Jean Carnahan

Mrs. CARNAHAN

Mrs. CARNAHAN. Madam President, the disintegration of the Soviet Union more than a decade ago resulted in economic and political chaos. The Soviet Union possessed more than 10,000 nuclear weapons, and dozens of nuclear weapons production facilities sprawled across 11 time zones. As a result of the economic collapse, funding fell short for security at nuclear weapons storage and production facilities. This left dangerous amounts of deadly weapons and materials vulnerable to theft. Since 1991, there have been countless documented cases of individuals stealing plutonium and uranium from the former Soviet Union. So far, we believe no ``nuclear smuggler'' has taken enough material to make a nuclear device. The real problem is the uncertainty of the unknown. Since the end of the Cold War, we have done a great deal to curb the threat posed by weapons of mass destruction. The United States has taken the lead in the international community to help Russia secure its nuclear weapons and material. The Department of Defense's Cooperative Threat Reduction Program and the sister programs at the Department of Energy are truly ``defense by other means.'' The Defense Department's program is more commonly known as the Nunn-Lugar program, in recognition of its creators, my colleague from Indiana, Dick Lugar, and former Senator Sam Nunn of Georgia. Because of these two men, we face less of a threat from the Soviet Union's nuclear legacy than we would have otherwise. The Department of Defense has focused on destroying nuclear weapons and improving security over weapons in transit and storage. The Department of Energy has focused its own threat reduction efforts on locking up uranium and plutonium that could be used in a nuclear weapon and helping develop peaceful, commercial job opportunities for weapons scientists. The investments made in these programs to secure Soviet nuclear weapons and materials have truly been in our national interest. However, as far-reaching as these programs have been, they were not designed to address some of the terrorist threats we now face. In particular, there are three gaps in our nuclear threat reduction policies that need to be dealt with. First, these programs do not apply to countries outside of the former Soviet Union. Second, these programs do not address the threat of radiological materials. Third, these programs do not deal with preventing terrorist sabotage of nuclear power plants. Expanding our threat reduction programs globally is an important priority. So far, most of our efforts have focused on the dangerous situation in the former Soviet Union. This makes sense, since most of the under-secured nuclear weapons useable material is located in that part of the world. However, we need to pay more attention to the smaller amounts of weapons material in other parts of the world that are not under tight enough lock and key. This means building up security at every type of nuclear facility worldwide, including nuclear power plants, processing facilities, storage sites and other related buildings. We also need to start focusing on radiological materials. And by radiological materials, I am referring to highly radioactive substances other than weapons-useable uranium or plutonium. A ``dirty bomb'' combines radioactive material that could be found at nuclear power plants, medical facilities or other industrial sites with explosives. This weapon would not be as immediately destructive as a nuclear bomb. But it would cause significant physical, environmental, economic, and psychological damage to our citizens, and to our national security. Indeed, intelligence reports indicate that Osama bin Ladin has been actively pursuing the materials to develop a ``dirty bomb.'' In fact, he called the acquisition of weapons of mass destruction a ``religious duty.'' In addition, there have been reports of meetings between Pakistani nuclear weapons scientists and al-Qaeda operatives and between Iraqi officials and al-Qaeda representatives. We will never know what went on at these meetings. But we must take every step possible to thwart their evil plans. Finally, we will contribute to our national security by improving nuclear power plant security outside the United States. The Department of Energy has been working for years to improve the safety of Soviet- designed nuclear power plants in the former Soviet Union and Eastern Europe. This is to prevent the possible repeat of the Chernobyl disaster. However, to date, protecting these plants from terrorist sabotage has never been addressed. Before the tragedies of September 11, we never thought such an attack was realistic. Now that our reality has changed, we are providing greater security to protect our power plants here at home. These efforts will serve as good models to upgrade the security at nuclear plants in Russia and elsewhere. Today I am introducing a bill that would help bolster our national security by improving the security of all nuclear and radiological material worldwide. My bill addresses each of the three gaps in our current efforts that I have just identified. First, it calls on the Department of Energy in cooperation with the Departments of State and Defense to develop a program that would encourage all countries to adhere to the highest security standards for their nuclear material wherever it is used or stored; Second, it requires the Department of Energy to establish a systematic approach for securing radiological materials other than uranium and plutonium outside the United States; and Third, it directs the Department of Energy, in consultation with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the International Atomic Energy Agency, to develop plans for preventing terrorist attacks on nuclear power plants outside the United States. This bill is a cost-effective and short-term way to counter current threats to our national security and it promotes world cooperation in securing nuclear materials. Already, this bill has gained the endorsement of several world leaders in the field of nuclear non- proliferation, including: Dr William Potter, Director of the Monterey Institute's Center for Nonproliferation Studies; Dr. Graham Allison, former Assistant Secretary of Defense; and Rose Gottemoeller, former Deputy UnderSecretary at the Department of Energy. At this time I ask unanimous consent that letters of support from each of these individuals and organizations be printed in the Record.

Mrs. CARNAHAN. In January of this year, I traveled, with eight of my colleagues, to meet with the leaders of Pakistan, Turkey, Afghanistan, and several countries of the former Soviet Union. We were impressed with their level of commitment to the war against terrorism, and to making the world safe from weapons of mass destruction. We are all in this struggle against terrorism together. The only way to lock up all nuclear and radiological material is for friends and allies to work together and share the burden. We will spend several billions of dollars this year to improve our homeland security, and rightly so. But we also must recognize that we are only as safe as the weakest link in the chain-link fence guarding some nuclear material in far away country. I fully support President Bush's call to action, when he said late last year, with Russian President Putin by his side, that ``Our highest priority is to keep terrorists from acquiring weapons of mass destruction.'' I hope my colleagues will join me as well in supporting this effort.

