Jean Carnahan

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.

Mrs. CARNAHAN

Mrs. CARNAHAN. Mr. President, when I think of women who have put their stamp on history, I think of so many ``Wonder Women'' from Lucretia Mott to Eleanor Roosevelt to Sally Ride. While these names are recognizable to all of us, there are others--teachers, mothers, grandmothers--who are unsung heroines. They are women who greatly influenced our lives. I have also come to admire our 19th-century counterparts--the women who were warriors on the front lines of the slavery, suffrage, and temperance battles. These early advocates of social justice continue to inspire us today. With few resources at their command, they were forced to use the power of ideas to affect change. The pen became a mighty sword; the voice, a thunderous cannon. They shook the 19th century. Two of these women were contemporaries. They were both reared in New England, were married, had large families and overwhelming personal responsibilities. They were especially sensitive to injustice. Both changed the thinking of the nation on the dominant issues of their day. Beyond that, the similarities cease. One was from a prominent family, the daughter of a renowned clergyman. Unlike most women of her time, she was well-educated--a teacher and a writer. The other woman was a slave, unable to read or write. But she could speak, and did that quite well. One was Harriet Beecher Stowe, the author of Uncle Tom's Cabin--the woman whose writings did more to arouse the conscience of the nation against slavery than anyone of her day. Harriet had seven children and a husband who was a hypochondriac. He took to his bed whenever there was a crisis in life, leaving her to manage on her own. In spite of the demands on her, Harriet managed to do what she loved most--to write. At the time, women with political opinions were not taken seriously, but that did not prevent her from expressing her ideas. She somehow found time to write--letters, articles, entire books--thirty-three literary works in all. Uncle Tom's Cabin broke all sales records of its day. Her success brought her to the attention of the President of the United States. It is said that Abraham Lincoln referred to her as ``the little lady whose book started this big war.'' Harriet recognized what women have known for centuries, that there are duties, intrusions, necessary things that lay claim to our time and thoughts. That was certainly true of Isabella Baumfree, the hearty slave woman who faced more than her share of adversity. She was quite a contrast to the very proper, primly dressed, and precisely spoken Mrs. Stowe. By 1828, New York had abolished slavery. Around the same time, Isabella felt the call to preach. She was 46. She took the name Sojourner Truth because it was her intention to sojourn the land and proclaim the truth. Since she couldn't read the Bible, Isabella had it read to her, and she memorized large portions of it. She dictated her life's story and sold it to support herself. Wherever she spoke, her simple but dynamic message attracted crowds. She confounded the skeptics with plain truth and images from her own life, but critics hounded her. When told that there were threats to burn the auditorium where she was to speak, Sojourner replied, ``Let them burn the building and I will speak upon the ashes.'' Women of accomplishment have always been adaptive. They find a way when there is no way. They wear many hats. Being generalists, they come at problems from many different perspectives. A good example of this can be seen in the life of a St. Louis lady by the name of Frances Gage, or Aunt Fanny as she was known in the women's movement. Aunt Fanny loved to give speeches at the women's conventions. She often told her audiences about an incident that had inspired her to become an activist on behalf of women. ``At age ten, I made my first barrel. It was a beautiful barrel. The cooper who instructed me told my father, ``Fanny made that barrel and has done it quicker and better than any boy I have had after six months training.'' Fanny beamed with pride as she waited for her father's approval. Instead he shook his head and replied, ``What a pity that you were not born a boy so that you could be good for something. Now, run into the house, child, and go back to your knitting.'' Having been rejected as a barrel maker, Fanny turned her energy to being a speechmaker for the women's movement. Her desire to make a perfect barrel transferred to a desire to perfect the rights of women. Not only are women adaptive, they are triumphant. Without the traditional power resources--money, position, and prestige they had to rely on their talents and determination. These women refused to see themselves as too weak, or under- empowered, to make a difference. Their efforts on the critical issues of their time radically changed the course of the nation. They were not just taking political stands--not just writing and speaking about compassion, justice, and mercy. They were engaged in daily acts of human kindness. What they said and what they did matched. These women left their stamp on history with their ability to be adaptive, triumphant, and genuine. They have also left their stamp on us, their 20th- and 21st-century sisters. For these traits are alive and well in women today.

