enactment of the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993. This law has enabled workers to take up to 12 weeks of unpaid leave to attend to an ailing family member or to care for a newborn baby. Since this landmark legislation was signed into law, more than 50 million working Americans have been able to take critical time off when necessary without putting their jobs on the line. The Family and Medical Leave Act was a critical first step in recognizing the challenges that Americans face in achieving a family- work balance. For nearly a decade and a half, it has provided the most basic protections for workers who can afford to take unpaid leave. Yet, 40 million workers cannot use the FMLA because they can't go without a paycheck. Throughout my career as a lawyer, mother, First Lady and Senator, I have sought solutions to the difficult challenges that working parents face. That is why I am pleased to reintroduce legislation, the Choice in Child Care Act of 2007, to meet the child care needs of working families. My bill provides a modest and important option for families who have none: the chance to stay home with their infants when there is no childcare available to them. This is the critical next step to ensure low-income families welcoming children in their lives are afforded more economic security than they would have otherwise. Bringing a new child into the world is one of the greatest joys a parent can experience, yet we also know that in the reality of today's economy, most parents must work to provide economic security for their newborns. In fact, 55 percent of women with infants younger than one year of age are in the workforce. As a result, working parents are faced with trying to provide economic security for their family while simultaneously ensuring that their infant receives the quality of care that he or she needs. Research shows that the quality of caretaking in the first months and years of life is critical to a newborn's brain development, social development and well-being. Yet there is currently a severe shortage of safe, affordable, quality care for infants. The number of licensed child care slots for infants meets only 18 percent of the need. The shortage is particularly acute in rural areas, and especially in rural areas that have many low-income residents. Ideally, I think we would all agree that parents who need affordable, high-quality care for their infant would provide that care themselves. However we know that, in many low- and moderate-income families, having a parent quit his or her job or reduce work hours to care for an infant is not financially viable. Doing so would plunge the family into an economic crisis. Rather, parents should have the choice and greater flexibility in providing safe, quality care for their infants. My legislation is modeled on creative programs States have established to provide low-income parents of infants a choice between returning to work and using a State child care subsidy to care for their infant and caring for their infant themselves with a monthly child care stipend. The Choices in Child Care Act would make these programs available to families across the country. My bill amends the Child Care Development Block Grant so that low- and moderate-income parents have the option of forgoing a State childcare subsidy for infant care outside the home and instead receiving a comparable stipend to provide the care themselves while keeping the family economically stable. The bill would help parents balance work and family, help meet the critical shortage of infant child care, provide cost savings to state child care programs, support quality care for the critical first years of a child's development, and value parenting as a form of work. This legislation supports families when they need it the most by providing options for low and moderate income families when they need to care for an infant. In order to truly value families we need to make sure families at all income levels have options to do what is best for them. The Choices in Child Care Act promotes family security by ensuring low-income families have the chance to care for their infants at home and receive some, albeit modest, financial assistance. As we move forward from the celebration of the 14th anniversary of the Family and Medical Leave Act let us recognize the challenges Americans face in balancing work and family life today. The time has come, with the new 110th Congress, to give parents additional resources and options in helping them address these challenges. I urge my Senate colleagues from both sides of the aisle to join me in supporting the Choices in Child Care Act of 2007.