Mrs. CARNAHAN

Mrs. CARNAHAN. Madam President, the disintegration of the Soviet Union more than a decade ago resulted in economic and political chaos. The Soviet Union possessed more than 10,000 nuclear weapons, and dozens of nuclear weapons production facilities sprawled across 11 time zones. As a result of the economic collapse, funding fell short for security at nuclear weapons storage and production facilities. This left dangerous amounts of deadly weapons and materials vulnerable to theft. Since 1991, there have been countless documented cases of individuals stealing plutonium and uranium from the former Soviet Union. So far, we believe no ``nuclear smuggler'' has taken enough material to make a nuclear device. The real problem is the uncertainty of the unknown. Since the end of the Cold War, we have done a great deal to curb the threat posed by weapons of mass destruction. The United States has taken the lead in the international community to help Russia secure its nuclear weapons and material. The Department of Defense's Cooperative Threat Reduction Program and the sister programs at the Department of Energy are truly ``defense by other means.'' The Defense Department's program is more commonly known as the Nunn-Lugar program, in recognition of its creators, my colleague from Indiana, Dick Lugar, and former Senator Sam Nunn of Georgia. Because of these two men, we face less of a threat from the Soviet Union's nuclear legacy than we would have otherwise. The Department of Defense has focused on destroying nuclear weapons and improving security over weapons in transit and storage. The Department of Energy has focused its own threat reduction efforts on locking up uranium and plutonium that could be used in a nuclear weapon and helping develop peaceful, commercial job opportunities for weapons scientists. The investments made in these programs to secure Soviet nuclear weapons and materials have truly been in our national interest. However, as far-reaching as these programs have been, they were not designed to address some of the terrorist threats we now face. In particular, there are three gaps in our nuclear threat reduction policies that need to be dealt with. First, these programs do not apply to countries outside of the former Soviet Union. Second, these programs do not address the threat of radiological materials. Third, these programs do not deal with preventing terrorist sabotage of nuclear power plants. Expanding our threat reduction programs globally is an important priority. So far, most of our efforts have focused on the dangerous situation in the former Soviet Union. This makes sense, since most of the under-secured nuclear weapons useable material is located in that part of the world. However, we need to pay more attention to the smaller amounts of weapons material in other parts of the world that are not under tight enough lock and key. This means building up security at every type of nuclear facility worldwide, including nuclear power plants, processing facilities, storage sites and other related buildings. We also need to start focusing on radiological materials. And by radiological materials, I am referring to highly radioactive substances other than weapons-useable uranium or plutonium. A ``dirty bomb'' combines radioactive material that could be found at nuclear power plants, medical facilities or other industrial sites with explosives. This weapon would not be as immediately destructive as a nuclear bomb. But it would cause significant physical, environmental, economic, and psychological damage to our citizens, and to our national security. Indeed, intelligence reports indicate that Osama bin Ladin has been actively pursuing the materials to develop a ``dirty bomb.'' In fact, he called the acquisition of weapons of mass destruction a ``religious duty.'' In addition, there have been reports of meetings between Pakistani nuclear weapons scientists and al-Qaeda operatives and between Iraqi officials and al-Qaeda representatives. We will never know what went on at these meetings. But we must take every step possible to thwart their evil plans. Finally, we will contribute to our national security by improving nuclear power plant security outside the United States. The Department of Energy has been working for years to improve the safety of Soviet- designed nuclear power plants in the former Soviet Union and Eastern Europe. This is to prevent the possible repeat of the Chernobyl disaster. However, to date, protecting these plants from terrorist sabotage has never been addressed. Before the tragedies of September 11, we never thought such an attack was realistic. Now that our reality has changed, we are providing greater security to protect our power plants here at home. These efforts will serve as good models to upgrade the security at nuclear plants in Russia and elsewhere. Today I am introducing a bill that would help bolster our national security by improving the security of all nuclear and radiological material worldwide. My bill addresses each of the three gaps in our current efforts that I have just identified. First, it calls on the Department of Energy in cooperation with the Departments of State and Defense to develop a program that would encourage all countries to adhere to the highest security standards for their nuclear material wherever it is used or stored; Second, it requires the Department of Energy to establish a systematic approach for securing radiological materials other than uranium and plutonium outside the United States; and Third, it directs the Department of Energy, in consultation with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the International Atomic Energy Agency, to develop plans for preventing terrorist attacks on nuclear power plants outside the United States. This bill is a cost-effective and short-term way to counter current threats to our national security and it promotes world cooperation in securing nuclear materials. Already, this bill has gained the endorsement of several world leaders in the field of nuclear non- proliferation, including: Dr William Potter, Director of the Monterey Institute's Center for Nonproliferation Studies; Dr. Graham Allison, former Assistant Secretary of Defense; and Rose Gottemoeller, former Deputy UnderSecretary at the Department of Energy. At this time I ask unanimous consent that letters of support from each of these individuals and organizations be printed in the Record.

Mrs. CARNAHAN. In January of this year, I traveled, with eight of my colleagues, to meet with the leaders of Pakistan, Turkey, Afghanistan, and several countries of the former Soviet Union. We were impressed with their level of commitment to the war against terrorism, and to making the world safe from weapons of mass destruction. We are all in this struggle against terrorism together. The only way to lock up all nuclear and radiological material is for friends and allies to work together and share the burden. We will spend several billions of dollars this year to improve our homeland security, and rightly so. But we also must recognize that we are only as safe as the weakest link in the chain-link fence guarding some nuclear material in far away country. I fully support President Bush's call to action, when he said late last year, with Russian President Putin by his side, that ``Our highest priority is to keep terrorists from acquiring weapons of mass destruction.'' I hope my colleagues will join me as well in supporting this effort.

Mrs. CARNAHAN

Mrs. CARNAHAN. Madam President, I am proud to take this opportunity to recognize the Mexican holiday, Cinco de Mayo. This holiday is a day to celebrate and appreciate Mexican history and culture. I would also urge all Americans to take this opportunity to learn more about the important contributions Mexicans and Mexican- Americans have made to the United States. The Cinco de Mayo holiday dates back to the mid-19th century. In 1862, the democratic nation of Mexico found itself under invasion from the French, led by Napoleon III. On its march to conquer Mexico, the French army met the Mexican army in the city of Puebla, just 100 miles east of Mexico City. On May 5, 1862, the ill-equipped and outnumbered Mexican army under Texas-born General Ignacio Zaragoza, would defy all odds and defeat the superior French army at the Batalla de Puebla. This defeat of the French, one of the strongest militaries in the world, would become a symbol of the strength and determination of the Mexican people. As immigration to the United States increased during the Mexican Revolution and in subsequent years, Mexicans and Mexican-Americans demonstrated these same qualities on the battlefield in defense of the American flag. They were among the first to volunteer for the U.S. armed forces during World War I and an estimated 375,000-500,000 Mexican-American soldiers served with honor during World War II. Jose P. Martinez of Colorado would become the first American and one of many Mexican-Americans to receive the Congressional Medal of Honor for his heroism during World War II. Americans of Mexican descent would also serve in the wars in Korea, Vietnam, the Cold War, and the Gulf War. They continue to enlist in high numbers and remain committed to military service in defense of the United States. Military service is just one of countless contributions Mexicans and Mexican-Americans have made to the United States. Cesar Chavez's passion for justice and the right to organize resulted in improved living and working conditions for people in California and throughout the United States. Diego Rivera's artwork continues to inspire Latino artists as well as others to paint murals that beautify our cities and are available for the general public to appreciate. Missouri is also proud of one of its own, Hector Barreto, who currently serves as Administrator of the U.S. Small Business Administration. There are currently 13 Mexican-American members in the House of Representatives and I look forward to the day when I will have Mexican-American colleagues here in the U.S. Senate as well. The same strength of character and determination that was displayed by the Mexican army at the Batalla de Puebla is evident in today's Mexican-American leaders in business, labor, not-for-profits, government, and in the arts. It is fitting that as we celebrate the Cinco de Mayo holiday, we also recognize the valuable cultural, social, and political contributions Mexicans and Mexican-Americans have made and continue to make in the United States.

Mrs. CARNAHAN

Mrs. CARNAHAN. Mr. President, early Sunday morning there were horrible tornadoes that killed a young child, injured many others and caused extensive damage throughout Marble Hill and other communities in southern Missouri. I believed it was important to visit the affected communities on Monday to comfort them and lend support. I regret that due to scheduling difficulties, I could not return to Washington in time for the vote on the motion to proceed to the Andean Trade Act.

Mrs. CARNAHAN

Mrs. CARNAHAN. Mr. President, the expedited bankruptcy procedures provided in Chapter 12 of the bankruptcy code are extremely important for family farmers struggling during difficult times. I have been working diligently to extend these provisions and to make them permanent. I am pleased that both the Farm Bill and the Bankruptcy Bill Conference Committees are currently considering permanent extensions. The bill we are about to pass is an important stop-gap measure that will provide much needed assistance to family farmers until a permanent extension is enacted.