Mrs. CARNAHAN

Mrs. CARNAHAN. Mr. President, in late October, I came to the Senate floor to address a dispute between the state of Missouri and the Health Care Financing Agency, now known as the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, or CMS. I felt compelled to discuss the matter because of what was at stake, the future of Missouri's Medicaid program. Medicaid is a partnership between the Federal Government and the States to provide healthcare services to our most vulnerable citizens-- low-income children and seniors. Unfortunately, the Federal partner, CMS, is behaving irresponsibly. Since I last spoke about this issue on the Senate floor, CMS Administrator Tom Scully escalated the dispute to an unprecedented level. Not only unprecedented, but dangerous. On November 29, he sent a harshly toned letter to Governor Holden that called Missouri's tax on hospitals illegal and threatened to withhold $1.6 billion from the State. I am here today to call attention to an agency that is out of control. At a time when States are struggling to maintain service due to the recession, this agency has threatened to devastate Missouri's health care safety net. At a time when States and the Federal Government should be working for the common good, CMS is ignoring its own laws and regulations. After our delegation appealed to top Administration officials, finally negotiations began on a long-term solution to the Medicaid funding issue. But just this weekend, reports emerged that CMS expects to pressure Missouri into accepting changes to the program due to its threatened legal action. I am all in favor of negotiations. But I want a bargaining table to be completely level. Our State should be free to act in the best interest of Missouri's citizens without a $1.6 billion lawsuit hanging over its head. That is why I am also introducing legislation today that seeks to put an end to this dispute once and for all. Governor Holden has stated that one of his top Federal priorities is to clarify that Missouri's provider tax is fully consistent with Federal law. That is what my bill does. Before I explain my legislative proposal, I want to describe the events that have brought us to this point in time. The subject of the disagreement is Missouri's provider assessment program, which is a tax on hospitals. States use the money generated from these taxes as their ``match'' for Federal Medicaid dollars. Over ten years ago, Congress became concerned that States were using provider taxes improperly to increase the Federal contributions to Medicaid programs. In response, Congress enacted a law in 1992 that placed limitations on provider assessment programs. One specific limitation is that a provider assessment must not contain a ``hold harmless'' provision. This means that States may not guarantee that a hospital will receive back from Medicaid the amount of funds it paid to the State in provider taxes. In 1992, under the leadership of Governor John Ashcroft, now the Attorney General, Missouri complied with the federal law by enacting the Federal Reimbursement Allowance Program law. This law created a tax on hospitals, but contained no ``hold harmless'' provision. Governor Ashcroft signed the bill into law. Governor Carnahan continued the program, and Governor Holder is continuing it. For almost a decade, the program has been operating under the auspices of HCFA, now CMS. During this time, 100 percent of the revenues generated by the tax have been dedicated to Missouri's Medicaid program. The program has made Missouri a national model for using Federal, State, and private resources to provide health care to as many needy citizens as possible. This long-standing legal tax has assisted Missouri in creating a strong healthcare safety net for its children, pregnant women, and most vulnerable seniors. Much of Missouri's success can be attributed to expanded enrollment of eligible citizens in Medicaid. During the 1990's, the number of Missourians covered by Medicaid more than doubled, increasing from 364,000 in 1990 to 839,000 in 2001. The number of children enrolled in Medicaid has grown at an even faster rate, increasing from 180,000 in 1990 to 474,000 in 2001. An important step in covering more children was the enactment of the state's Children's Health Insurance Program, also known as MC Plus. Under the leadership of Governor Carnahan, MC Plus was designed to cover children up to 300 percent of the poverty level. It is a national model. Due to MC Plus, uninsured working parents could secure this previous health coverage for their children. The MC Plus program has made a difference in the lives of 75,000 children in Missouri. This combination of initiatives has sharply reduced the number of Missouri citizens that lack health insurance. In 1999, Missouri had the fourth lowest percentage of uninsured citizens in the country. These tremendous accomplishments, however, could be completely undermined because of a bureaucratic crusade to overturn Missouri's provider tax, a crusade that is not based on law. Let me explain. The letter CMS Administrator Scully sent to Missouri on November 29 was significant for several reasons. First, it was the first formal declaration from CMS that the agency found Missouri's State provider tax impermissible. Second, the letter included a draft audit that outlined the agency's case and claimed that it would seek to take back $1.6 billion from the State. Third, the letter opens the door for CMS to actually try to take back the money. Until this the draft audit was sent, CMS had only threatened action against the state. Now, this letter has made it abundantly clear that the CMS case is based on a flawed legal theory. The Federal statute says that there is a hold harmless provision with respect to the provider tax if the Secretary can determine that, and I quote from the statute: ``The State or other unit of government improving the tax providers--directly or indirectly--for any payment, offset, or waiver that guarantees to hold taxpayers harmless for any portion of the costs of the tax.'' In the draft audit, Mr. Scully asserts that Missouri indirectly holds hospitals harmless. This leads one to ask the question, how is an ``indirect guarantee'' defined under the law? The answer exists, but unfortunately Mr. Scully's letter does not include it. You can find the answer in the Federal regulations that govern how the Federal provider tax law should be implemented. On September 13, 1993, almost ten years ago, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services issued final regulations for the new law. The regulations established an objective test to determine whether a government had an indirect guarantee. The regulations provide that if the tax on health care providers is less than 6 percent of the taxpayer's revenues, ``the tax or taxes are permissible.'' Missouri's provider tax on hospitals has always been less than 6 percent. Case closed. The bill that I am introducing today essentially codifies this regulation into law. If CMS were willing to abide by its own regulations, then this bill would not be necessary. But I am concerned from the actions the agency has taken and its responses to my inquiries on the subject, that CMS is pursuing an ideological agenda, not fair even-handed enforcement of the law. There is nothing wrong with the State law former Governor Ashcroft signed a decade ago. There has been no ``indirect guarantees'' to anyone. CMS should back off and allow Missouri to do what it has been doing well for over a decade, providing healthcare to its citizens. I encourage my colleagues to take a close look at my bill and support its passage.