Mrs. CLINTON

Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, last month marked the 14th anniversary of the enactment of the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993. This law has enabled workers to take up to 12 weeks of unpaid leave to attend to an ailing family member or to care for a newborn baby. Since this landmark legislation was signed into law, more than 50 million working Americans have been able to take critical time off when necessary without putting their jobs on the line. The Family and Medical Leave Act was a critical first step in recognizing the challenges that Americans face in achieving a family- work balance. For nearly a decade and a half, it has provided the most basic protections for workers who can afford to take unpaid leave. Yet, 40 million workers cannot use the FMLA because they can't go without a paycheck. Throughout my career as a lawyer, mother, First Lady and Senator, I have sought solutions to the difficult challenges that working parents face. That is why I am pleased to reintroduce legislation, the Choice in Child Care Act of 2007, to meet the child care needs of working families. My bill provides a modest and important option for families who have none: the chance to stay home with their infants when there is no childcare available to them. This is the critical next step to ensure low-income families welcoming children in their lives are afforded more economic security than they would have otherwise. Bringing a new child into the world is one of the greatest joys a parent can experience, yet we also know that in the reality of today's economy, most parents must work to provide economic security for their newborns. In fact, 55 percent of women with infants younger than one year of age are in the workforce. As a result, working parents are faced with trying to provide economic security for their family while simultaneously ensuring that their infant receives the quality of care that he or she needs. Research shows that the quality of caretaking in the first months and years of life is critical to a newborn's brain development, social development and well-being. Yet there is currently a severe shortage of safe, affordable, quality care for infants. The number of licensed child care slots for infants meets only 18 percent of the need. The shortage is particularly acute in rural areas, and especially in rural areas that have many low-income residents. Ideally, I think we would all agree that parents who need affordable, high-quality care for their infant would provide that care themselves. However we know that, in many low- and moderate-income families, having a parent quit his or her job or reduce work hours to care for an infant is not financially viable. Doing so would plunge the family into an economic crisis. Rather, parents should have the choice and greater flexibility in providing safe, quality care for their infants. My legislation is modeled on creative programs States have established to provide low-income parents of infants a choice between returning to work and using a State child care subsidy to care for their infant and caring for their infant themselves with a monthly child care stipend. The Choices in Child Care Act would make these programs available to families across the country. My bill amends the Child Care Development Block Grant so that low- and moderate-income parents have the option of forgoing a State childcare subsidy for infant care outside the home and instead receiving a comparable stipend to provide the care themselves while keeping the family economically stable. The bill would help parents balance work and family, help meet the critical shortage of infant child care, provide cost savings to state child care programs, support quality care for the critical first years of a child's development, and value parenting as a form of work. This legislation supports families when they need it the most by providing options for low and moderate income families when they need to care for an infant. In order to truly value families we need to make sure families at all income levels have options to do what is best for them. The Choices in Child Care Act promotes family security by ensuring low-income families have the chance to care for their infants at home and receive some, albeit modest, financial assistance. As we move forward from the celebration of the 14th anniversary of the Family and Medical Leave Act let us recognize the challenges Americans face in balancing work and family life today. The time has come, with the new 110th Congress, to give parents additional resources and options in helping them address these challenges. I urge my Senate colleagues from both sides of the aisle to join me in supporting the Choices in Child Care Act of 2007.

Mrs. CLINTON

Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, more than 5 years after the 9/11 attacks, the number of victims continues to rise because of the lasting health impacts experienced by far too many of those who selflessly responded to this disaster in 2001. On that day, and in the following months, thousands worked and lived by the Ground Zero site, amidst the dust, smog, and toxic mix of debris. And now we are seeing those workers, responders, and residents become sick from what they were exposed to on 9/11 and the following months. I believe we have a moral obligation to take care of those suffering from 9/11-related illnesses. The work of Senator Harkin, Senator Byrd, Senator Specter, and all of their colleagues on the Senate Appropriations Committee has been invaluable in securing funding to address many of the health issues that have appeared following 9/11. In December 2001, we learned that hundreds of firefighters were on medical leave because of injuries related to 9/11 issues, and the Appropriations Committee responded by allocating $12 million for medical monitoring activities so that we could track and study the health impacts associated with the rescue and response efforts at the World Trade Center. Thousands of individuals signed up for this program, and in Congress, we worked to meet the demand by appropriating an additional $90 million to monitor other workers and volunteers who were at Ground Zero and Fresh Kills. Through this work, we learned that many of those who were exposed are now experiencing significant health problems from this exposure--people who were in the prime of their life before 9/11 now suffering from asthma, sinusitis, reactive airway disease, and mental health issues. So in December 2005, I worked with Senator Harkin and other appropriators, as well as my colleagues in the New York Congressional Delegation, to secure an additional $75 million in funding that would for the first time provide Federal funding for treatment to help those who were disabled by these attacks get the care that they needed. Sadly, we are once again running out of funding to take care of the heroes who never questioned their responsibility on 9/11 and are now paying a terrible price. While the President has proposed providing additional funding for treatment in the fiscal year 2008 budget, we must act sooner to provide sufficient funds to ensure treatments through the rest of the current fiscal year. That is why I introduced an amendment to the 9/11 bill we are considering today to divert $3.6 million in funding--originally part of that $20 billion secured for New York in the wake of 9/11 that the administration proposed to cut in its fiscal year 2008 budget. At a time when treatment needs are so urgent, I believe that we need to ensure that dollars that were intended for 9/11 needs can be used to address the mounting health crisis that we are facing as a direct result of these attacks. I believe it is important to raise awareness of the fact that these programs--programs that are helping tens of thousands of first responders in New York and around the Nation--are in danger of having to turn patients away. I am extremely grateful for what we have been able to accomplish with the support of Senator Harkin and other appropriators. They have shown that they consider it our national responsibility to care for those who did our country proud in the hours, days, weeks, and months following that horrific attack. I am also proud that I will be working with my colleagues on the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, including Senators Kennedy, Enzi, and Harkin, to develop a lasting solution to address these health care needs. But while we are working on those solutions, we must ensure that these programs continue to operate.

Mrs. CLINTON. I thank the Senator. On behalf of the thousands of firefighters, police officers, rescue workers, residents, students, and others who are suffering from 9/11-related illnesses, I look forward to working with you on the upcoming emergency supplemental appropriations legislation to ensure that those who are sick can receive the care they need. With this commitment, I will withdraw my amendment to this legislation.