Mrs. CARNAHAN

Mrs. CARNAHAN. Mr. President, last year, Democrats and Republicans joined together with President Bush to enact a monumental and far- reaching education bill. This new law, the Leave No Child Behind Act, will bring new resources and meaningful reform to our Nation's schools. It establishes new academic standards for students, increases teacher training, and demands new levels of accountability, while increasing flexibility with Federal funds at the State and local level. I am hopeful that this law will help close the achievement gaps that separate many poor and minority students from their peers. Indeed, I am optimistic that it will improve education for all students. But Congress has, as Harry Truman once said, some ``unfinished business' when it comes to our schools. We have left out a critical component when it comes to ensuring that our schools and our teachers and, most importantly, our students will succeed. Today, one in five schools fails to meet building or safety codes or needs extensive repairs, renovations, and maintenance. Across the country, run-down, overcrowded, dilapidated schools jeopardize the health and safety of our students. Across the country, deteriorating schools inhibit the ability of our children to learn. And yet, with the exception of the Impact Aid program, which I strongly support, the new education reform law did not include funds for school renovation and repair. Nor were any funds for renovation and repair made available through the appropriations process. The administration's most recent budget even eliminates the Emergency School Repair Program. And yet, data from the National Center for Education Statistics tells us that nearly $127 billion in renovations and repairs are needed to upgrade existing schools to good physical condition. Furthermore, this figure does not include the funding needed for construction to accommodate increasing enrollments in districts across the country. We have these pressing needs at a time when resources are scarce. Our States and local governments are still feeling the effects of the recession. And for too many years, Congress has failed to provide States and localities the funding it promised long ago to share the cost of special education. The Federal Government cannot ask States and localities to shoulder the burden of school renovation and repair costs alone. If the Federal Government stands on the sidelines, it will be at the expense of our children. But neither should Washington attempt to single-handedly solve this problem. Congress should not be in the business of giving direct grants to communities to build schools. I strongly believe that education is a national priority but a local responsibility. The legislation being introduced today, the ``Investing for Tomorrow's Schools Act,'' answers this call for partnership. Our bill provides initial funding for the creation of State and regional infrastructure banks. These banks will make loans to districts for school construction or modernization needs. This mechanism helps to alleviate the financial burden for States and localities but provides sufficient flexibility to meet local needs. The structure of the bill ensures that states and localities have the requisite flexibility to tailor programs to meet their unique needs. The bill requires a 25 percent State match, which ensures the commitment of State government to the program while allowing States to leverage their dollars four-to-one. It is a voluntary program--only for those states who choose to participate. To those who have argued that the Federal Government should have no role in school facilities, and likewise to those who call for overly intrusive Federal programs, this bill offers a common-sense compromise. I remember visiting a school in Nixa, MO, where every fourth-grader in the district attends class in trailers behind the school. I have subsequently learned from teachers and administrators in other districts that the kids in trailers often have the best deal because conditions in the actual school buildings are often far worse than they are in the trailers. Every State in this country has districts in need, in both urban and rural and suburban communities. The needs span the social economic strata of our Nation. Disadvantaged and minority students are most likely to attend school in decrepit and obsolete buildings. I would imagine that we have all seen schools that are either freezing cold or unbearably hot, that have poor lighting or inadequate bathroom facilities. But students in more affluent suburbs--where there is often explosive growth in the community--also suffer from overcrowding. Most parents would agree that they would like their children to attend schools where the student to teacher ratio is low, where class size is small. Yet, without enough space, small class size is an impossibility. And despite these conditions, we are asking our children for more than ever before. A fellow Missourian, Mark Twain, once told the following story: When I was a boy on the Mississippi River there was a proposition in a township there to discontinue public schools because they were too expensive. An old farmer spoke up and said, ``If they stopped building the schools they would not save anything, because every time a school was closed a jail had to be built.'' I have great faith in America's children. The time to invest in them is now. The investments we make in them will be returned to us many times over.

Mrs. CARNAHAN

Mrs. CARNAHAN. Madam President, today I am proud to introduce the Uterine Fibroids Research and Education Act 2002. This bipartisan legislation addresses a serious health problem that affects women during their reproductive years. At least twenty to thirty percent of all women aged 35 and older have symptomatic fibroids that require treatment. This number rises to approximately fifty percent for African-American women. I am pleased that two of my colleagues, Senator Jeffords and Senator Mikulski, are joining me in sponsoring this legislation. Both are strong advocates for women's health. Uterine fibroids are benign tumors that impact the reproductive health of women, particularly minority women. If they go undetected or untreated, uterine fibroids can lead to childbirth complications or infertility, among other things. For those who do seek treatment, the option prescribed most often is a hysterectomy. Uterine fibroids are the top reason for hysterectomies currently being performed in this country. A hysterectomy is a major operation--the average recovery time is six weeks. This is just the physical impact, the emotional impact lasts much longer. We need to invest additional resources in research, so that there are more treatment options for women, including options less drastic than a hysterectomy. We also need to increase awareness of uterine fibroids, so that more women will recognize the symptoms and seek treatment. To accomplish both of these goals we need a sustained Federal commitment to better understanding uterine fibroids. That is why I am introducing this legislation today. My bill has two components. First, it authorizes $10 million for the National Institutes of Health, (NIH), for each of our years to conduct research on uterine fibroids. Second, the bill supports a public awareness campaign. It calls on the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services to carry out a program to provide information and education to the public regarding uterine fibroids. The content of the program shall include information on the incidence and prevalence of uterine fibroids and the elevated risk for minority women. The Secretary shall have the authority to carry out the program either directly or through contract. This legislation will make a meaningful difference in the lives of women and their families across this country. I encourage the entire Senate to support this important legislation.

Mrs. CARNAHAN

Mrs. CARNAHAN. Madam President, today I am proud to introduce the Uterine Fibroids Research and Education Act 2002. This bipartisan legislation addresses a serious health problem that affects women during their reproductive years. At least twenty to thirty percent of all women aged 35 and older have symptomatic fibroids that require treatment. This number rises to approximately fifty percent for African-American women. I am pleased that two of my colleagues, Senator Jeffords and Senator Mikulski, are joining me in sponsoring this legislation. Both are strong advocates for women's health. Uterine fibroids are benign tumors that impact the reproductive health of women, particularly minority women. If they go undetected or untreated, uterine fibroids can lead to childbirth complications or infertility, among other things. For those who do seek treatment, the option prescribed most often is a hysterectomy. Uterine fibroids are the top reason for hysterectomies currently being performed in this country. A hysterectomy is a major operation--the average recovery time is six weeks. This is just the physical impact, the emotional impact lasts much longer. We need to invest additional resources in research, so that there are more treatment options for women, including options less drastic than a hysterectomy. We also need to increase awareness of uterine fibroids, so that more women will recognize the symptoms and seek treatment. To accomplish both of these goals we need a sustained Federal commitment to better understanding uterine fibroids. That is why I am introducing this legislation today. My bill has two components. First, it authorizes $10 million for the National Institutes of Health, (NIH), for each of our years to conduct research on uterine fibroids. Second, the bill supports a public awareness campaign. It calls on the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services to carry out a program to provide information and education to the public regarding uterine fibroids. The content of the program shall include information on the incidence and prevalence of uterine fibroids and the elevated risk for minority women. The Secretary shall have the authority to carry out the program either directly or through contract. This legislation will make a meaningful difference in the lives of women and their families across this country. I encourage the entire Senate to support this important legislation.

