Jean Carnahan

Mrs. CARNAHAN

Mrs. CARNAHAN. Mr. President, I call up amendment No. 448, and I ask unanimous consent to send a modification to the desk.

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

Mrs. CARNAHAN. Mr. President, the quality classrooms amendment provides flexibility for our schools. I am delighted that the Senate has recognized the need to provide our schools with more choices, not more mandates. The amendment allows for the hiring of teaching specialists, the development of alternative educational programs, and year-round school schedules. It will recognize, reward, and encourage promising reform efforts. I thank the managers for their assistance with the quality classrooms amendment. I greatly appreciate the suggestions that Senator Jeffords and his staff have offered. I am also grateful to Senator Kennedy and his staff for their assistance and for their hard work throughout the education debate. I am proud to be a part of this debate. I am confident that our efforts in behalf of public education will bring greater opportunity to our Nation's children. I understand that the managers have agreed to accept the amendment.

Mrs. CARNAHAN

Mrs. CARNAHAN. Mr. President, I am proud to take this opportunity to recognize National Police Week 2001 and the immeasurable contributions of our nation's law enforcement officers. In both urban and rural communities, these men and women touch the lives of all those around them. Today, I urge all Americans to join together in commemorating the tremendous service and sacrifice of our nation's law enforcement officers. We have made great strides since the 1970s, when we lost approximately 220 officers every year through the decade. That figure decreased dramatically in the 1990s to 155 fallen officers each year. Yet, each one of these lives is one too many. And it is with great sorrow that I note that Missouri leads the nation in losing nine law enforcement officers in the past eleven months. We may take comfort only in recognizing and honoring the ultimate sacrifice that each of these individuals has made to their community, to their State, and to their Nation. We owe these officers and their family an unending debt of gratitude. They will always be remembered. The efforts of police officers and chiefs, sheriffs, and highway patrol are largely responsible for the seven percent decrease in crime rates over most of the last decade. In return for their valiant courage in protecting our streets, our homes, and our families, we must strive to find measures that will better protect our law enforcement officers. I will join my fellow Senators in looking for ways to ensure that sufficient safeguards are in place. In the meantime, I take this opportunity to express my gratitude to these men and women and their families. God bless these heroes among us.

Mrs. CARNAHAN

Mrs. CARNAHAN. Mr. President. Last month, I joined a bipartisan group of centrist Senators to support a $1.25 trillion tax cut along with an economic stimulus for this year. The tax cut agreed upon after negotiations with the White House and House of Representatives totals $1.35 trillion. I support a tax cut of this size and think that the people of Missouri also believe it to be a commonsense compromise. This tax cut should provide immediate tax relief to help stimulate the economy, cut personal income taxes for all taxpayers, eliminate the marriage penalty, and eliminate the estate tax for all family farms and family-owned small businesses. I also want to ensure that the tax cut is distributed fairly and responsibly by focusing on the people who need tax relief the most--the working men and women of America. The other key component of the budget voted on by the Senate last month was an approximately $300 billion investment in education over the next decade. That budget plan included sufficient funds to meet the Federal Government's commitment to fund 40 percent of the cost of special education. Meeting this commitment would enable states and localities to spend billions of dollars of their own funds on improving educational quality at the local level. The Senate budget also included funds for student loans, programs for disadvantaged students, and the testing and accountability reforms currently being debated on the Senate floor. Unfortunately, the conference report before us completely eliminated the educational investments contained in the Senate passed budget. Indeed, this conference report does not even fund the education increases contained in President Bush's budget proposal. Not only is this approach to education inconsistent with the bipartisan actions taken on the budget by the Senate a few weeks ago, but it is dramatically at odds with the votes being cast by the Senate on the education reform bill. Last week, the Senate unanimously voted to fully fund the Individual with Disabilities Education Act at a cost of $120 billion over ten years. Earlier this week, the Senate agreed to fully fund the largest federal education program for disadvantaged students at a cost of $130 billion. The vote on that amendment was 79- 21. I am a newcomer to the Federal budget process, but it defies common sense to be voting to support major increased investments in education on the one hand, while on the other hand voting for a budget that does not meet these commitments. Some of my colleagues have stated that the lack of education funding in the budget should not be of concern because, eventually, Congress will provide additional support for education during the appropriations process. But I ask, what purpose does a budget serve if we vote based on an intention not to abide by it? So, while I strongly support the $1.35 trillion in tax cuts for the American people contained in the conference report, I cannot support this budget agreement. I look forward to working on the tax cut legislation scheduled for later this month and on the appropriations bills that follow. Hopefully, in the end, we will provide both a tax cut of $1.35 trillion that provides needed tax relief to the public and an investment plan that meets our vital national priorities.