Mrs. CARNAHAN

Mrs. CARNAHAN. Mr. President, discussions about the state of our democracy too often focus on what is wrong with our political system. Experts bemoan low turnout; they say young people are turned off by politics; they say grassroots campaigns no longer can work in the age of 30-second television ads. But Americans cherish their democracy. Political participation allows us to express our deepest held beliefs. When we fight for something we believe in we are true participants in our democracy. I know this is true because I saw it myself. Missourians during the last election, even in the face of grief, went to the polls to make their will known. The 2000 election, however, revealed a number of flaws in our electoral machinery. Far too many Americans were being disenfranchised without their knowledge. Too many voters left the polling places in confusion; too often registration lists had not been properly maintained. The promise of American democracy is that everyone has the right to vote without regard to their individual circumstance. It is our job to make that promise a reality. The Constitution calls for a decentralized system that puts states in charge of elections. But since States hold elections for Federal offices, it is appropriate for the Federal Government to encourage and empower States to improve the voting process. I believe this bill does just that and I am pleased to support it. I congratulate the sponsors and those who have put many hours of hard work to bringing this consensus bill to the floor. This bill is framed around two basic premises: Those who are not properly registered to vote are not allowed to cast a ballot, but for those who are properly registered, we should make it as easy as possible for them to go to the polls, vote, and have their vote counted. To those who say we need additional steps to eliminate voter fraud and punish those who abuse the system, you are correct. We must work harder to put systems in place that will adequately update voter rolls. Many States and local registrars are plagued by insufficient technology, and thus an inability to maintain databases that are current. There must also be adequate voter education so that our citizens understand what steps they must take to register properly. And we must make sure that poll workers receive the appropriate training so that we can reduce any potential issues at the polling places. To those who say we must live up to the promise of our Constitution and do all within our power to bring more people into the process, I say your call must be heard. This Nation's history is built on the fight for suffrage. To place even the lowest hurdle before someone seeking to exercise the right to vote is an affront to our democracy. This bill ensures that we go the extra mile to protect the rights of those populations most vulnerable to disenfranchisement: the elderly, the disabled, those who are not fluent in English, ethnic and racial minorities, and members of the armed services who are serving overseas. Perhaps the most significant reform in this bill is that States will be required to implement a system of provisional voting. From now on, if someone's eligibility is challenged at the polling place, they will have the right to cast a vote. If it turns out that the voter was properly registered, his or her vote will be counted. The bill will also prevent disenfranchisement by updating voting technology. In the future, voters will know if they unintentionally selected more than one candidate for a single office, or if their ballots are not otherwise properly marked, and they will have a chance to correct their ballots, and make sure their vote is counted. It is common sense that when a system is broken, we must mend it. When this system concerns a fundamental and cherished right, it is not only common sense, it is vital to the health of our Nation. Our efforts today to empower voters remind me of the words of President Franklin D. Roosevelt, who said: Let us never forget that government is ourselves and not an alien power over us. The ultimate rulers of our democracy are not a President and senators and congressmen and government officials, but the voters of this country. Let us renew the promise of our great Nation and enact legislation that will promote fairness, enhance participation, and increase our faith in the greatest democracy in the history of the world. north dakota voting procedures