Mrs. CARNAHAN

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

Mrs. CARNAHAN. Mr. President, I rise today to add my voice to those who support the ethanol provisions in this legislation. Ethanol is one of our most promising renewable resources. By blending ethanol with gasoline, we can reduce oil imports and reduce the environmental damage of vehicle emissions. As America struggles to meet its growing energy needs, ethanol provides extraordinary opportunities. The product is made from corn. It can be produced in abundance, unlike other fossil fuels. The more ethanol we use to fuel our cars and trucks, the less oil we need to import from hostile countries such as Iraq. Rather than looking to the Mideast for energy, we would be far better served to look to the Midwest. This legislation lays out a plan for increasing the amount of ethanol Americans use to meet their transportation fuel needs. I find it absurd that some claim these provisions are included in this bill simply for the benefit of ethanol producers. Ethanol is an environmentally safe and economically efficient way to reduce our dependence on foreign sources of oil. In short, additional use of ethanol to meet our needs for transportation fuel will be good for our environment, good for our economy, and good for our national security interests. Not only do I support the renewable fuels standard we are debating today, I look forward to supporting an amendment that will be offered by the Finance Committee. That amendment incorporates several aspects of legislation that I introduced last year. Specifically, it will expand eligibility for the tax credit available to small producers of ethanol. These changes will ensure that farmer- owned cooperatives are eligible to receive a tax credit. It will also encourage small producers to expand the size of their operation to meet increased demand. These changes will help us meet the demand for ethanol envisioned by the bill. Ethanol is truly a win-win solution to our energy needs. The increased use required by this legislation represents a positive step, one for our farmers, for our environment, and for our energy independence. I support the compromise in this bill that will lead to increased uses of ethanol, and I urge my colleagues to support it as well. The renewable fuels standard included in this bill is an important part of a balanced energy policy that we need. Transport of Spent Nuclear Fuel Mr. President, on a separate topic, I would like to discuss an amendment I will be offering next week. Two years ago, the Department of Energy proposed to send a shipment of foreign spent nuclear fuel through Missouri. The route selected went through the heavily populated areas of St. Louis, Columbia, and Kansas City, along a major highway, Interstate 70, that was undergoing major repairs. Governor Carnahan intervened, and an alternate, more rural route was selected. The shipment was completed without incident. Then last year, Missouri was asked to accept another shipment through the State. Governor Holden raised the same objections that had been discussed the year earlier. And after he did, a curious thing happened: The Department of Energy held up shipments from a reactor inside Missouri. This reactor produced isotopes used in cancer treatment. If these shipments did not go forward as scheduled, the reactor would have to be closed, halting production of needed medicines for bone cancer patients. I insisted these two matters--the shipments from the reactor in Missouri and the transport of spent nuclear fuel through the State--be delinked, and they were. Eventually, Governor Holden worked out a safety protocol with the Department and the foreign spent fuel shipment went forward. Although the shipment was completed, we encountered some problems with the timing of its passage through Missouri. Our experience in Missouri over the past 2 years suggests the Department of Energy's route selection process deserves careful study. How we deal with spent nuclear fuel in this country may be a matter of great controversy, but regardless of one's position on this topic, everyone ought to be able to agree that when spent fuel has to be transported we want it to be done in the safest possible way. One of the key components in ensuring safe transport of spent fuel is the process for selecting the safest route. My amendment would commission the National Academy of Sciences study of the Department of Energy's route selection process for shipments of spent nuclear fuel. The National Academy would examine the way DOE picks potential routes, the factors it uses to evaluate the safety of these routes, including traffic and accident data, the quality of roads and the proximity to population centers and venues where people congregate, and the process it uses to compare the risks associated with each route. There are a number of reasons why it makes sense to commission this study now. First, the responsibility for this program is divided among multiple agencies. The Department of Transportation sets the regulations for transportation of spent nuclear fuel. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has oversight responsibility and the Department of Energy makes the final decision in consultation with these organizations. A study will help ensure these agencies are working together and are properly performing their function. Secondly, these agencies are using regulations drafted in the 1990s. The devastating events of September 11 have taught us we have to rethink all of our security procedures, and while I understand the Nuclear Regulatory Commission has issued some additional guidelines since that date, I believe a complete review is in order and an NSA study will help us ensure that our agencies are focused on the appropriate safety factors. Finally, Congress will be considering a highway bill next year. If there are safety problems on routes that are likely to be used for cross-country shipments of spent nuclear fuel, we ought to address them in the highway bill. We need to start the study now, however, if we want to have the information in time for a debate on the highway bill. This amendment is not intended to take sides on the controversial issue that will soon be before this Senate. Its purpose is to get a neutral, nonpartisan review of an important public safety function that has received very little scrutiny. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mrs. CARNAHAN

Mrs. CARNAHAN. I ask unanimous consent to proceed as in morning business for 10 minutes.

Mrs. CARNAHAN. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mrs. CARNAHAN

Mrs. CARNAHAN. Madam President, last week, as people of many faiths celebrated holy days of peace, our television screens were filled with visions of horror. Young Palestinian men and women, strapping explosives to their bodies and detonating themselves in crowds of Israeli civilians, destroyed dozens of lives and with them exploded the hopes and dreams for a peaceful resolution of the Middle East crisis. The words used to acclaim these acts are deeply troubling. The murderous bomber who killed celebrants at the Passover meal was deemed ``a glorious martyr.'' Such a proclamation is a cruel hoax, perpetrated by those dedicated to the destruction of the Jewish state. It comes from those who have never admitted in their hearts--and will never admit that Israel has the right to exist within secure and peaceful borders. They unleash their hate under the banner of such groups as Hamas, and Hezbollah, the Fatah and the Al Asqa Mosque Martyrs' Brigade. Unfortunately, the leader of the Palestinian Authority, Yasser Arafat, is unwilling or unable to prevent the wave of assaults against Israeli civilians. For far too many years he has talked the talk of peace; but he has never walked the walk for peace. When it has served his interest to speak of reconciliation, of compromise, of security for Israel--he has done so. But days, or even hours, later when speaking to his people, or the Arab world, he uses language that urges armed struggle, a war of liberation, and a return to conquered lands. He has not prepared his people for peace. He has not explained the need for compromise. In fact, maps in school books do not even show the State of Israel. On the White House lawn, President Clinton urged both sides to take a chance for peace. Israel was willing to do just that. Israel traded land in the hope for peace. Israel promised even more land, and a Palestinian state. What did the Palestinians do? They did not create a government to serve the best interests of their people. Yasser Arafat created a gulag on Israel's back doorstep--one riddled by corruption and bent on crushing dissent. The Palestinian leader built an infrastructure for terror and then incited his people telling them that Palestine would run from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea. When the parties met at Camp David, Israel did what it had never done before. It put the issue of Jerusalem on the table. But the most generous offer Israel could possibly make, was not only rejected, it was brutalized by violence. That violence has intensified for 18 months, mutating into waves of suicidal terror. In the minds of most Israelis, this cruel response has undermined Yasser Arafat as a genuine partner in search of peace, for Israel now has to question whether land for peace is actually an equation for more violence. Israel has an obligation to its citizens to respond. When al Qaeda attacked America, we sent our military across the globe to seek out the terrorists in training camp by camp, cave by cave. Israel has terrorist's cells just a couple miles from its largest cities. It had no choice but to take them out--root and branch. America is conducting her own war on global terrorism in the wake of attacks on our country and to address the threat of Saddam Hussein acquiring weapons of mass destruction. But the United States must at the same time devote its full resources to resolving the Israeli- Palestinian conflict. We must do so in a way, however, that does not undermine the core principle of our war against terrorism. There must be zero tolerance for terrorism. Such deeds cannot have, or be perceived to have, any political benefit. Those who seek a political solution to conflict must first rebuild trust by rejecting terror. Unfortunately, both the Arab League and Islamic Conference have failed to do so. Nonetheless, Secretary Powell's mission takes place against the backdrop of a new Arab initiative. This initiative has many flaws, but it is significant. Arab governments have now demonstrated a desire to play a constructive role in resolving the conflict. Since the Palestinian leadership has been totally discredited as peace partners, the path to peace goes through Amman, Cairo, and Riyadh. If these governments are serious peace-seekers, other steps must follow. They must denounce terror against Israel with the same strength and passion as they denounce actions taken against Palestinians. They must halt their financial backing for terrorist groups dedicated to the destruction of Israel. They must put an end to the anti-semetic, anti- Israel, and anti-American rhetoric in their state sponsored media. Finally, they must convince Yasser Arafat, and more importantly the Palestinian people, to abandon their self-destructive behavior. Had the Passover ceremony in Netanya not been violated by a murderous bomber, those present, together with Jews around the world, would have ended the ceremony by saying: ``next year in Jerusalem.'' The Jerusalem to which they aspire, however, is not the city we see today--a city stricken with fear; a city of shattered windows and shattered lives where calls to worship have been replaced by sirens and ambulances. No, the Jerusalem to which they aspire, is a Jerusalem of tolerance, of faith, and of peace. While that vision seems remote at the moment, we are reminded of the words of Louis Pasteur, who said: Never let yourselves be discouraged by the sadness of certain hours which pass over nations. For those who earnestly seek peace, even dark days can be the harbingers of brighter tomorrows. Our prayers today are for a brighter tomorrow for all in the Mideast, for all people of goodwork.