Mrs. CARNAHAN

Mrs. CARNAHAN. Mr. President, I commend my colleague, Senator Murray, for highlighting class size and the pupil-to-teacher ratio as a key ingredient to educational excellence. A dramatic increase in the student population in all grades throughout the country has presented a serious shortage of teachers. During the past 8 years, as first lady and now as Senator, I have traveled across Missouri visiting schools in every part of the State. I have spoken with many dedicated educators who are frustrated by having classes so large that individualized instruction is impossible. Teachers do their best under the circumstances, but they are handicapped when those in our communities and government ignore the plight of our classrooms. Missouri's classroom teachers know that smaller classrooms and more individualized attention to students translates into higher achievement scores, especially for children of low-income families. Students in smaller classroom settings are more likely to graduate on time and less likely to drop out, and they are more likely to enroll in honors classes and to graduate in the top 10 percent of their class. It is not only the number of kids in the classroom that concerns me but the physical condition of the classroom itself. Far too many school buildings are in need of repair. Two years ago, the U.S. Department of Education reported that about 25,000 of the Nation's existing school buildings had ``extensive repair or replacement needs.'' The Department estimated that almost 12 million students were attending schools with poor roofing. Another 12 million were in buildings with outdated plumbing, and almost 15 million were in buildings with inadequate heating, ventilation, and air conditioning. In Missouri's public schools, they face the daunting prospect of some $4 billion in construction needs over the next decade. In addition, 59,000 children in Missouri study in portable classrooms. In Nixa, MO, the Nation's second fastest growing school district, all fourth graders at Matthews Elementary are in trailers behind the school. Too many of our schools have a crisis of infrastructure. Allowing this is a sad commentary on our priorities in the 21st century. Because I believe that improved classrooms are essential to the future of our Nation, I will vote with Senator Harkin later this week to provide a Federal investment in school infrastructure. True, we must demand high standards and rigorous accountability in our schools, but reform can only come with the resources to do the job. It must come with flexibility for States and local school districts to meet their unique needs. Any nutritionist or mother will tell you that it takes good food to grow strong bones and bodies. Likewise, we cannot have strong schools if we starve the educational system. At a time of record budget surplus, it is our moral responsibility to do what is right for our children. We need a major new commitment to public education. To do less is to falter in our stewardship as elected leaders and as parents and as citizens. The time is now and the place is here. As the poet, Gabriela Mistral, reminded us: Many things can wait, the child cannot. Now is the time his bones are being formed, his blood is being made, his mind is being developed. To him, we cannot say tomorrow, his name is today. I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mrs. CARNAHAN. Yes.

Mrs. CARNAHAN. Mr. President, what is the pending business?

Mrs. CARNAHAN. Yes, I ask unanimous consent the pending business be set aside.

Mrs. CARNAHAN. I call up amendment No. 374.