Mrs. CARNAHAN

Mrs. CARNAHAN. Mr. President, in late October, I came to the Senate floor to address a dispute between the state of Missouri and the Health Care Financing Agency, now known as the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, or CMS. I felt compelled to discuss the matter because of what was at stake, the future of Missouri's Medicaid program. Medicaid is a partnership between the Federal Government and the States to provide healthcare services to our most vulnerable citizens-- low-income children and seniors. Unfortunately, the Federal partner, CMS, is behaving irresponsibly. Since I last spoke about this issue on the Senate floor, CMS Administrator Tom Scully escalated the dispute to an unprecedented level. Not only unprecedented, but dangerous. On November 29, he sent a harshly toned letter to Governor Holden that called Missouri's tax on hospitals illegal and threatened to withhold $1.6 billion from the State. I am here today to call attention to an agency that is out of control. At a time when States are struggling to maintain service due to the recession, this agency has threatened to devastate Missouri's health care safety net. At a time when States and the Federal Government should be working for the common good, CMS is ignoring its own laws and regulations. After our delegation appealed to top Administration officials, finally negotiations began on a long-term solution to the Medicaid funding issue. But just this weekend, reports emerged that CMS expects to pressure Missouri into accepting changes to the program due to its threatened legal action. I am all in favor of negotiations. But I want a bargaining table to be completely level. Our State should be free to act in the best interest of Missouri's citizens without a $1.6 billion lawsuit hanging over its head. That is why I am also introducing legislation today that seeks to put an end to this dispute once and for all. Governor Holden has stated that one of his top Federal priorities is to clarify that Missouri's provider tax is fully consistent with Federal law. That is what my bill does. Before I explain my legislative proposal, I want to describe the events that have brought us to this point in time. The subject of the disagreement is Missouri's provider assessment program, which is a tax on hospitals. States use the money generated from these taxes as their ``match'' for Federal Medicaid dollars. Over ten years ago, Congress became concerned that States were using provider taxes improperly to increase the Federal contributions to Medicaid programs. In response, Congress enacted a law in 1992 that placed limitations on provider assessment programs. One specific limitation is that a provider assessment must not contain a ``hold harmless'' provision. This means that States may not guarantee that a hospital will receive back from Medicaid the amount of funds it paid to the State in provider taxes. In 1992, under the leadership of Governor John Ashcroft, now the Attorney General, Missouri complied with the federal law by enacting the Federal Reimbursement Allowance Program law. This law created a tax on hospitals, but contained no ``hold harmless'' provision. Governor Ashcroft signed the bill into law. Governor Carnahan continued the program, and Governor Holder is continuing it. For almost a decade, the program has been operating under the auspices of HCFA, now CMS. During this time, 100 percent of the revenues generated by the tax have been dedicated to Missouri's Medicaid program. The program has made Missouri a national model for using Federal, State, and private resources to provide health care to as many needy citizens as possible. This long-standing legal tax has assisted Missouri in creating a strong healthcare safety net for its children, pregnant women, and most vulnerable seniors. Much of Missouri's success can be attributed to expanded enrollment of eligible citizens in Medicaid. During the 1990's, the number of Missourians covered by Medicaid more than doubled, increasing from 364,000 in 1990 to 839,000 in 2001. The number of children enrolled in Medicaid has grown at an even faster rate, increasing from 180,000 in 1990 to 474,000 in 2001. An important step in covering more children was the enactment of the state's Children's Health Insurance Program, also known as MC Plus. Under the leadership of Governor Carnahan, MC Plus was designed to cover children up to 300 percent of the poverty level. It is a national model. Due to MC Plus, uninsured working parents could secure this previous health coverage for their children. The MC Plus program has made a difference in the lives of 75,000 children in Missouri. This combination of initiatives has sharply reduced the number of Missouri citizens that lack health insurance. In 1999, Missouri had the fourth lowest percentage of uninsured citizens in the country. These tremendous accomplishments, however, could be completely undermined because of a bureaucratic crusade to overturn Missouri's provider tax, a crusade that is not based on law. Let me explain. The letter CMS Administrator Scully sent to Missouri on November 29 was significant for several reasons. First, it was the first formal declaration from CMS that the agency found Missouri's State provider tax impermissible. Second, the letter included a draft audit that outlined the agency's case and claimed that it would seek to take back $1.6 billion from the State. Third, the letter opens the door for CMS to actually try to take back the money. Until this the draft audit was sent, CMS had only threatened action against the state. Now, this letter has made it abundantly clear that the CMS case is based on a flawed legal theory. The Federal statute says that there is a hold harmless provision with respect to the provider tax if the Secretary can determine that, and I quote from the statute: ``The State or other unit of government improving the tax providers--directly or indirectly--for any payment, offset, or waiver that guarantees to hold taxpayers harmless for any portion of the costs of the tax.'' In the draft audit, Mr. Scully asserts that Missouri indirectly holds hospitals harmless. This leads one to ask the question, how is an ``indirect guarantee'' defined under the law? The answer exists, but unfortunately Mr. Scully's letter does not include it. You can find the answer in the Federal regulations that govern how the Federal provider tax law should be implemented. On September 13, 1993, almost ten years ago, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services issued final regulations for the new law. The regulations established an objective test to determine whether a government had an indirect guarantee. The regulations provide that if the tax on health care providers is less than 6 percent of the taxpayer's revenues, ``the tax or taxes are permissible.'' Missouri's provider tax on hospitals has always been less than 6 percent. Case closed. The bill that I am introducing today essentially codifies this regulation into law. If CMS were willing to abide by its own regulations, then this bill would not be necessary. But I am concerned from the actions the agency has taken and its responses to my inquiries on the subject, that CMS is pursuing an ideological agenda, not fair even-handed enforcement of the law. There is nothing wrong with the State law former Governor Ashcroft signed a decade ago. There has been no ``indirect guarantees'' to anyone. CMS should back off and allow Missouri to do what it has been doing well for over a decade, providing healthcare to its citizens. I encourage my colleagues to take a close look at my bill and support its passage.