Mrs. CARNAHAN

Mrs. CARNAHAN. Madam President, nearly 2,000 years ago, a ``poll'' was taken on the road between Jericho and Jerusalem. We are told that only one out of three was willing to turn from their personal pursuits to help someone who had been physically assaulted and left without care. This story of the Good Samaritan is an ancient and familiar teaching. We must be the people today who will pause in our own pursuits to help heal the wounds in our society. April is Child Abuse Prevention Month. Today I want to challenge all of us to face this horrific national tragedy head on. We should never lose sight of the pressing needs of our most precious resource, our children. Across the nation, neglect and abuse figures reach 2.5 million. Not only has the reported number of abused and neglected children increased, but their problems are more severe and difficult to treat. Abuse is not new, nor is it likely to go away, but I believe we are lowering the tolerance for this kind of behavior. Policy makers, community leaders, educators and parents came together on April 1st in Kansas City to demonstrate their commitment to the issue. These are the types of actions we need to help build strong families and eliminate the circumstances leading to abuse. As legislators, we are making significant strides in our crusade against abuse. I supported $82.6 million in continued funding of the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act during the appropriations process. President Bush signed the appropriations bill into law on January 10, 2002. I was pleased to support the Promoting Safe and Stable Families Amendments Act that the President also recently signed into law. This bill reauthorizes and expands several programs designed to help children and families in high-risk situations. Specifically, the bill established grants for programs for mentoring children of prisoners, and amends the Foster Care Independent Living program to provide for educational and training vouchers for youths aging out of foster care. It also extends adoption assistance eligibility and prevents states from opting out of criminal background checks for foster and adoptive parents. In addition, I have cosponsored a bill, which would restore the Social Services Block Grant (SSBG) funding. Missouri uses its Social Services Block Grant funds to provide aid to families sand children with identified problems in the areas of child abuse and neglect, and services to juvenile offenders committed to the custody of the State's Division of Youth Services as well as other services to our most vulnerable citizens. I am committed to increasing funding for this important program. Yes, we have had significant victories, but there is much left to do. As long as there is one child that needs our help, we must remain committed. In closing, let me share a few lines from a poem I ran onto recently. I hope you will keep its vivid imagery before you as we continue to search for solutions. Let us remember the children who can't bound down the streets in a new pair of sneakers, who never go to the circus, who live in an X-rated world. Let us remember the children who have no safe blanket to drag behind them, whose pictures aren't on anybody's dresser, whose monsters are real. And let us remember the children who want to be carried and for those who must, gor those we never give up on and for those who don't get a second chance, for those who cling to the shadows and for those who will grab the hand of anybody kind enough to offer it.

Mrs. CARNAHAN

Mrs. CARNAHAN. Mr. President, today my friend, Senator Nelson of Florida, and I are introducing important legislation to restore accountability to the accounting industry. The Integrity in Auditing Act will help renew Americans' confidence in our financial markets. Investors rely on the financial information that is provided by companies and certified by independent auditors. This legislation is designed to make sure that these auditors are truly independent. Over the course of the last few months, I have been looking into the devastating events related to the collapse of the Enron Corporation. As a member of both the Governmental Affairs Committee and the Commerce Committee, I have participated in numerous hearings on this matter. We have heard testimony from many experts about the different things that went wrong at Enron. The shareholders were failed by many parties who were supposed to be looking out for their interests: the company executives, the board of directors, the Government watchdogs, and certainly, the accountants who certified that Enron's financial statements were accurate. But, this is not just about Enron. This is about the disturbing number of restatements that firms have filed in recent years. It is no longer uncommon for a company to say that profits they previously touted were actually fictitious. This is absolutely unacceptable. And to the extent that inaccurate accounting can be eliminated by removing any conflicts of interest that are preventing better audits, Congress must act quickly to do so. Let me be clear, that I have the deepest respect for the many accountants in this country who are extremely hard working and honest. This legislation is not meant to impugn individual accountants or the accounting industry. Rather, it will improve this industry. The Integrity in Auditing Act will ensure that accountants can do their jobs with the highest professionalism, free from any pressures to overlook suspicious bookkeeping by their clients. The reforms we propose today are urgent and in the interest of all Americans. Auditors who simply rubber stamp questionable financial reports for their clients do a tremendous disservice to all investors. If they prevent true and accurate information from coming to light, auditors endanger the hard earned savings of working Americans. Many parents are investing money every year to pay for the college expenses of their children. Many workers are saving for their golden years in 401(k) plans or other retirement accounts. Young couples, saving to buy their first homes, often put money into mutual funds or money market accounts. All of these investors are entitled to accurate information so that they can make wise decisions about their savings. This legislation is an important step toward ensuring that investors can trust the financial information provided by companies. Let me briefly summarize how this legislation establishes the independence of auditors. First, it prohibits audit firms from providing non-audit services to their clients. An exception is made if the client's Audit Committee believes it is in the best interest of the shareholders to also receive tax services consulting from the audit firm. But it will prevent companies from engaging in extremely lucrative management consulting or technology consulting contracts with the auditors who ought to be providing unbiased assessments of the companies' financial health. Second, this legislation requires that every seven years a company rotate the firm that performs its independent audit. Arthur Levitt, the former chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission made it very clear why such rotation is important. In his testimony before the Senate Banking Committee he proposed that audit firms ought to be rotated in order ``to ensure that fresh and skeptical eyes are always looking at the numbers.'' This legislation will also close the revolving door that could compromise independent auditors. It prohibits outside accountants from working, in a management capacity, for a client company for a period of 1 year. This simple restriction will ensure that shareholders, and not company management, remain an auditor's primary concern. In the interest of providing full information to investors, our legislation also requires that any connections between the company and a member of the board of directors be fully disclosed, whether those connections are familial, financial, or professional. It also prohibits any directors who have such potential conflicts of interest from serving on the board's audit or compensation committees. Lastly, this legislation would express the sense of the Senate that the Securities and Exchange Commission ought to take a tough approach to the enforcement of securities laws. America has the most vibrant and dynamic economy in the world. The foundation of our economy is our capital markets, which are robust and resilient. But the success of these markets depends on the free flow of accurate, reliable information. Our markets are the envy of the world because of the confidence investors have in the private and public institutions that produce, verify, and analyze this information. The legislation we are introducing today will improve our markets. It will restore public confidence in auditors. And it frees accountants from any inappropriate conflicts of interest. I encourage my colleagues to support this bill.