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

Mrs. CARNAHAN. Mr. President, it has been suggested that families and communities give us roots, but our schools give us wings--the wings of opportunity that come with a solid educational background. I commend President Bush for putting education at the top of the national agenda. His goal to ``leave no child behind'' is one that all of us in the Congress should support. Indeed, education is a cause that all Americans can rally behind. For it is in the common interest to prepare our children for success. If we are interested in increased prosperity, higher productivity, safer streets, lower welfare rolls, and reduced need for government services, the place to start is in our public schools. The Better Education for Students and Teachers Act that we are debating today is an important first step. It is the product of arduous and painstaking negotiations on the part of my colleagues and the Bush administration. It represents bipartisan consensus. I applaud all those involved, who have put our children ahead of politics. The legislation will bring greater accountability to our school system. It will mean increased testing, targeted support for failing schools, and new options for parents. The core principle behind the act is that we can identify low-performing schools through rigorous testing and then give them the resources they need to turn themselves around. The bill is based on successful models that have been developed at the state level. In Missouri, we have a comprehensive accountability system in place called the Missouri Assessment Program, or MAP. These tests measure student progress in math, reading, science, and social studies to see if kids are meeting what we like to call the ``Show-Me Standards.'' Now I am not one who feels that increased spending automatically translates into improved results. But I do believe a key element of the reform effort is to provide troubled schools with the resources they need to improve performance. The first piece of legislation I introduced--the Quality classrooms Act--is designed to fit in the context of this overall education reform effort. The Quality classrooms Act calls for a new investment in our schools, yet offers flexibility at the local level. It provides school districts with the option of using funds on any of five proven programs: hiring new teachers; building more classrooms; hiring teaching specialists in core subjects such as reading, math, and science; creating alternative discipline programs; and instituting year-round school schedules. These are commonsense provisions that meet basic needs. And I am pleased that the first two ideas--class size reduction and school construction--are already part of the education debate. Today, I am introducing an amendment to accomplish the other three elements of the Quality Classrooms Act: specialists for core subjects; alternative discipline programs; and year round school programs. This amendment is about flexibility, not mandates. Like the Quality Classrooms Act, this amendment recognizes that local districts area best suited to make decisions about their needs. The amendment proposes more teaching specialists because studies show that reducing class size is more cost effective when focused on certain subjects. A good example of this is ``Success for All'' a program which enlists retired teachers and other part-timers as reading instructors. The instructors are carefully trained and focus on small groups of children. More than 700 schools have participated in this program, and have achieved impressive results. Students enjoy learning more, are more engaged, and develop closer bonds with their teachers. I point out, too, that this amendment will allow funds to be used for alternative programs for violent and disruptive students. Ask any teacher, and they will tell you that one or two chronically disruptive students can destroy the learning environment for the entire class. Schools need the flexibility and authority to provide safe and effective classrooms for all. At the same time, we must make sure that districts can provide appropriate educational resources for disruptive students. Under Missouri law, a teenager who carries a gun to school can be expelled and prohibited from returning to the traditional public school. In some areas of the state, there is simply no alternative program available to this student. Turning disruptive and potentially violent students out onto the streets without an education is a recipe for disaster. However, in some parts of the state, districts have been able to create very effective programs for these students, relying on alternative education grants under Missouri's Safe Schools Act. Often, the alternative programs provide students with their last chance to receive an education. In the Kirkwood School District, an alternative school has helped students improve their grades, behavior and attendance. Those participating in the program have a different learning plan tailored to their needs. Alternative programs open the door for creativity in working with disruptive students. The Kirkwood program, for example, collaborates with the juvenile court system. police officers meet with students and lead discussions on controlling anger, on drugs and alcohol abuse, and on decision-making. As a result, discipline problems dropped dramatically. A total of 166 referrals to school administrators were made for students in the school year before they started in the alternative program. The following year, this number dropped to 73. School officials noted that fewer referrals saved the school ``at least 90 hours of administrative time.'' Mr. President, the goal of my amendment is to recognize, reward, and encourage that kind of innovation and success. And finally, the amendment will help school districts implement a year-round school schedule where it might be appropriate. Studies have shown that a year-round school schedule increases student achievement. Teachers in traditional nine-month schools often spend three to six weeks in the fall reviewing material that was taught during the previous year. A year-round program can work well for at-risk or learning disabled students who may be struggling to grasp and retain information. In addition, year-round schools can be a way to use facilities more efficiently. Some overcrowded schools stagger student attendance, so that one group is on vacation during each grading period. In one district that grows by 1,500 kids a year, the district implemented a staggered, year-round schedule. This allows them to serve 2,000 additional children in a given academic year. Of course, a year-round approach may not be right for some districts. For example, in rural areas, students often play a key role on family farms during the summer months. That is why this amendment allows each district to make the choice for itself. There is no ``one-size-fits-all'' approach for our schools. Our schools and local districts need flexibility so they can make appropriate choices. My amendment will add to the flexibility that the bill already provides. I look forward to working with the manager and hope the amendment will receive widespread support. This debate has given us an unique opportunity to improve education in America. Major progress is within our grasp. Our support for these innovative reforms will give our children the wings of opportunity needed for success. Let us seize this opportunity and do what is right for our children. I ask unanimous consent that the amendment be laid aside. I yield the floor.