Mrs. CARNAHAN

Mrs. CARNAHAN. Mr. President, I wish to enter a short colloquy with the Senator from Iowa, Chairman of the Agriculture Committee and the floor manager of this bill. As you know, the manager's amendment contains a provision designed to remedy problems that transpired last year in the programs governed by Public Law 107-25. My question is whether this remedy applies to farmers eligible for payments and assistance under Public Law 107-25, but who were denied payments and assistance because their cases were under appeal when the September 30, 2001 deadline passed. As the distinguished Senator might know, several Missouri farmers did not receive payments and assistance they were entitled to under Public Law 107-25. It was impossible for these Missouri farmers to meet their September 30 deadline because their cases were under appeal. They received no payments even though it was eventually determined that they were eligible for assistance. So, by no fault of their own, several Missouri family farmers face ominous financial situations without the clarifications provided in this amendment.

Mrs. CARNAHAN

Mrs. CARNAHAN. Mr. President, I am pleased to have the opportunity to express my support for the Baucus amendment to the farm bill. I want to commend Senator Baucus for his leadership on this amendment. This amendment provides much needed relief for our farmers and farm communities. This emergency assistance will provide an immediate boost to the sagging farm industry in Missouri. I am especially grateful to Senator Baucus for his assistance in providing relief to farmers whose crops were damaged by an invasion of armyworms. Armyworms marched through Missouri and left a trail of crop destruction and economic loss in their wake. The armyworm is a caterpillar only about one and a half inches long, but they march in large groups, moving on only after completely stripping an area. Last winter's unusually warm weather and the summer drought conspired to make life easy for the armyworm and hard for the farmer. Thousands of farmers across southern Missouri were devastated. One official at the Missouri Department of Agriculture said that last year's invasion was the worst he has seen in his 38 years at the Department. Agriculture Secretary Ann Veneman declared 32 counties in Missouri disaster areas due to the extent of the armyworm damage. Missouri wasn't the only State hit hard by the armyworm infestation. Farmers throughout the Midwest and Northeast were all affected. The armyworms work extremely fast. Jim Smith, a cattle farmer in Washington County, completely lost 30 acres of hay field and most of the hay on another 30 acres. He said that he did not even know he had armyworms until 20 acres had been mowed down ``slick as concrete'' by the insects. In his 73 years on the farm, Mr. Smith says this is the worst he has even seen. This invasion has had severe economic consequences for my State. Missouri is second in the Nation in cattle farming. As a result of crop loss, farmers are using winter hay reserves to feed their cattle and dairy cows. Farmers are not only losing thousands of dollars in crop loss, but also have the additional and substantial expense of purchasing livestock feed for their herds this winter. In addition, some farmers were forced to sell their yearlings earlier than normal. Due to premature sales of yearlings, farmers got below average prices for their heads of stock, further increasing farm loss. The effects of this infestation will continue to be felt. It isn't just the farmers that are suffering economic loss. When the farmers hurt financially so do the feed merchants, farm supply dealers, and gas stations. The funds provided in this bill will help all of Missouri recover from the armyworm infestation. So, I support this amendment and I look forward to its inclusion in the farm bill.

Mrs. CARNAHAN

Mrs. CARNAHAN. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mrs. CARNAHAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Mrs. CARNAHAN. I ask unanimous consent Senator Hutchinson of Arkansas be added as a cosponsor to this amendment.

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

Mrs. CARNAHAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Senator Leahy be added as a cosponsor.

Mrs. CARNAHAN. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Mrs. CARNAHAN. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mrs. CARNAHAN. Mr. President, let me commend the two managers of this bill, Senator Harkin and Senator Lugar. Trying to forge a consensus on a farm bill is a daunting task. The work is absolutely critical for family farmers in Missouri and throughout the Nation. This amendment is designed specifically to help ailing family farmers. It will make permanent chapter 12 of the bankruptcy law. Chapter 12 offers an expedited bankruptcy procedure to family farmers in an effort to accommodate their special needs. It was first enacted in 1986 and has been extended several times since then--in fact, twice last year. The provisions of chapter 12 allow family farmers to reorganize their debts as opposed to liquidating their assets. These provisions can be invaluable to farmers struggling to stay in business during difficult times. Unfortunately, chapter 12 expired on October 1 of last year. The Carnahan-Hutchinson amendment seeks to make permanent these bankruptcy provisions and reinstates them retroactively to the date when they last expired. The retroactivity will ensure there are no gaps in availability of these procedures. The larger bankruptcy reform bill currently pending before the House- Senate conference committee includes a permanent extension of chapter 12. Nevertheless, America's family farmers should not have to wait for us to complete our work on the bankruptcy reform bill. Farmers and farm groups across Missouri have urged me to try to get these provisions reenacted as quickly as possible. They stress how important chapter 12 can be during tough times. This amendment is also important because the retroactivity will eliminate uncertainty for farmers who have cases already pending. Legislation extending these provisions passed the House of Representatives twice last year by votes of 411 to 1 and 408 to 2. These laws were both subsequently approved by the Senate by unanimous consent. It is my hope we can approve this amendment and complete our work on the farm bill quickly. I reserve the remainder of my time.