Mrs. CARNAHAN

Mrs. CARNAHAN. Mr. President, today my friend, Senator Nelson of Florida, and I are introducing important legislation to restore accountability to the accounting industry. The Integrity in Auditing Act will help renew Americans' confidence in our financial markets. Investors rely on the financial information that is provided by companies and certified by independent auditors. This legislation is designed to make sure that these auditors are truly independent. Over the course of the last few months, I have been looking into the devastating events related to the collapse of the Enron Corporation. As a member of both the Governmental Affairs Committee and the Commerce Committee, I have participated in numerous hearings on this matter. We have heard testimony from many experts about the different things that went wrong at Enron. The shareholders were failed by many parties who were supposed to be looking out for their interests: the company executives, the board of directors, the Government watchdogs, and certainly, the accountants who certified that Enron's financial statements were accurate. But, this is not just about Enron. This is about the disturbing number of restatements that firms have filed in recent years. It is no longer uncommon for a company to say that profits they previously touted were actually fictitious. This is absolutely unacceptable. And to the extent that inaccurate accounting can be eliminated by removing any conflicts of interest that are preventing better audits, Congress must act quickly to do so. Let me be clear, that I have the deepest respect for the many accountants in this country who are extremely hard working and honest. This legislation is not meant to impugn individual accountants or the accounting industry. Rather, it will improve this industry. The Integrity in Auditing Act will ensure that accountants can do their jobs with the highest professionalism, free from any pressures to overlook suspicious bookkeeping by their clients. The reforms we propose today are urgent and in the interest of all Americans. Auditors who simply rubber stamp questionable financial reports for their clients do a tremendous disservice to all investors. If they prevent true and accurate information from coming to light, auditors endanger the hard earned savings of working Americans. Many parents are investing money every year to pay for the college expenses of their children. Many workers are saving for their golden years in 401(k) plans or other retirement accounts. Young couples, saving to buy their first homes, often put money into mutual funds or money market accounts. All of these investors are entitled to accurate information so that they can make wise decisions about their savings. This legislation is an important step toward ensuring that investors can trust the financial information provided by companies. Let me briefly summarize how this legislation establishes the independence of auditors. First, it prohibits audit firms from providing non-audit services to their clients. An exception is made if the client's Audit Committee believes it is in the best interest of the shareholders to also receive tax services consulting from the audit firm. But it will prevent companies from engaging in extremely lucrative management consulting or technology consulting contracts with the auditors who ought to be providing unbiased assessments of the companies' financial health. Second, this legislation requires that every seven years a company rotate the firm that performs its independent audit. Arthur Levitt, the former chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission made it very clear why such rotation is important. In his testimony before the Senate Banking Committee he proposed that audit firms ought to be rotated in order ``to ensure that fresh and skeptical eyes are always looking at the numbers.'' This legislation will also close the revolving door that could compromise independent auditors. It prohibits outside accountants from working, in a management capacity, for a client company for a period of 1 year. This simple restriction will ensure that shareholders, and not company management, remain an auditor's primary concern. In the interest of providing full information to investors, our legislation also requires that any connections between the company and a member of the board of directors be fully disclosed, whether those connections are familial, financial, or professional. It also prohibits any directors who have such potential conflicts of interest from serving on the board's audit or compensation committees. Lastly, this legislation would express the sense of the Senate that the Securities and Exchange Commission ought to take a tough approach to the enforcement of securities laws. America has the most vibrant and dynamic economy in the world. The foundation of our economy is our capital markets, which are robust and resilient. But the success of these markets depends on the free flow of accurate, reliable information. Our markets are the envy of the world because of the confidence investors have in the private and public institutions that produce, verify, and analyze this information. The legislation we are introducing today will improve our markets. It will restore public confidence in auditors. And it frees accountants from any inappropriate conflicts of interest. I encourage my colleagues to support this bill.

Mrs. CARNAHAN

Mrs. CARNAHAN. Mr. President, today marks the final stage for congressional action on campaign finance reform legislation. That we have reached this point is a testament to the leadership of my colleagues, John McCain and Russ Feingold. I thank them for their dedication. The American people are grateful to them for helping to restore our democracy. Our Founding Fathers gave us a tremendous gift: the experiment in self-government, an experiment that embodies faith in mankind, a revolutionary idea of governance. To those who say Americans have deviated from this course, to those who say Americans have become apathetic or disinterested, I say Americans cherish their democracy as never before. Dating back to the birth of our Nation, numerous observers have visited America's shores to witness firsthand the wonders of this Government. In ``Democracy in America,'' Alexis de Tocqueville commented on the trust vested by the American people in their elected officials. He said: The electors see their representatives not only as a legislator for the state, but also as the natural protector of local interests in the legislature; indeed, they almost seem to think that he has a power of attorney to represent each constituent. Certainly, De Tocqueville identified a sacred trust--a trust still held and cherished by the American people. We, as elected officials, must not jeopardize that trust. Voters understand the danger of money in politics. Voters understand that the so-called special interests can have an insidious effect on good government. They have seen Enron reel and topple. Between 1989 and 2001, Enron contributed nearly $6 million to Federal parties and candidates. It is fair for our constituents -- many of whom lost their savings when Enron collapsed--to ask what Enron got in return. Now voters are calling for our Government to take action to prevent special interests from having the ability to whisper in the ear of elected officials simply because their campaign coffers have been filled. The clarion call for action can no longer be ignored. We must have systemic change. The legislation before us today cleans up our system and strengthens our democracy. Banning unlimited contributions eliminates the very worst aspect of our campaign finance system: huge contributions that distort the democratic process. Banning soft money will not make our system perfect, but it will cleanse our politics and make it possible for the voices of ordinary Americans to be heard. No longer will wealthy special interest groups have an advantage over average, hard-working citizens. By diminishing the role of money in politics, this bill will help to ensure that elected officials spend less time fundraising and more time doing the job they were elected to do. This bill will strengthen democracy by strengthening the faith that Americans have in their elected officials and Government. No one understands the connection between campaign finance reform and love of country better than my colleague, John McCain. His service and his sacrifice for the Nation stand as an inspiration for all of us. His dedication to the cause of reform is a continuation of that service. Vaclav Havel once said that ``democracy is like a horizon, always approaching.'' Democracy has always been a work in progress. In fact, I am reminded of a story once told about President Eisenhower, who had a painting hung in his office--the Oval Office. It was a painting of the signing of the Declaration of Independence. The strange thing about the painting was that it was not completed. It was only two-thirds complete. There was some raw, unfinished canvas in one corner. Someone asked him: ``Why did you hang such a picture?'' He said: ``I found it in the basement of the White House. The painting had been commissioned many years earlier, but the painter had died before the work was completed.'' But Eisenhower hung it anyhow because he said it reminded him that democracy is an unfinished work and that there is room in the picture for all of us. Campaign finance reform reminds us that democracy is an unfinished work, and the passage of this bill will ensure us that there is room in the picture for all of us. Thank you, Mr. President.