Mrs. CARNAHAN

Mrs. CARNAHAN. Mr. President, I would like to bring to the Senate's attention that a few weeks from now will be National Association of Insurance Women week. Professional insurance women constitute over 50 percent of those employed in our Nation's insurance industry. For that reason, the National Association of Insurance Women and its 400 local affiliates are dedicated to the development of leaders for the insurance industry. NAIW and its affiliates promote personal and professional development through education, networking and leadership opportunities to all women in the insurance business. Both national and local organizations continually strive to raise the standards of ethics, consumer education and customer service throughout the insurance industry. NAIW local affiliates are engaged in charitable causes to strengthen and enhance hundreds of communities throughout the U.S., Canada, Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands. Professional insurance women have earned recognition for their many accomplishments in the economically vital insurance industry. It is important that we celebrate and honor the women who are performing such important and diverse roles throughout the risk and insurance industry.

Mrs. CARNAHAN

Mrs. CARNAHAN. Mr. President, I am delighted today to pay tribute to Mr. James Schibig, who is retiring as principal of Beasley Elementary School, in St. Louis, MO, after 34 years in education. During his long service to education, he has been a leader and role model for thousands of children. James started out teaching fourth, fifth, and sixth grades before serving as Assistant Principal at Bernard and Trautwein Elementary. In 1986, he became Principal of Beasley Elementary School. James' commitment to his work is overshadowed only by his dedication to serving his community. Instead of calling it quits at five o'clock, James devotes his time and energy to helping the community through his volunteer activities. He lends his skills to the Parish Council at St. Margaret Mary School, advising them on various education issues. He coaches baseball and soccer and serves as a Parent Teacher Organization officer. I know that the teachers, parents, and students at Beasley Elementary will greatly miss James. I wish James and his wife Jeanne all the best in retirement, and I urge my colleagues to join me in saluting James Schibig.

Mrs. CARNAHAN

Mrs. CARNAHAN. Mr. President, I want to tell you about one of my constituents, Julianne Woodle. Julianne was raised in St. Louis and went to the University of Missouri-Columbia after high school. As she worked toward a bachelor's degree in children and group settings, she planned to take her degree and find a job in the classroom. She dreamed of working with preschoolers in a childcare center, helping them develop the social and mental skills necessary to start school. When she graduated in 1998, she started looking for a job. There were many available, but none of them paid enough for her to live on. She looked for more than a month, but seven or eight dollars an hour was the most anyone could pay her. Julianne still dreamed of working with young children in a classroom setting, but she had to make a living. It was a hard choice, but Julianne decided to go back to school. She hopes that a master's degree will allow her to find a job where she can work with children and still earn a decent salary. It is because of people like Julianne that I cosponsored S.R. 79, calling for the designation of May 1, 2001 as ``National Child Care Worthy Wage Day.'' This resolution calls on the President to set aside the first day in May as ``National Child Care Worthy Wage Day.'' Study after study has shown that good quality infant and toddler care has positive long term effects on children, and that poor quality care can have devastating effects. Despite the extreme importance of their work, child care providers earn an average of only $7.42 an hour nationally. In Missouri the average is even lower, just $7.02 an hour. The average housekeeper and restaurant worker make more. Child care providers are largely responsible for the social, emotional, and mental development of the children in their care, yet we do not pay enough to attract qualified individuals to the field. Instead young graduates like Julianne, who really want to nurture and teach young children, are forced to look elsewhere for jobs. It is a pressing national problem, and it deserves recognition and attention from our national leaders. The resolution is a symbolic action, but it is an important one. We must bring this issue to the forefront of public discussion. We owe it to our children.