Mrs. CARNAHAN

Mrs. CARNAHAN. Mr. President, every February our nation pauses to recognize the tremendous contributions of African-Americans to the history of our nation. In 1926, Dr. Carter G. Woodson established Negro History Week because he saw that most of the contributions African- Americans had made to American culture and industry were being ignored by historians. We have come a long way since 1926. More and more of our history books acknowledge the contributions of African-Americans. Our schools have made it part of their curriculum. Libraries and museums create exhibits. Television executives highlight the contributions of African- American actors and screenwriters and our celebration of Black history has been expanded to an entire month. But we still have a long way to go. We need Black History Month because people may not be aware of African-Americans who have added to the richness and greatness of our country. It is appropriate that as we stand in our nation's Capitol, which was built by the back-breaking labor of free and slave African- Americans, we talk about the contributions African-Americans have made to this country's history, and to its future. Any Missourian can name George Washington Carver's most famous invention, peanut butter, but few realize the role Carver played in the agricultural revolution that went on in the South in the early 1900s-- Carver's work to wean the South from its single-crop cultivation of cotton. His development of commercial uses for alternate crops like peanuts and sweet potatoes helped modernize Southern agriculture, paving the way for a better life for the entire South. Scott Joplin led a revolution of a different kind. While living in Sedalia, Missouri he created a blend of classical and folk music that took America by storm. Ragtime, as his style came to be called, has become America's unique contribution to classical music and a prelude to jazz. In literature, Missourians are proud of the heritage of Langston Hughes of Joplin, MO. A poet of international renown, Hughes' poetry helped to create the Harlem Renaissance, the artistic and cultural awakening among African-Americans in the 1920's and early 1930's. His first two books of poetry daringly fused jazz and blues with traditional verse. Also an advocate for children, Hughes wrote over a dozen still popular children's books on jazz, Africa and the West Indies. Another Missourian became famous not only as an inventor but also as the most outstanding jockey of his time. Tom Bass, of Mexico, MO, trained some of the finest race and show horses of his day. At the peak of his career he rode in the Inauguration of President Grover Cleveland and gave a command performance before Queen Victoria. In addition to being a famous jockey, he invented the ``Bass bit'' which is still used today. Missouri has borne some notable civil rights leaders as well. Perhaps the most prominent of them is Roy Wilkins, who served as executive director of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People from 1955-1977. Appointed during the most turbulent era in the civil rights movement, Wilkins kept the NAACP on the path of nonviolence and rejected racism in all forms. His leadership and devotion to the principle of nonviolence earned him the reputation of a senior statesman in the civil rights movement. All of these great Missourians, and others history may have forgotten, struggled against bigotry and violence, but all showed-- through their natural talents--that racism was not just wrong, but un- American. So it is fitting that we take this month to learn more about the history of African-Americans in this country, to ensure that these Americans are recognized, and to celebrate their contributions to our great nation.

Mrs. CARNAHAN

Mrs. CARNAHAN. Mr. President later today, Washington University, in St. Louis, MO, will be dedicating the Whitney R. Harris Institute for Global Legal studies. This Institute is a fitting tribute to a man who has devoted his life to the concept of international law. As a young naval officer, Mr. Harris was selected to join the team of 24 U.S. prosecutors during the trial of Nazi war criminals at Nuremberg because of his expertise in German intelligence matters. The trial was without precedent in legal history. For his services at Nuremberg, Harris was awarded the Legion of Merit, the Highest decoration received by any trial counsel. As Mr. Harris said, ``Because of Nuremberg--and the effort which it represents of man's attempt to elevate justice and law over inhumanity and war--there is hope for a better tomorrow.'' The importance of Mr. Harris' work cannot be overstated. In the 50 years since Nuremberg, Mr. Harris has championed human rights through international law. In 1954, Mr. Harris wrote ``Tyranny Trial,'' in which he distills the massive documentary evidence presented at the historic trial to provide a meticulous look at Hitler's rise to power and the Nazi planning and execution of war crimes. His book explores the relationship between law and war and discusses the precedent Nuremberg set for international human rights law. The mission statement of the Institute for Global Legal Studies says: ``We live in a truly global age. People, goods, services, information, and capital flow freely across international boundaries. From the Internet, e-mail, fax machines to travel, migration, commerce, and foreign relations, the story of the new millennium will be our ever shrinking planet. The world's problems--and the problems entrusted to lawyers--will increasingly require international cooperation and international solutions.'' The Whitney R. Harris Institute for Global Legal Studies will train men and women to follow in Mr. Harris' footsteps, guiding us through this new global age.