Mrs. CLINTON

Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, I rise today to reintroduce the Paycheck Fairness Act in recognition of Women's History Month. I'd like to thank my colleagues Senators Kennedy, Harkin, Boxer, Cantwell, Dodd, Feingold, Klobuchar, Leahy, Menendez, Mikulski, Murray, Reed, Reid and Schumer for joining me in reintroducing this legislation to prevent, regulate and reduce pay discrimination for women across the country. I also want to acknowledge Congresswoman DeLauro for being the champion of this legislation in the House of Representatives. As America celebrates Women's History Month, it's important that we not only take pride in how far women have come in our lifetime, but also recognize the work we must continue to achieve true pay equity in this country. Over the past four decades, we have made tremendous strides in closing the wage gap between women and men. But research still shows us that pay discrimination continues to result in women earning less than men for performing the same job. Today, women working full time, year-round, still make only 77 cents for every dollar that a man makes--meaning that for every $100 she earns, a typical woman has $23 less to spend on groceries, housing, child care, or other expenses. Women of color fare even worse: African- American women earn only 67 cents, and Latinas only 56 cents, for every $1.00 earned by white men. Just two weeks ago, the Wall Street Journal published an article entitled ``Women Post Job Gains, Data Show.'' The article showcased proof of progress over the past decade. From the year 2000 through 2005, women posted a net increase of 1.7 million jobs paying above the median salary, while men gained a net increase of just over 220,000 of such positions, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The issue of the wage gap, however, continues to affect women workers. In 2005, the median weekly pay for women was $486, or 73 percent of that for men--$663. While we often associate the pay wage with low-paying jobs, this inequity is not exclusive to the lower class. The New York Times recently reported that Wimbledon has finally agreed to pay its women tennis champions the same amount of prize money as their male counterparts. Last year's men's champion received $1.170 million, while the tournament's women's winner got $1.117 million. That is why I am pleased to be introducing the Paycheck Fairness Act--a bill that will build on the promise of the Equal Pay Act and help close the pay gap. The Paycheck Fairness Act has three main components. First, it prevents pay discrimination before it starts. By helping women strengthen their negotiation skills and providing outreach and technical assistance to employers to ensure they fairly evaluate and pay their employees, the Paycheck Fairness Act gives employers the tools they need to level the playing field between men and women. Second, the Paycheck Fairness Act creates strong penalties to punish those who do violate the act. By strengthening the penalties for employers who violate the Equal Pay Act, this bill sends a strong message--Equal Pay is a matter to be taken seriously. And finally, the Paycheck Fairness Act ensures that the Federal Government, which should be a model employer when it comes to enforcing Federal employment laws, uses every tool in its toolbox to ensure that women are paid the same amount as men for doing the same jobs. There is no question that we have come a long way since the Equal Pay Act became law 44 years ago. But we still have a lot of work to do. According to the National Committee on Pay Equity, working women stand to lose $250,000 over the course of their career because of unequal pay practices--a difference in pay that cannot be fully explained by experience, education, or other qualifications. And the pay gap follows women into retirement: unmarried women in the workforce today will receive, on average, about $8,000 per year less in retirement income than their male counterparts. As a result, millions of American families lose out because equal pay is still not a reality. It is my hope that many more of my colleagues will join me in recognizing this is more than a women's issue--it is a family issue. It is in all of our interests to allow women to support their families and to live with the dignity and respect accorded to fully engaged members of the workforce.