Mrs. CARNAHAN

Mrs. CARNAHAN. Mr. President, today I am pleased to support S. 350, the Brownfields Revitalization and Environmental Restoration Act of 2001. This bill will help communities throughout the country identify and clean up brownfields, sites where low level contamination has kept the land from being developed. This bill would help communities in several different ways. By providing liability protection and economic incentives to clean up contaminated and abandoned industrial sites, this legislation will make our communities healthier and reduce environmental threats. By returning these sites to productive use, we encourage redevelopment and help curb sprawl. This legislation means both new jobs and a cleaner environment for Missouri. It shows that a clean environment and a strong economy are not in competition, they go hand in hand. In Missouri, we have 11 brownfield projects financed in part with federal funds, and another 29 projects that are State-financed. One example of a successful brownfield project is Martin Luther King Business Park in St. Louis, Missouri. The site, which is across the street from two schools, was contaminated from a century of metal plating and junkyards. Asbestos and high levels of lead were found close to the surface. As a result of federally-funded assessments and the State's Voluntary Cleanup and Brownfield Redevelopment Programs, a developer stepped forward to purchase and cleanup the property. Due to these cleanup efforts, a much-needed warehouse/light manufacturing facility in the heart of St. Louis opened in 2000, bringing more than 60 jobs to the area. Construction of an even larger facility is scheduled to begin this year after cleanup is complete. This development will help to rejuvenate the entire surrounding area. This progress was made possible by the federal brownfield grant which allowed the City to perform initial environmental assessments. Without those assessments, developers are reluctant to even consider such properties. We have made considerable progress toward making our urban centers into places where people want to work and live. Yet we still have more than 12,000 abandoned and tax-default properties in St. Louis alone. Obviously our work is not done. Brownfields are not just an urban problem. A century of lead mining has left towns like Bonne Terre, Missouri with contamination from mining waste. In Bonne Terre, developers are reluctant to purchase land near the mine waste properties being addressed by Superfund because of possible contamination. Using federal pilot funds, Bonne Terre is working on cleaning up these sites and developing them into a 122-acre commercial zone and industrial park. The clean up and development will bring more jobs to this rural community as well as address environmental concerns. I anticipate a strong vote in favor of the Brownfields Revitalization and Environmental Restoration Act of 2001. I hope that this vote will provide momentum for this legislation as it proceeds to the House of Representatives and that it will eventually be signed into law by the President.

Mrs. CARNAHAN

Mrs. CARNAHAN. Yes. Amendment No. 188

Mrs. CARNAHAN. Yes.