Mrs. CARNAHAN

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

Mrs. CARNAHAN

Mrs. CARNAHAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 218, S. 1630; that the bill be read three times and passed, and the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table with no intervening action.

Mrs. CARNAHAN. Mr. President, I am disappointed to hear objection to passing a bipartisan bill to help family farmers. We spent a great deal of time last year trying to pass a farm bill. I supported that effort. I support reviving that effort again this year. The legislation that I am trying to pass today is also aimed at helping ailing family farmers. The bill would extend chapter 12 of the bankruptcy code for 6 additional months. Chapter 12 offers expedited bankruptcy procedures for family farmers in an effort to accommodate their special needs. It was first enacted in 1986. It has been extended several times since then--most recently earlier this year. The provisions of chapter 12 allow family farmers to reorganize their debts as opposed to liquidating their assets. These provisions can be invaluable to farmers struggling to stay in business during difficult times. Unfortunately, chapter 12 expired on October 1 last year. My bill seeks to extend these provisions for six additional months and to reinstate them retroactively to the date when they expired. Retroactivity will ensure that there are no gaps in availability of these procedures. I hope this will be the last extension that is necessary. The larger bankruptcy reform bill that is currently pending before a House-Senate conference committee includes a permanent extension of chapter 12. Nevertheless, American family farmers should not have to wait for us to complete our work on the bankruptcy reform bill. The very least we can do to assist farmers now is to reenact these noncontroversial procedures. That is why I am so puzzled by this anonymous objection. Legislation extending these provisions passed the House of Representatives by a vote of 408 to 2 last year and subsequently passed the Senate by unanimous consent. The Judiciary Committee unanimously reported the bill I am seeking to pass today on a voice vote. Furthermore, the bill has several bipartisan cosponsors, including my colleague from Missouri, Senator Kit Bond; the chairman of the Judiciary Committee, Senator Leahy; and the lead sponsor of the Senate bankruptcy reform bill, Senator Grassley. I urge any Senator who has any concern about this bill to speak with me. I will be more than happy to work to address any issues my colleagues may have in an effort to secure expedited passage of this bill. I yield the floor.

Mrs. CARNAHAN

Mrs. CARNAHAN. Mr. President, we are all familiar with the quote ``I only hope that we don't lose sight of one thing--that it was all started by a mouse.'' Immediately, my mind turns to Walt Disney and a smile comes across my face. His lifetime achievements are well known by all and often told, but today I want to talk about the boy. Walt Disney grew up with roots deep in Missouri. A boy whose early childhood experiences and memories would be the foundation for the man who would take the dreams of America, and make them come true. This year we mark the one hundredth anniversary of Walt's birth, and all over America people are gathering to celebrate. In Marceline, MO, Walt's hometown, the Centennial Celebration drew a reported 50,000 visitors anxious to participate. People came from all over the world to get a feel for what Walt experienced there, including a dedication to the kind of group effort that was a hallmark of American farming around the turn of the century. The idealized Main Street in Disneyland, the country life depicted in ``Old Yeller,'' and even the fascination with animals that led to the True-Life Adventures, all have their origins on that farm in Marceline. In Kansas City they also celebrate one of the most successfully creative men of the 20th century. At age 9, Walt and his family moved to Kansas City where his father bought a Kansas City Star newspaper route. Walt and his brother, Roy, had to wake at 3:00 a.m. every day to deliver newspapers, developing a work ethic in Walt that would later wear out all but the sturdiest of staff members. It was his father's gritty determination and resilience balanced by his mother's love of fun and a pleasure in people that added to his wealth of experience from which he was to draw in films and other creative ventures for the rest of his life. Legend has it that the idea for Mickey Mouse came to him from a memory of a friendly mouse that begged for food in his Kansas City art studio. We all owe him our gratitude. Try to imagine a world without Walt Disney--a world without his magic, whimsy, and optimism. Fortunately we don't have to. Walt did more to touch the hearts, minds, and emotions of millions of Americans than any other man in the past century. A mouse may have started it, but through his work he brought joy, happiness, and a universal means of communication to the people all over the world.