Mrs. CLINTON

Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, I rise today to reintroduce the Paycheck Fairness Act in recognition of Women's History Month. I'd like to thank my colleagues Senators Kennedy, Harkin, Boxer, Cantwell, Dodd, Feingold, Klobuchar, Leahy, Menendez, Mikulski, Murray, Reed, Reid and Schumer for joining me in reintroducing this legislation to prevent, regulate and reduce pay discrimination for women across the country. I also want to acknowledge Congresswoman DeLauro for being the champion of this legislation in the House of Representatives. As America celebrates Women's History Month, it's important that we not only take pride in how far women have come in our lifetime, but also recognize the work we must continue to achieve true pay equity in this country. Over the past four decades, we have made tremendous strides in closing the wage gap between women and men. But research still shows us that pay discrimination continues to result in women earning less than men for performing the same job. Today, women working full time, year-round, still make only 77 cents for every dollar that a man makes--meaning that for every $100 she earns, a typical woman has $23 less to spend on groceries, housing, child care, or other expenses. Women of color fare even worse: African- American women earn only 67 cents, and Latinas only 56 cents, for every $1.00 earned by white men. Just two weeks ago, the Wall Street Journal published an article entitled ``Women Post Job Gains, Data Show.'' The article showcased proof of progress over the past decade. From the year 2000 through 2005, women posted a net increase of 1.7 million jobs paying above the median salary, while men gained a net increase of just over 220,000 of such positions, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The issue of the wage gap, however, continues to affect women workers. In 2005, the median weekly pay for women was $486, or 73 percent of that for men--$663. While we often associate the pay wage with low-paying jobs, this inequity is not exclusive to the lower class. The New York Times recently reported that Wimbledon has finally agreed to pay its women tennis champions the same amount of prize money as their male counterparts. Last year's men's champion received $1.170 million, while the tournament's women's winner got $1.117 million. That is why I am pleased to be introducing the Paycheck Fairness Act--a bill that will build on the promise of the Equal Pay Act and help close the pay gap. The Paycheck Fairness Act has three main components. First, it prevents pay discrimination before it starts. By helping women strengthen their negotiation skills and providing outreach and technical assistance to employers to ensure they fairly evaluate and pay their employees, the Paycheck Fairness Act gives employers the tools they need to level the playing field between men and women. Second, the Paycheck Fairness Act creates strong penalties to punish those who do violate the act. By strengthening the penalties for employers who violate the Equal Pay Act, this bill sends a strong message--Equal Pay is a matter to be taken seriously. And finally, the Paycheck Fairness Act ensures that the Federal Government, which should be a model employer when it comes to enforcing Federal employment laws, uses every tool in its toolbox to ensure that women are paid the same amount as men for doing the same jobs. There is no question that we have come a long way since the Equal Pay Act became law 44 years ago. But we still have a lot of work to do. According to the National Committee on Pay Equity, working women stand to lose $250,000 over the course of their career because of unequal pay practices--a difference in pay that cannot be fully explained by experience, education, or other qualifications. And the pay gap follows women into retirement: unmarried women in the workforce today will receive, on average, about $8,000 per year less in retirement income than their male counterparts. As a result, millions of American families lose out because equal pay is still not a reality. It is my hope that many more of my colleagues will join me in recognizing this is more than a women's issue--it is a family issue. It is in all of our interests to allow women to support their families and to live with the dignity and respect accorded to fully engaged members of the workforce.

Mrs. CLINTON

Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, I rise today to reintroduce legislation to help ensure that American students are competitive in today's global economy. If approved, The National Mathematics and Science Consistency Act would ensure that America's children have access to a rigorous math and science education. The reality is that modern technology makes it increasingly possible for employers to hire the most skilled workers wherever they live. Additionally, too many American students--even some graduates of high school and college--are not equipped with the skills they need to compete successfully in the global economy. That is why I am reintroducing the Mathematics and Science Consistency Act. This legislation calls for the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) to convene a national panel of experts to collect proven effective K-12 science and mathematics teaching standards and materials to serve as promising practices. Under this bill, it is entirely up to states whether to adopt these promising practices. States that do so, however, would be eligible for grants to acquire instructional materials, to make those materials available online to teachers and staff for free, and to train teachers to effectively use these materials. These promising practices would provide effective standards for K-12 education. Regrettably, many States have set standards for math and science education at an abysmally low level. A Fordham Institute report entitled ``The State of State Science Standards 2006'' deemed the average grade for State standards across all subjects as a ``C-minus,'' while two-thirds of our K-12 students attend schools in States with C-, D-, or F-rated standards. The result of low State standards is that States think their students are demonstrating proficiency in math and science when in fact they are not. For example, a recent Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study, the largest and most comprehensive comparative international study of education, found that 12th graders in the U.S. ranked 21st out of 40 industrialized nations on general math and science knowledge. In addition, just one in three of America's college graduates earn degrees in math, science, and engineering while two in three college graduates of other countries do so. We must act now to improve education and research in math and science if America is to retain leadership of the global economy in the 21st century. The Mathematics and Science Consistency Act will help States to raise their standards, invest in high-quality teaching through the collection of best practices, and ensure that a world-class curriculum is available to all students. I am hopeful that my Senate colleagues from both sides of the aisle will join me today to move this legislation to the floor without delay.

Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, today I am introducing the Legal Immigrant Children's Health Improvement Act, legislation that would again allow States to use Federal funds to provide critical healthcare services to pregnant women and children. I want to thank Senator Snowe for partnering with me on this bipartisan effort. All across New York and America, legal immigrants work hard, pay taxes, and exercise their civic responsibilities. I see examples of this every day in New York. They fight for our country in the military. They contribute to our Nation's competitiveness and economic growth. They help revitalize neighborhoods and small towns across the country. And most are fiercely proud to call themselves Americans. Yet, in 1996, Congress denied safety net services to legal immigrants who had been in the country for less than five years. Today, Senator Snowe and I are introducing legislation that would take a first step towards correcting that injustice. The Legal Immigrant Children's Health Improvement Act will allow States to use Federal funds to make the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) and Medicaid available to legal immigrant pregnant women and children who are within the five year ban. There is tremendous need for this legislation. An Urban Institute study found that children of immigrants under the age of 6 years are two times as likely to be in fair or poor health compared to same-age children of natives, whereas 6 to 17 year old children of immigrants are almost three times as likely to be in fair or poor health. While most children receive preventative medical care, such as vaccines and routine dental care, too often immigrant children do not. They are forced to forego treatment and can ultimately end up seeking needed care in emergency rooms--the least cost-effective place to provide care. To make matters worse, minor illnesses, which would be easily treated by a pediatrician, may snowball into life-threatening conditions. And women without access to prenatal care are four times more likely to deliver low birth weight infants and seven times more likely to deliver prematurely than women who receive prenatal care, according to the Institute of Medicine. All of these health outcomes are costly to society and to the individuals involved. Today, 16 States, including New York and Maine, use State funds to provide healthcare services to legal immigrant pregnant women and children within the five year waiting period. An additional six States provide some coverage to either pregnant woman or children. The Legal Immigrant Children's Health Improvement has been endorsed by a wide range of organizations including Asian American Justice Center, Catholic Health Association, National Immigration Law Center, National Health Law Program, Families USA, and National Council of La Raza and I want to thank them for their support. This year Congress will reauthorize the SCHIP program and it is my hope that we will finally eliminate the unfair ban on legal immigrant children and pregnant woman by incorporating the Immigrant Children's Health Improvement Act into the reauthorization of SCHIP. I look forward to working with Senator Snowe and my colleagues to enact this bill into law.

Mrs. CLINTON

Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, I rise today to reintroduce legislation to help ensure that American students are competitive in today's global economy. If approved, The National Mathematics and Science Consistency Act would ensure that America's children have access to a rigorous math and science education. The reality is that modern technology makes it increasingly possible for employers to hire the most skilled workers wherever they live. Additionally, too many American students--even some graduates of high school and college--are not equipped with the skills they need to compete successfully in the global economy. That is why I am reintroducing the Mathematics and Science Consistency Act. This legislation calls for the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) to convene a national panel of experts to collect proven effective K-12 science and mathematics teaching standards and materials to serve as promising practices. Under this bill, it is entirely up to states whether to adopt these promising practices. States that do so, however, would be eligible for grants to acquire instructional materials, to make those materials available online to teachers and staff for free, and to train teachers to effectively use these materials. These promising practices would provide effective standards for K-12 education. Regrettably, many States have set standards for math and science education at an abysmally low level. A Fordham Institute report entitled ``The State of State Science Standards 2006'' deemed the average grade for State standards across all subjects as a ``C-minus,'' while two-thirds of our K-12 students attend schools in States with C-, D-, or F-rated standards. The result of low State standards is that States think their students are demonstrating proficiency in math and science when in fact they are not. For example, a recent Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study, the largest and most comprehensive comparative international study of education, found that 12th graders in the U.S. ranked 21st out of 40 industrialized nations on general math and science knowledge. In addition, just one in three of America's college graduates earn degrees in math, science, and engineering while two in three college graduates of other countries do so. We must act now to improve education and research in math and science if America is to retain leadership of the global economy in the 21st century. The Mathematics and Science Consistency Act will help States to raise their standards, invest in high-quality teaching through the collection of best practices, and ensure that a world-class curriculum is available to all students. I am hopeful that my Senate colleagues from both sides of the aisle will join me today to move this legislation to the floor without delay.

Mrs. CLINTON

Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, today I am introducing the Legal Immigrant Children's Health Improvement Act, legislation that would again allow States to use Federal funds to provide critical healthcare services to pregnant women and children. I want to thank Senator Snowe for partnering with me on this bipartisan effort. All across New York and America, legal immigrants work hard, pay taxes, and exercise their civic responsibilities. I see examples of this every day in New York. They fight for our country in the military. They contribute to our Nation's competitiveness and economic growth. They help revitalize neighborhoods and small towns across the country. And most are fiercely proud to call themselves Americans. Yet, in 1996, Congress denied safety net services to legal immigrants who had been in the country for less than five years. Today, Senator Snowe and I are introducing legislation that would take a first step towards correcting that injustice. The Legal Immigrant Children's Health Improvement Act will allow States to use Federal funds to make the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) and Medicaid available to legal immigrant pregnant women and children who are within the five year ban. There is tremendous need for this legislation. An Urban Institute study found that children of immigrants under the age of 6 years are two times as likely to be in fair or poor health compared to same-age children of natives, whereas 6 to 17 year old children of immigrants are almost three times as likely to be in fair or poor health. While most children receive preventative medical care, such as vaccines and routine dental care, too often immigrant children do not. They are forced to forego treatment and can ultimately end up seeking needed care in emergency rooms--the least cost-effective place to provide care. To make matters worse, minor illnesses, which would be easily treated by a pediatrician, may snowball into life-threatening conditions. And women without access to prenatal care are four times more likely to deliver low birth weight infants and seven times more likely to deliver prematurely than women who receive prenatal care, according to the Institute of Medicine. All of these health outcomes are costly to society and to the individuals involved. Today, 16 States, including New York and Maine, use State funds to provide healthcare services to legal immigrant pregnant women and children within the five year waiting period. An additional six States provide some coverage to either pregnant woman or children. The Legal Immigrant Children's Health Improvement has been endorsed by a wide range of organizations including Asian American Justice Center, Catholic Health Association, National Immigration Law Center, National Health Law Program, Families USA, and National Council of La Raza and I want to thank them for their support. This year Congress will reauthorize the SCHIP program and it is my hope that we will finally eliminate the unfair ban on legal immigrant children and pregnant woman by incorporating the Immigrant Children's Health Improvement Act into the reauthorization of SCHIP. I look forward to working with Senator Snowe and my colleagues to enact this bill into law.