Mrs. CARNAHAN

Mrs. CARNAHAN. Madam President, the Senate is engaged in an important debate on our Nation's energy policy. America needs an energy policy that reduces our dependency on imported oil, one that increases our energy efficiency, promotes the use of renewable fuels, and encourages additional domestic production of fossil fuels. We need an energy policy for the 21st century--not a pipeline to the past. The bill the Senate is now considering is a good foundation for this debate. This legislation promises to increase our domestic natural gas supply dramatically. It improves energy efficiency standards. It requires that the Federal Government lead in using our natural resources more efficiently. To me, the most exciting aspect of this bill is that it encourages production and use of renewable fuels. One of the most promising of these is ethanol. By blending ethanol with gasoline, we can reduce our oil imports and we can reduce the environmental damage of vehicle emissions. This legislation lays out a plan for increasing the amount of ethanol Americans use, and I strongly support these provisions. As America struggles to meet its growing energy needs, ethanol provides extraordinary opportunities. This product is made from corn and, unlike fossil fuels, can be produced in abundance. The more ethanol we use to fuel our cars and trucks, the less oil we will need to import from hostile countries such as Iraq. Rather than looking to the Mideast for energy, we would be far better off to look to the Midwest. With the use of a corn-based product such as ethanol, we can create an enormous market for home-grown agricultural products. At the same time, we can reduce the emission of harmful greenhouse gases. In short, ethanol use is good for the economy, good for the environment, and good for our national security interests. Ethanol is a relatively new fuel, and we are still building the infrastructure and capacity for wider use of this product. Last year, I introduced legislation to promote the production and the use of ethanol-blended fuels and other value-added agricultural products. My legislation proposed to expand eligibility for the tax credit available for small producers of ethanol. I am very pleased that these aspects of my bill have been included in the amendment crafted by the Senate Finance Committee. These changes will ensure that farmer-owned cooperatives are eligible to receive the tax credit. They will also encourage small producers to expand the size of their operations to meet increased demands. Under this legislation, facilities that produce as much as 60 million gallons a year could still qualify as small producers. These changes are necessary if America is to meet the demand for ethanol envisioned by this bill. Last year, America produced less than 2 billion gallons of ethanol. Under this legislation, annual ethanol use would increase to 5 billion gallons over the next 10 years. Ethanol is truly a win-win solution to our energy needs. The increased use required by this legislation represents a positive step for our farmers, for our environment, and for energy independence. I support the compromise of this bill that will lead to the increased use of ethanol, and I urge my colleagues to support it as well. I yield the floor.

Mrs. CARNAHAN

Mrs. CARNAHAN. Madam President, today I commend the Girl Scouts of America on the anniversary of its 90th year of operation. The objective of the Girl Scouts is ``to discover the fun, friendship, and power of girls together.'' Experiences such as field trips, community service, and working with others help them to develop their full potential. These actions are greatly needed in America and an amazing feat when you consider that 99 percent of all adults that participate in leading the Girl Scouts are volunteers. The effects of this organization extend not from one generation but to many, with the oldest active member being 97, and the youngest, the new Brownie, starting out at age 5. The Girl Scouts is a quintessential American institution that has exported its successful strategy to 140 countries, and a worldwide family of 8.5 million girls. The Girl Scouts participate in cultural exchanges that allow many to gather worldwide experiences that they otherwise would not have been able to attain. There is even a bi- partisan Troop Capitol, made up of Congressional members from both the Senate and House. The women of the Senate have dedicated the book Nine and Counting to the girls of America, with some of the proceeds going to the Girl Scouts. The GSA has spent much of its time teaching young women about professional fields that do not ordinarily attract women. The past year's focus was the field of engineering. The girls not only studied engineering but also had the opportunity for a hands-on approach, thanks to the Society of Women Engineers donating their time. Girls succeed when we set the bar high for them. The Girl Scouts gives them the skills, but more importantly the confidence, to reach these goals and beyond. We must thank Juliette Gordon Low, who on this day in 1912 founded the Girl Scouts. Her desire and foresight to create an organization for young girls started with 18 girls and a budget that was funded by selling her pearl necklace. It has become one of the most recognized organizations in America. Though some traditions thankfully remain steadfast, notably the exceptional Thin Mint cookies, the GSA has evolved to address the events of the day. From Women's Suffrage to Civil Rights to the environment, this organization has not backed away from taking a stand on the issues. They have an amazing past and a bright future. I am sure they will continue to be a force to be reckoned with, a positive force shaping the lives of tomorrow's leaders. Congratulations to the Girl Scouts and thank you to all those who have contributed their time, energy, and love to making this organization an American success story.

Mrs. CARNAHAN

Mrs. CARNAHAN. Mr. President, today I am pleased to vote in favor of legislation that will extend unemployment benefits for workers across America who have lost their jobs since this recession began last March. Congress ought to have acted much sooner. Thousands of people have exhausted their unemployment benefits and have had to resort to extraordinary measures to take care of their families while they look for another job. They should not have had to wait this long for assistance. I am relieved that they will not have to wait any longer. This bill also provides tax relief to businesses in order to boost the economy and ensure a robust recovery. I have long supported provisions to provide bonus depreciation and net operating loss carry back to businesses. I believe that these steps will help our economic engine create more jobs. This legislation also includes tax provisions that have recently expired or are about to expire. It extends the Welfare to Work tax credit which is so vital to our hopes for renewed economic growth. And it provides tax deductions to construct the infrastructure necessary for the widespread use of renewable fuels such as ethanol. In addition, I strongly support the measures included in this bill that will contribute to the recovery of New York City. The devastation suffered in lower Manhattan last September will be difficult to overcome. It will take a long time. But all Americans want to see the city reclaim its standing as a proud center of commercial activity. The measures included in this legislation are an important step in that recovery process. Let me state for the record, I have some reservations about this bill. I do not believe that this is the best stimulus package the Senate has considered this year. I strongly supported the consensus package offered by Senator Daschle in January. That bill would have provided tax rebates to those low-income Americans who did not receive them last year. It would have limited the business tax incentives to a shorter timeframe, thereby really promoting investment in the near future. I have also been very supportive of efforts to help unemployed workers secure health insurance for themselves and their families. I am very disappointed that this legislation make no progress on that front. And most important, Senator Daschle's bill included financial assistance to our states that are facing such dire fiscal crises. I supported increasing the Federal matching money for the Medicaid program to help states meet the additional demands for social services that are being placed on them as they respond to the economic downturn. Most states do not have the option of engaging in deficit spending, no matter what the circumstances. Yet the legislation we have before us today will make their job more difficult. Rather than lending a helping hand to states, we have just reduced their tax revenues. I believe this is the largest failing of this bill. And I will continue to work with my colleagues to find ways that we can help states cope with the pressure on their budgets. In spite of its flaws, I support this compromise legislation. It is not the bill I would have crafted myself, but I believe that every Senator here could make the same statement. this is a compromise. And on balance this legislation will be good for our economy, and is vital for those workers who are still struggling to find new jobs.