Mrs. CARNAHAN

Mrs. CARNAHAN. Mr. President, 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 collapse of Enron, represents a dramatic failure of these institutions. Even sophisticated investors did not detect that Enron was in was in poor financial condition. We need to create greater transparency and an early warning system so investors can better protect themselves. One warning sign that a company may be in trouble is when its executives are selling large amounts of company stock, as occurred at Enron. I have learned, however, that information about insider sales of stock is not easily accessible. Under our current system, a company's officers are required to file a disclosure form with the Securities and Exchange Commission, (SEC), any time they sell securities issued by their company. Tens of thousands of these forms are filed annually. However, the vast majority of these forms are filed on paper, rather than electronically. The paper disclosure forms are not easily accessible to the public. People can see the disclosure forms at the Public Reference Room of the SEC in Washington, DC. Alternatively, people can request in writing that the SEC mail copies of the disclosure forms to them. Requests submitted in writing may take weeks to process. This is unacceptable in the electronic age. So today I am introducing legislation that requires information about insider sales of publicly traded companies to be filed electronically on the day of the sale. The Fully Informed Investor Act mandates that disclosure forms required by the SEC be filed electronically whenever officers, directors or other affiliates of the company sell shares of their company. The forms will be due at the SEC by the end of the day of the transaction. The SEC would then make the forms available to the public over the Internet. In addition, any company that maintains an internal company website would be required to post these disclosure forms on that website on the day of the transaction. This single reform would dramatically level the playing field between insiders and ordinary investors. Never again would company executives be able to quietly dump large amounts of company stock without facing immediate scrutiny about the financial health of their company. As I said, our capital markets are the envy of the world. To continue to be worthy of that envy, we need to constantly improve and modernize our system. The Fully Informed Investor Act is an important aspect of that modernization.

Mrs. CARNAHAN

Mrs. CARNAHAN. Mr. President, 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 collapse of Enron, represents a dramatic failure of these institutions. Even sophisticated investors did not detect that Enron was in was in poor financial condition. We need to create greater transparency and an early warning system so investors can better protect themselves. One warning sign that a company may be in trouble is when its executives are selling large amounts of company stock, as occurred at Enron. I have learned, however, that information about insider sales of stock is not easily accessible. Under our current system, a company's officers are required to file a disclosure form with the Securities and Exchange Commission, (SEC), any time they sell securities issued by their company. Tens of thousands of these forms are filed annually. However, the vast majority of these forms are filed on paper, rather than electronically. The paper disclosure forms are not easily accessible to the public. People can see the disclosure forms at the Public Reference Room of the SEC in Washington, DC. Alternatively, people can request in writing that the SEC mail copies of the disclosure forms to them. Requests submitted in writing may take weeks to process. This is unacceptable in the electronic age. So today I am introducing legislation that requires information about insider sales of publicly traded companies to be filed electronically on the day of the sale. The Fully Informed Investor Act mandates that disclosure forms required by the SEC be filed electronically whenever officers, directors or other affiliates of the company sell shares of their company. The forms will be due at the SEC by the end of the day of the transaction. The SEC would then make the forms available to the public over the Internet. In addition, any company that maintains an internal company website would be required to post these disclosure forms on that website on the day of the transaction. This single reform would dramatically level the playing field between insiders and ordinary investors. Never again would company executives be able to quietly dump large amounts of company stock without facing immediate scrutiny about the financial health of their company. As I said, our capital markets are the envy of the world. To continue to be worthy of that envy, we need to constantly improve and modernize our system. The Fully Informed Investor Act is an important aspect of that modernization.

Mrs. CARNAHAN

Mrs. CARNAHAN. Madam President, earlier this month I had the opportunity to visit our troops in Afghanistan who are on the front lines in the global war to conquer terrorism. I also spoke with new Afghani leaders, who desire a far different future for their people. While visiting with them, I was reminded of a quote from Martin Luther King Jr.'s letter from Birmingham city jail: ``Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. We are caught in an inescapable network of mutuality tied in a single garment of destiny. Whatever affects one directly affects all indirectly.'' The life of Dr. King always reminds me of the power of one; the possibility that each of us has for righting wrong, no matter who we are or where we are. When Dr. King began his work, he was not a prominent political figure. He did not have great financial resources at his command. He was a simple Baptist preacher. He was walking in the footsteps of those who had gone before him. People like Sojourner Truth who embodied the power of one. She was not famous in any way; she was a humble slave woman with a commanding presence and a heart-wrenching story. There was Harriet Beecher Stowe, writer of ``Uncle Tom's Cabin.'' She was not a social philosopher or a theologian; she was a housewife with seven children. Rosa Parks was not a revolutionary; she was a woman who was tired after a day's work and wanted to sit down on a bus. None of these people began with great wealth, fame, or political power. Yet they harnessed the inner strength to challenge traditional thinking and to change the course of our Nation, not with guns and hatred, but with nonviolence and love. This past year we saw the heroism of average working Americans-- firefighters, police officers, emergency medical personnel, postal workers and members of the armed forces. We learned again that each of us owes a debt to freedom. Dr. King reminded us that ``the arc of the universe is long, but it ends in justice.'' For more than 200 years, Americans like Sojourner Truth, Harriet Beecher Stowe, Rosa Parks and Dr. King himself have pushed and prodded our Nation toward greater equality. Now in this century, it is up to us to continue that long journey. We cannot be bystanders to history. We all have some Martin Luther King in us. His work is now our work, and there is much to be done.