Mrs. CLINTON

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

Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, we are in the middle of an ongoing discussion and debate over our homeland security, and certainly, as all of us know, this remains a matter of grave concern. Homeland security means many things, and it certainly does mean that we fully and appropriately fund our police and our fire. It means we guard our ports and our infrastructure such as our tunnels and bridges, all of which are going to be the subject of the authorization legislation brought forward by the chairman and ranking member. But it also means we have to remain strong at home and we have to have the economic resources to spend on protecting ourselves. Yesterday, the Dow Jones Industrial Average plummeted 416 points--the largest single drop since the markets reopened after the September 11 attacks. While our markets were reeling, alarm bells were ringing once again over the irresponsible fiscal and economic policies of this administration that continue to surrender the economic sovereignty of our country to foreign banks, investors, and governments piece by piece. Yesterday's stock market disruption came on the heels of pessimistic economic news on the homefront and ominous comments about recession by former Fed Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan. So while it can and will be debated whether yesterday's market fluctuation was a blip or a larger indicator of our economy's vulnerabilities, it is clear that what happened underscores the exposure of our economy to a combination of economic developments in countries such as China and economic policies here at home. A scare in the Chinese stock market, based on rumors within that country, sent economic reverberations around the world. In terms of our fiscal stability, we are in uncharted waters. Markets, to a certain degree, will always be volatile and, to a great extent, we are fortunate that our domestic markets are deep enough to absorb certain shocks. But there is no precedent in U.S. history for an economy as large as ours to be as heavily in debt to its trading partners as the United States is to countries such as China, Japan, and others. When it comes to the fiscal recklessness and economic fatalism of the current administration, the writing may not be on the wall, but yesterday the writing was on the ``Big Board.'' In the face of this challenge, the economic policies of the last 6 years have contributed to an erosion of U.S. economic sovereignty and have made us more dependent on the economic decisions of other nations. As I have proposed, and continue to support, we need to take steps to restore fiscal responsibility and sound economic policies based on the facts, not ideology. I will continue to support legislative steps to require that the Bush administration address mounting fiscal and trade imbalances. Today I sent letters to Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke urging them to address many of our underlying economic vulnerabilities resulting from our debt and deficits. Our Nation has been running record deficits and digging a massive fiscal hole of nearly $8.8 trillion as foreign countries have been buying our debt and in essence becoming our bankers. According to the most recent Treasury statistics, foreign nations now hold more than $2.2 trillion, or 44 percent, of all publicly held U.S. debt. Japan and China alone hold nearly $1 trillion. To put it plainly: 16 percent of our entire economy is being loaned to us by the Central Banks of other nations. I know other Members of this Chamber, such as Senator Conrad, the chairman of our Budget Committee, share my concern over the implications of this massive foreign debt. While the foundations of our fiscal house are eroded by our fiscal policies, our failure to pursue smart economic policies has added strain on our economy. Every single year since President Bush took office we have had a record trade deficit. Last year the deficit was $764 billion. One of the ramifications of that trade deficit to foreign interests is the control by foreign interests of more and more of our assets. How can we negotiate fair, pro-American trade agreements and ensure foreign countries uphold these agreements when we sit across the negotiating table not only from our competitor but from our banker as well? While ceding our economic sovereignty, we also sow the seeds of economic vulnerability. Precipitous decisions by any country holding our debt could create much graver economic problems than what we saw yesterday. I believe in smart, pro-American trade, and globalization does hold incredible promise to continue to improve our standard of living and to create economic growth. But for too long, the choices have been painted far too starkly and with a broad political brush. In fact, we can protect our economic interests while promoting trade. We can secure our economic sovereignty while promoting policies that secure our global economic position. Trade does not have to be a zero sum game. The choice is not between fatalism and protectionism. The choice is between policies that work and policies that are not working. We have to curb these deficits and ensure foreign governments do not own too much of our Government debt. We need a firewall that keeps our economic future more in our own hands. In years past I have worked with other Members of Congress who share my concerns. For example, during the last session of Congress I supported legislation by Senator Dorgan and then-Congressman Cardin that rings an alarm bell when U.S. foreign-owned debt reaches 25 percent of GDP or the trade deficit reaches 5 percent of GDP. It would require the administration to develop a plan of action to address these conditions and report their findings to Congress. At the very least this proposal would compel our Government to deal with these economic issues while they are problems but before they become crises. I believe proposals such as these need to be considered in order to put our economic house in order, as we can too easily be held hostage to the economic policies that are being made not in Washington and not in the markets of New York but in Beijing, Shanghai, Tokyo, and elsewhere. Yesterday it was the selloff of foreign stocks that had reverberations in U.S. markets. But if China or Japan made a decision to decrease their massive holdings of U.S. dollars, there could be a currency crisis and the United States would have to raise interest rates and invite conditions for a recession. Precipitous decisions by any country holding our debt could create far graver economic consequences than what we witnessed yesterday. While it is clear we should take reasonable steps now to ensure that the economic problems of today do not become the crises of tomorrow, we are awaiting some action by the administration that gives us a clear signal that we can begin to restore responsibility. This is a long-term problem, but it is one that I think we must respond to. We ignore it at our peril. As we saw yesterday, the United States is interconnected with globalized markets. They are not going to leave anyone out. We will all be impacted by decisions that we have nothing to do with making, even if they are rumors or quickly reversed. It is my hope what happened yesterday, which gave us headlines across the world, will open our eyes to what we need to do to take action to put ourselves in a much more competitive position and to begin to move away from the loss of economic sovereignty we have seen over the last years. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mrs. CLINTON

Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, today I am reintroducing with my colleague Senator Sununu The Cameron Gulbransen Kids and Cars Safety Act, a bill to improve the child safety features in new vehicles. While we hear a great deal about automobile accidents, we don't hear nearly as much about non-traffic automobile accidents, which can be just as tragic. This bill is named in honor of a 2-year-old Long Island boy who was killed when his father accidentally backed over him in his driveway. Since 2000, over 1,150 children have died in non-traffic, non-crash incidents, and this number has been steadily rising. The average age of victims in these cases is just 1 year old, and in 70 percent of backover cases, a parent, relative or close friend is behind the wheel. This bill is aimed at preventing other families from suffering this fate. The Cameron Gulbransen Kids and Cars Safety Act would make new passenger motor vehicles safer in three important ways. First, it requires a detection system to alert drivers to the presence of a child behind the vehicle. Second, it will ensure that power windows automatically reverse direction when they detect an obstruction--preventing children from being trapped, injured or killed. And finally, the bill will require the vehicle service break to be engaged in order to prevent vehicles from unintentionally rolling away. The bill also establishes a child safety information program administered by the Secretary of Transportation to collect non-traffic, non-crash incident data and disseminate information to parents about these hazards and ways to mitigate them. This bill proves that with modest, cost-effective steps, we can prevent many tragic car-related accidents from occurring. Power window sensors, for example, cost around $10 a window. Brakeshift interlocks are already standard in most passenger vehicles, but will cost only $5 where needed. Backover warning systems cost approximately $300 a car, far cheaper than DVD and stereo systems. This inexpensive technology could save thousands of children's lives. I fought long and hard into the last hours of the 109th Congress to get this bill through and I know that families, advocates and many of my colleagues are poised to continue that momentum in the new Congress. I am proud to be reintroducing the Cameron Gulbransen Kids and Cars Safety Act of 2007 and urge all my colleagues to join me in supporting this bill. Together, we can ensure that we have safer cars and safer kids across our country.

Mrs. CLINTON

Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, today I am reintroducing with my colleague Senator Sununu The Cameron Gulbransen Kids and Cars Safety Act, a bill to improve the child safety features in new vehicles. While we hear a great deal about automobile accidents, we don't hear nearly as much about non-traffic automobile accidents, which can be just as tragic. This bill is named in honor of a 2-year-old Long Island boy who was killed when his father accidentally backed over him in his driveway. Since 2000, over 1,150 children have died in non-traffic, non-crash incidents, and this number has been steadily rising. The average age of victims in these cases is just 1 year old, and in 70 percent of backover cases, a parent, relative or close friend is behind the wheel. This bill is aimed at preventing other families from suffering this fate. The Cameron Gulbransen Kids and Cars Safety Act would make new passenger motor vehicles safer in three important ways. First, it requires a detection system to alert drivers to the presence of a child behind the vehicle. Second, it will ensure that power windows automatically reverse direction when they detect an obstruction--preventing children from being trapped, injured or killed. And finally, the bill will require the vehicle service break to be engaged in order to prevent vehicles from unintentionally rolling away. The bill also establishes a child safety information program administered by the Secretary of Transportation to collect non-traffic, non-crash incident data and disseminate information to parents about these hazards and ways to mitigate them. This bill proves that with modest, cost-effective steps, we can prevent many tragic car-related accidents from occurring. Power window sensors, for example, cost around $10 a window. Brakeshift interlocks are already standard in most passenger vehicles, but will cost only $5 where needed. Backover warning systems cost approximately $300 a car, far cheaper than DVD and stereo systems. This inexpensive technology could save thousands of children's lives. I fought long and hard into the last hours of the 109th Congress to get this bill through and I know that families, advocates and many of my colleagues are poised to continue that momentum in the new Congress. I am proud to be reintroducing the Cameron Gulbransen Kids and Cars Safety Act of 2007 and urge all my colleagues to join me in supporting this bill. Together, we can ensure that we have safer cars and safer kids across our country.