Mrs. CARNAHAN

Mrs. CARNAHAN. Mr. President, as the last few months have shown, America's citizen soldiers and airmen are vital to Homeland Security. Air Guard fighter pilots have patrolled the skies over our largest cities. Army Guard units police our air terminals and ports of entry. These brave men and women stand sentry over our Nation. They are making America safer. But we must be ready to respond if terrorists again succeed in bringing harm to American people. We must be ready to rescue the victims, care for the sick, and aid the injured. This will take cooperation from every level of government--local, State, and Federal agencies. Dr. Jeffery Lowell is the St. Louis Mayor's Chief of a special team called the Medical Critical Incident Response Group. He is responsible for determining how the region's 30-plus hospitals will provide medical aid to the 2\1/2\ million residents of the St. Louis metropolitan area. Dr. Lowell reports only that 70 to 80 critical care beds are available at any one time. But we need to prepare for the possibility that an attack could generate hundreds, perhaps thousands, of injuries. Additionally, the entire St. Louis metropolitan area does not have enough emergency responders to care for so many victims. Help would need to come from other cities, other States. This would take time, many hours, even days. In situations like this, lost time means lost lives. There is an answer to this problem, and it involves the same Guard men and women I mentioned earlier. The answer is the Expeditionary Medical System, or EMEDS. EMEDS is a new rapid response medical system. It was created by the Air Force to rush its medics with blazing speed anywhere in the world they are needed, at a moment's notice. Our military relies on this life-saving capability during wartime, but it could prove just as valuable to the civilian community here, in America. The legislation I am introducing today would establish an EMEDS program in the Air Guard. This bill gives the Air Guard an EMEDS program so that we are prepared for any disaster or attack on the home front, as our troops have been on the war front. Our Guard soldiers and airmen pride themselves on being light, lean, and lethal. EMEDS will make our Guard medics light, lean, and life- saving, able to react within minutes to an attack. The new equipment and training that EMEDS would provide the Guard will allow it to respond to attacks or disasters within minutes. And once on site, Guard EMEDS will be able to remain there for days without re-supply, they are self-sustaining. They would assist local responders. EMEDS will care for sick, provide emergency medicine to wounded, even perform life-saving surgery. Additionally, Guard EMEDS would be able to perform in a biological, chemical, or radiological warfare environment. If the pilot program is successful, I would hope each State's Guard will acquire EMEDS capability. America needs this capability as its citizens grapple with the emerging threats facing them within the United States. The National Guard is the perfect organization to provide Americans this valuable homeland defense initiative. This bill is supported by the U.S. Air Force Surgeon General as well as several other national military organizations such as the Air Force Sergeants Association, National Guard Association and the Air Force Association. I am proud to offer this bill. Guard EMEDS is a ground-breaking initiative. This first step toward ensuring that each State, through its Guard units, can medically respond to disasters and terrorist attacks with live-saving immediacy. I believe this measure is of vital importance to our national security. I urge my colleagues to support this bill's passage.

Mrs. CARNAHAN

Mrs. CARNAHAN. Mr. President, as the last few months have shown, America's citizen soldiers and airmen are vital to Homeland Security. Air Guard fighter pilots have patrolled the skies over our largest cities. Army Guard units police our air terminals and ports of entry. These brave men and women stand sentry over our Nation. They are making America safer. But we must be ready to respond if terrorists again succeed in bringing harm to American people. We must be ready to rescue the victims, care for the sick, and aid the injured. This will take cooperation from every level of government--local, State, and Federal agencies. Dr. Jeffery Lowell is the St. Louis Mayor's Chief of a special team called the Medical Critical Incident Response Group. He is responsible for determining how the region's 30-plus hospitals will provide medical aid to the 2\1/2\ million residents of the St. Louis metropolitan area. Dr. Lowell reports only that 70 to 80 critical care beds are available at any one time. But we need to prepare for the possibility that an attack could generate hundreds, perhaps thousands, of injuries. Additionally, the entire St. Louis metropolitan area does not have enough emergency responders to care for so many victims. Help would need to come from other cities, other States. This would take time, many hours, even days. In situations like this, lost time means lost lives. There is an answer to this problem, and it involves the same Guard men and women I mentioned earlier. The answer is the Expeditionary Medical System, or EMEDS. EMEDS is a new rapid response medical system. It was created by the Air Force to rush its medics with blazing speed anywhere in the world they are needed, at a moment's notice. Our military relies on this life-saving capability during wartime, but it could prove just as valuable to the civilian community here, in America. The legislation I am introducing today would establish an EMEDS program in the Air Guard. This bill gives the Air Guard an EMEDS program so that we are prepared for any disaster or attack on the home front, as our troops have been on the war front. Our Guard soldiers and airmen pride themselves on being light, lean, and lethal. EMEDS will make our Guard medics light, lean, and life- saving, able to react within minutes to an attack. The new equipment and training that EMEDS would provide the Guard will allow it to respond to attacks or disasters within minutes. And once on site, Guard EMEDS will be able to remain there for days without re-supply, they are self-sustaining. They would assist local responders. EMEDS will care for sick, provide emergency medicine to wounded, even perform life-saving surgery. Additionally, Guard EMEDS would be able to perform in a biological, chemical, or radiological warfare environment. If the pilot program is successful, I would hope each State's Guard will acquire EMEDS capability. America needs this capability as its citizens grapple with the emerging threats facing them within the United States. The National Guard is the perfect organization to provide Americans this valuable homeland defense initiative. This bill is supported by the U.S. Air Force Surgeon General as well as several other national military organizations such as the Air Force Sergeants Association, National Guard Association and the Air Force Association. I am proud to offer this bill. Guard EMEDS is a ground-breaking initiative. This first step toward ensuring that each State, through its Guard units, can medically respond to disasters and terrorist attacks with live-saving immediacy. I believe this measure is of vital importance to our national security. I urge my colleagues to support this bill's passage.

Mrs. CARNAHAN

Mrs. CARNAHAN. Madam President, I rise today to introduce important legislation for homeland defense, the Weapons of Mass Destruction Responder Training Facility Act of 2002. America's war against international terrorism has increased the need to prepare against the threat of weapons of mass destruction, known as WMDs. Currently the Army's frontline of defense against WMD threats, Fort Leonard Wood, does not have the ability to conduct full-scale, joint training year round. This preparation gap must be closed. Our national security depends on the ability to effectively respond to a WMD attack. That is why I have introduced legislation to create a permanent training facility at Fort Leonard Wood. Fort Leonard Wood has no dedicated facility for training active duty and National Guard WMD responders. This prevents both joint training and the expansion of coordination among all WMD responders. Last October, we in this body learned first hand the importance of a coordinated response to WMD attacks. When letters, filled with anthrax, were mailed to members of Congress, 50 of our colleagues in the Senate and their staffs were evicted from the Hart office building for over three months. Experts from several agencies and departments, who never prepared together to respond to a WMD attack, worked to overcome setbacks and difficulties to make sure the Hart building was safe again. I thank them for all their hard work. But we now know that to prepare for future threats, those responsible for responding to WMD attacks must train together. Constructing of a permanent facility will enable joint training and cooperation of WMD Civil Support Teams; Department of Defense Emergency Responders; Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear Instillation Support Teams; and Active and Reserve Component Chemical Units. The need to conduct joint operations and training year round is important and immediate. It is vital to national security. This is why the Army has placed the highest priority on building a permanent facility at Fort Leonard Wood. This legislation will compliment S. 1909, which was introduced by my friend and colleague from Missouri. Senator Bond's legislation calls for the establishment of a unified command for homeland defense, a post both the President and the Secretary of Defense support. S. 1909 will allow the Department of Defense to more effectively manage homeland defense resources by centrally locating the unified command within the United States, away from a major population center at an Armed Forces facility already in use for WMD training. Fort Leonard Wood meets all of these requirements and seems like an ideal candidate to fulfill this new and important national security role. But Fort Leonard Wood is not yet ready. While it has taken the lead in preparing WMD responders, there is yet another step to take. We must ensure that the country is prepared for future attacks by establishing a permanent training facility now.