Mrs. CARNAHAN. Mr. President, when families across the country plan for the future, they first determine their essential priorities. Then they put money aside to make sure they can pay for them. Only after those priorities are met, do our families decide whether money is left over to pay for other things. I believe we would be wise to approach the Federal Government's budget the same way. First, we should determine how much we need to invest for vital national priorities. The remaining funds should be returned to the people through a tax cut. We can meet our national priorities and still provide for substantial tax relief to America's working families. But the budget we are considering seems to have been constructed exactly the opposite way. It appears to have been built around the $1.6 trillion tax cut, leaving us without adequate funds to meet our budgetary needs. One of the most glaring shortfalls in the President's budget is in the area of national defense. Of the $5.6 trillion in anticipated surpluses, the budget proposed by President Bush spends only $60 billion--about 1 percent--on defense. I believe that this level of military funding is inadequate to meet our military's current and long-term needs. The amendment that Senator Landrieu and I have proposed will remedy this flaw by increasing defense spending over the next 10 years by $100 billion above what the President has proposed. I commend Senator Landrieu for her leadership on this issue and am pleased to join with her in supporting the men and women of our Armed Forces and in protecting the national security. Leaders of our Armed Forces tell us that we must invest in both personnel and equipment to preserve our preeminence in the 21st century. The list of military needs is exceptionally long. That list includes, but is not limited to, modernizing our tactical aircraft and other aging weapons systems, increasing the readiness of our forces, building decent housing on our bases at home and abroad, improving the quality of military life, increasing military salaries and health benefits, maintaining and repairing our aging infrastructure, and securing our information technology. Virtually every expert that has looked at the state of our military agrees that major new investments are required. Just last September, the Joint Chiefs of Staff estimated that $50 billion per year in additional funds were needed to maintain readiness and to modernize our forces. And the Joint Chiefs were only talking about modernization and readiness. The $50 billion figure did not include the investments needed to increase retention of personnel and improve the standards of living for military families. Examples of urgent funding requirements abound. But let me take a few minutes to discuss the situations on the two major bases in Missouri, Fort Leonard Wood and Whiteman Air Force Base, with a special focus on housing. Fort Leonard Wood's housing units were constructed between 1958 and 1964. Only one out of six units has been fully renovated. The floor plans are outdated. There are insufficient playgrounds and storage space. Many homes are below Army standards in size and quality. The poor grade of housing at Fort Leonard Wood is one of the factors that makes it difficult for us to retain our highly trained and skilled senior enlisted personnel and officers. Numerous other infrastructure improvements are needed at Fort Leonard Wood. The most disturbing one that has been reported to me is the lack of running water or sewers on the 48 ranges used to train our young men and women. The latrines on the ranges are some of the worst in the command. Some soldiers are said to limit their water intake to avoid using these decrepit facilities. Military personnel at Whiteman Air Force Base face other indignities. Family housing suffers from termite damage, water seepage, and flooding of playgrounds. Twenty percent of all units have been vacated due to termite and water damage. Unfortunately, I cannot say that help is on the way. The backlog of deferred maintenance at Fort Leonard Wood comes to about $66 million. The current annual budget of $13 million is $2 million less than necessary to sustain the current housing stock and $6.6 million less than what is necessary to reducing the backlog. To make matters worse, high utility costs this year have caused a shortfall of $1.8 million, which is being taken from the housing maintenance budget. At Whiteman, $125 million are needed to fix 900 units, construct 129 new units, and repair playgrounds, streets, and other common areas. But Whiteman's annual housing budget is $7 million less than necessary to implement this plan. The problems in Missouri are duplicated across the country and at our bases abroad. The Commander in Chief of the European Command, General Ralston, testified last month before the Armed Services Committee on which I sit. He said that 70 percent of the housing in Europe did not meet Army standards. And the Department of Defense reports that the backlog of real property maintenance is $27.2 billion. The Landrieu-Carnahan amendment is designed to meet these needs in the years to come. The amendment will reduce the President's tax cut by $100 billion and dedicate these funds to defense spending. Reducing the tax cut by this amount will only slightly lessen the amount returned to the wealthiest Americans under the President's plan. I believe that these Americans would be willing to take this sacrifice if they knew that the money would be spent for better equipment, housing, and salaries for our military personnel. When I asked new appointees to the Pentagon how they plan to address the shortfall in the budget, they have all told me that these issues are currently being considered in the Pentagon's comprehensive strategic review. I applaud the new administration for conducting this review and for proposing to ``transform'' the military to meet the security threats of this new century. But no one believes that this new review is going to lead to reduced defense spending over the next decade. Quite the contrary. One expert, Dr. Andrew Krepinevich of the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, testified before the Senate Budget Committee. He said that there is a $120 billion mismatch between our current defense plans and projected defense budget. The Pentagon's strategic review may result in some cuts to existing programs. These cuts, however, will not cover both the $120 billion shortfall, plus whatever new costs are required to transform the military. The bottom line is that there will be calls to spend more, not less, on defense after the strategic review is over. We should prepare for that certainty now by adopting a budget that contains realistic spending levels for national security. The problem with waiting until after the review is over is that Congress is poised to pass the President's tax cut now. If this tax cut passes, the necessary funds simply will not be available for the required level of defense spending. This amendment is a much more prudent approach. It sets aside the funds for our military needs over the next decade. In the unlikely event that the strategic review calls for less spending than this amendment provides, that money can always be used for tax cuts, or other purposes in the future. But everyone in the Chamber knows that we will not be able to undo a tax cut, not even to increase defense spending. If the President's tax cut goes forward, our military budget is going to feel the squeeze in the years and decades to come. So I strongly advocate this amendment. I urge the Senate to stand behind the men and women who defend our country by adopting this important measure. I yield the floor. Amendment No. 189

Mrs. CARNAHAN

Mrs. CARNAHAN. Mr. President, seniors' ability to afford prescription drugs is a very serious problem. Too many seniors have to make a painful choice between paying for medicine or paying for rent and food. I have heard from many Missouri constituents on this issue. It is time that Congress enacts a comprehensive prescription drug benefit for all seniors. This is why I am cosponsoring and supporting the amendment to the Senate budget resolution that would create a voluntary prescription drug benefit for all seniors through the Medicare program. The Democratic amendment makes an investment in an affordable, accessible, and meaningful prescription drug benefit for all beneficiaries. Instead of making a real investment in a Medicare prescription drug benefit, the Republican budget resolution invests only $153 billion over 10 years in this critical initiative. This investment is nowhere near sufficient to meet the need. The size of the Republican leadership's tax cut would make it impossible to provide the additional investment needed to meet the demand of this important national priority. The Democratic amendment would reduce the tax cut by $158 billion over 10 years and invest a total of $311 billion over 10 years in a Medicare prescription drug benefit for all beneficiaries. The Democratic amendment to the budget resolution proposes a prescription drug benefit for all Medicare beneficiaries that does not use funds from the Medicare or Social Security surpluses. The amendment will provide a benefit that is voluntary, gives beneficiaries meaningful protection, is affordable to all beneficiaries and the program, and ensures access to the drugs seniors and people with disabilities need at the pharmacies they trust. In addition, it is consistent with broader Medicare reform. It is time that Congress act on this important matter.