Mrs. CLINTON

Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, I am pleased to re-introduce the Kinship Caregiver Support Act today with my friend and colleague, Senator Olympia Snowe. The growth of kinship care is a phenomenon that is quietly changing the face of the American family and creating new challenges for our Nation's child welfare system. This bill would be a huge help to kinship caregivers in New York and across the country. Nationwide, now more than ever children are living in households headed by grandparents and other relatives. In New York City alone, there are over 245,000 adolescents already living in grandparent households. Nationwide, an estimated 20,000 children living in foster care could leave the system if Congress made subsidized guardianship available to their families. As caregivers who often become parents unexpectedly, these generous family members face unique challenges to successfully raising children. These challenges are physical, emotional and of course, financial. Grandparents and other relatives raising children often encounter a variety of unnecessary barriers, including difficulties enrolling children in school, authorizing medical treatment, maintaining their public housing leases, obtaining affordable legal services, and accessing a variety of Federal benefits and services. Almost one-fifth of grandparents responsible for their grandchildren live in poverty. The Kinship Caregiver Support Act attempts to address the full range of difficulties facing kinship caregivers, by allowing relatives to become formal guardians while receiving some financial assistance. This bill will provide relative caregivers with the information and assistance they need to thrive as non-traditional families. First, the Act contains a ``subsidized guardianship provision'', which will give States the option to use their Title IV-E funds to provide payments to grandparents and other relatives who have assumed legal guardianship of children they have cared for as foster parents. The Act also establishes the Kinship Navigator Program, which will provide families with the guidance they need to learn how to obtain health care coverage for the children in their care, apply for housing assistance, locate childcare, enroll children in school, and gain access to other services. Finally, this legislation will require States to notify grandparents and other close relatives when children enter the foster care system. Unfortunately, grandparents and other relatives often do not know when their grandchildren or nieces and nephews come under the care of the State. Notifying grandparents and other relatives when children enter the foster care system will make it easier for families to stay together. So many grandparents and other relatives are making great personal sacrifices to provide safe and loving homes for the children in their care. It is my hope that my colleagues will join Senator Snowe and me as we continue this fight for children and families.

Mrs. CLINTON

Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, I am pleased to re-introduce the Kinship Caregiver Support Act today with my friend and colleague, Senator Olympia Snowe. The growth of kinship care is a phenomenon that is quietly changing the face of the American family and creating new challenges for our Nation's child welfare system. This bill would be a huge help to kinship caregivers in New York and across the country. Nationwide, now more than ever children are living in households headed by grandparents and other relatives. In New York City alone, there are over 245,000 adolescents already living in grandparent households. Nationwide, an estimated 20,000 children living in foster care could leave the system if Congress made subsidized guardianship available to their families. As caregivers who often become parents unexpectedly, these generous family members face unique challenges to successfully raising children. These challenges are physical, emotional and of course, financial. Grandparents and other relatives raising children often encounter a variety of unnecessary barriers, including difficulties enrolling children in school, authorizing medical treatment, maintaining their public housing leases, obtaining affordable legal services, and accessing a variety of Federal benefits and services. Almost one-fifth of grandparents responsible for their grandchildren live in poverty. The Kinship Caregiver Support Act attempts to address the full range of difficulties facing kinship caregivers, by allowing relatives to become formal guardians while receiving some financial assistance. This bill will provide relative caregivers with the information and assistance they need to thrive as non-traditional families. First, the Act contains a ``subsidized guardianship provision'', which will give States the option to use their Title IV-E funds to provide payments to grandparents and other relatives who have assumed legal guardianship of children they have cared for as foster parents. The Act also establishes the Kinship Navigator Program, which will provide families with the guidance they need to learn how to obtain health care coverage for the children in their care, apply for housing assistance, locate childcare, enroll children in school, and gain access to other services. Finally, this legislation will require States to notify grandparents and other close relatives when children enter the foster care system. Unfortunately, grandparents and other relatives often do not know when their grandchildren or nieces and nephews come under the care of the State. Notifying grandparents and other relatives when children enter the foster care system will make it easier for families to stay together. So many grandparents and other relatives are making great personal sacrifices to provide safe and loving homes for the children in their care. It is my hope that my colleagues will join Senator Snowe and me as we continue this fight for children and families.