Mrs. CARNAHAN

Mrs. CARNAHAN. Madam President, we will have many important debates over the coming year on this Senate floor. Debates about tax cuts, spending priorities, education and defense, health care and agriculture. But none of these debates will be more important to the future of our democratic process than the debate over campaign finance reform. From the time I sat at our kitchen table balancing the books on my husband's earliest campaign to his race for the U.S. Senate, I have witnessed the changing face of campaigns. Last year's U.S. Senate race in Missouri shattered all previous records. The two opposing campaigns spent almost $18 million. This figure does not include spending by the state parties or outside interest groups. For $18 million, Missouri could have done any one of the following: built two new elementary schools; hired 500 new teachers; sent 3800 students to the University of Missouri; provided day care to an additional 5000 low-income children; put 9,000 new computers into our schools. There is no accounting of the hours and effort that went into raising these large sums of money. It is time and energy I am sure all Senators would rather spend discussing the issues and dealing with problems affecting their constituents. The traditional face-to-face visits with voters at the State fair, the local diner or a town hall play a much smaller role in modern political campaigns. Instead, candidates introduce themselves with costly and skillfully packaged commercials. According to a recent study, viewers in the Kansas City area were exposed to over 22,000 campaign commercials during the 2000 election cycle. At 30 seconds apiece, that is the equivalent of 187 straight hours of campaign ads. The same study showed that the number of ads nationwide has nearly tripled since 1998. Without reform, there is no end in sight. Not only do candidates air ads to get their own message out, they must also respond to negative attacks. More and more, our political discourse is turning away from an honest discussion of the issues affecting the average American. Personal attacks and outrageous distortions are all too common. What are the consequences? Today, Americans are more cynical and more disconnected from the government than ever. They read of huge contributions from special interest groups and wonder how one small voice can possibly be heard over the shouts of large donors to political campaigns. Election day for them is not a celebration of self-government, but a finale to months of nasty, negative messages that have invaded their homes and mailboxes. To rejuvenate our democracy, we must change the common perception and reality that our political system is dominated by big money. To wean American politics from these excesses will be costly and painful, but we must begin. While many reforms are necessary, purging the system of unlimited donations to campaigns through so called ``soft money'' is a necessary first step. Some would argue that passing McCain-Feingold will hurt the Democratic Party, but I say if we do not pass McCain-Feingold, we will be hurting the democratic process. This is a time when all of us, Democrats and Republicans alike, must do what is right for our country, what is right for our democracy. The Biblical account of Joshua and the battle of Jericho shows us the strength of a united voice. We are told that ``the people shouted with a great shout, so that the walls fell down.'' If we speak with one voice, the wall of ``soft money'' that separates ordinary citizens from their government will come down. Only then can we be confident that campaigns are decided by the power of our ideas, not by the power of our pocketbooks. I enthusiastically support campaign finance reform and hope that we can pass legislation that reduces the influence of money in politics.

Mrs. CARNAHAN

Mrs. CARNAHAN. Madam President, this month we celebrate Women's History Month. It is an opportunity to reflect on the successes, advances and contributions women have made and are making in American life. Today, I have the special privilege of honoring a woman who is not only celebrating women's history this month--she is making it. Jackie Stiles stands 5 feet 8 inches tall, but she is a giant on and off the court. Earlier this week, she led the Lady Bears of Southwest Missouri State into victory over Washington, securing her team a spot in the NCAA Final Four. It was the latest accomplishment in the life of this remarkable young woman. In high school, she was a 14-time state track champion and once scored 71 points in a single basketball game. Her fans would show up at nine in the morning with lounge chairs to be first in line when the gym doors opened at 4:30. They just wanted to catch a glimpse of Jackie in action. She is a hero in her home town--and in towns across America where young girls dream impossible dreams. Jackie shows them dreams can happen. At Southwest Missouri State, Jackie Stiles has scored--as of today-- 3,361 points, becoming the all-time leading scorer in the NCAA. She has also become the heart of the Lady Bears. Every time she plays, she thrills the sell out crowds at the Hammons Student Center--better known as the ``House of Stiles.'' On Friday, the team will come home to Missouri for the Final Four. And with all due respect to my colleagues from the great state of Indiana, I predict a big win over Purdue for Jackie Stiles and the Lady Bears. Jackie Stiles didn't become a star overnight. She does it the hard way--the only way she knows how. She began training at age two with her father and has pushed herself ever since. She goes to the gym and won't leave until she makes 1,000 shots. The story of Jackie Stiles is also the story of Title IX, the landmark civil rights legislation which set out to curtail discrimination against women and girls in education and athletics. Without Title IX, we might never have heard of heroes like Jackie Stiles. In 1971, the year before Title IX, only 25,000 women competed in college sports. Today, that figure has grown to more than 135,000 women--including one very talented player who wears the number ten jersey for Southwest Missouri State. Jackie's success is measured in more than just rebounds, lay-ups, and jump shots. She has brought attention to women's sports, and has proven that women's basketball is exciting. Most of all, she is a role model and an inspiration for thousands of girls. If she chooses, Jackie's next stop is probably the WNBA. I have no doubt that she will become one of the league's greatest attractions. She will help not only her team but her sport and all those who appreciate and enjoy it. Mr. President, in honor of Women's History Month, I'd like to offer my congratulations to Jackie Stiles, the Lady Bears of Southwest Missouri State, and all the other heroes who are bringing women's sports to a new high and teaching young girls to follow their dreams. May they continue to thrill, entertain, and inspire us.

Mrs. CARNAHAN

Mrs. CARNAHAN. Mr. President, this week marks the 89th anniversary of the founding of the Girl Scouts of America. What began with a single troop of 12 girls in 1912 has grown into a 3.6 million member organization. Missouri alone has nearly 100,000 members. Over the last 89 years Girl Scouts of America has helped to instill in countless girls strong values, a social conscience, and the conviction of their own potential and self- worth. Earlier this week, I cosponsored a resolution to designate this week as National Girl Scout Week. I thank my colleagues for unanimously passing that resolution. The Girl Scouts of America has become a national institution. The organization has held a Congressional charter for more than 50 years, and spread to nearly every city in the nation. Girl Scouts learn to be, as the Girl Scout Law says, ``considerate, caring, courageous and strong.'' They develop a strong sense of community responsibility along with a sense of self worth. These girls serve as role models in their communities and become tomorrow's leaders. Community service is a bedrock principal of the Girl Scouts. Every year, each troop conducts a service project to assist their community. The Girl Scout Council of Greater St. Louis is about to start their annual April Showers project. Every year they collect and distribute personal care items like shampoo, toothbrushes, and diapers to families in need throughout the area. Last year they collected nearly one million items, helping countless families. On the other side of Missouri, Kara Dorsey, a member of Troop 706 in Warrensburg, recently won her Girl Scout Gold Award for creating a library at the new Warrensburg Veteran's Home. Kara organized two fundraising events then purchased books, tapes and magazine subscriptions with the proceeds. Because of Kara's work, the veterans in Warrensburg have a recreational and educational outlet they might not have had otherwise. Girl Scouts may be most famous for Thin Mints, Samoas and Tagalongs, but those cookies are more than delicious snacks. Cookie sales teach the scouts about money management, selling skills, and give the girls a chance to give back to their community. Junior Girl Scout Troop 59, in Odessa, Missouri, voted to give a percentage of the money it earned in January to the House of Hope, a shelter for victims of domestic violence. When someone asked Rachel Kopp, a member of the troop, why they had donated the money, she said, ``It was the Girl Scout thing to do.'' Indeed it is. That is what makes the Girl Scouts so unique. Girl Scouts provide an environment where girls are challenged and guided to become capable, self-reliant, ethical women who make a difference. On this, their anniversary, I want to thank the Girl Scouts of America for enriching so many young lives, and once again thank my colleges for unanimously calling for the recognition of National Girl Scout Week.

Mrs. CARNAHAN

Mrs. CARNAHAN. Mr. President, I understand the managers have agreed to accept my amendment on home energy. I thank Senator Collins, cosponsor of the amendment, as well as Senators Hatch, Grassley, and Leahy for their willingness to help on this very important amendment. I yield the floor.

Mrs. CARNAHAN

Mrs. CARNAHAN. Mr. President, I call up amendment No. 40.