Norm Coleman

Mr. COLEMAN

Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. President, today I wish to honor a fine young man, Eric Simon, who will be graduating from New Prague High School in Minnesota on Friday, June 4, 2004. Eric Simon has earned my respect because of the extraordinary courage he has demonstrated in confronting one of life's most difficult challenges. Eric's father has AIDS, and he has lost his mother and sister to AIDS. During the early 1980s, Eric's father, Douglas Simon, served in the Army National Guard at Fort Benning, GA and during his service he was injured and required emergency medical surgery. During surgery, Douglas Simon required a nine-unit blood transfusion. The blood he received had not been screened as it should have been, and it contained the AIDS virus. Eric and his brother, Brian, were spared from the ravages of the disease, but they have had to shoulder adult responsibilities since they were children. Since he was a boy, Eric has handled the grocery shopping, worried about paying the bills and cared for his father. Sometimes Eric has had to listen to some unpleasant and even mean- spirited comments from people who don't understand what his family has been through. As a young person, Eric has often been challenged to be the bigger man, and to keep from being hurt by unkind remarks. It has not been easy. Eric has also committed himself to his education. I understand at times that has been frustrating and, like all young men, Eric has sometimes been tempted to study less and hang out more. As the occasion of his graduation attests, however, Eric has risen to the challenge and succeeded. In closing, I would like to extend my best wishes to Eric Simon on his high school graduation from New Prague High School. His commitment to his education and family are commendable and greatly admired. I am very proud of this young man. I congratulate him on a job well done. I call upon my colleagues to join me in honoring Eric Simon of New Prague, MN on the occasion of his high school graduation.

Mr. COLEMAN

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 Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. COLEMAN. Are we in morning business?

Mr. COLEMAN. I ask unanimous consent to speak as in morning business.

Mr. COLEMAN. Madam President, as we approach Memorial Day, it touches us all as an important moment. This is the first Memorial Day for hundreds of American families who have recently lost loved ones in the Middle East. For others, it is the first such day for families of veterans of World War II and other conflicts who have passed away during the last year. My father-in-law Bob Casserly passed away a few weeks ago. He was one of four brothers. They all signed up, served in World War II, four boys. Bob was the youngest. They all made it home. He is the first of that family and that generation to pass away. How deeply significant and necessary it is for us to pause here and honor their precious gift of sacrifice for the lives we get to enjoy and they don't. One of the poet's wrote that ``God gave us memory that we might have roses in December.'' We remember the brave and strong young lives that were lost to give strength and courage to our own lives. As all of my colleagues do, I travel back and forth by air from this city to my home State. I see the same sight on both ends of my trip. Arlington National Cemetery spreads out across many acres on the Potomac River near the airport. In the Twin Cities, Fort Snelling Cemetery sits near the bank of the Minnesota River. You can see it as you fly into the Minneapolis-St. Paul airport. They are both beautiful places, but they carry a staggering message. We have paid an enormous price for liberty around the world. Each cross or monument is a person and a family and a home town. And there are thousands upon thousands of them. I have never been there, but I am told that there is a pilgrim graveyard near Plymouth Rock in Massachusetts, where the remains of the first colonists lie. Somewhere in that cemetery there is a small sign which reads, ``That which our forefathers at such a great price secured, let us not idly slip away.'' That is the message of this Memorial Day to me. Freedom is precious and constantly endangered. The world is such that, as Edmund Burke said, ``the only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.'' What is mind-boggling is the constant supply of good men and women willing to step forward to do something. Addicted as most of us are to security and convenience, it is astonishing that regular folks in great numbers step forward to enter into a hostile environment and risk their lives. For fame? No. For riches? No. For vengeance? No. They do it for their country and what America stands for. As has been said many times, America will remain the ``land of the free'' only so long as it is the ``home of the brave.'' A hundred and forty one years ago this November, Abraham Lincoln dedicated the cemetery at Gettysburg, PA. A large number of soldiers from the Minnesota First Volunteer Infantry Division, who had played a decisive role in the battle, were buried there. Lincoln spoke the heart of the whole country, and speaks our heart today, when he concluded: It is for us, the living, to be dedicated here to the unfinished business which they who fought here have thus so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be dedicated to the great task remaining before us--that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion: that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain; that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom; and that government of the people, by the people and for the people shall not perish from the earth. We in Minnesota especially grieve with the families who have lost young men in the conflict in Iraq. They join a long, brave column of patriots who laid down their lives. We can never repay the debt we owe them. But we dare not forget them, or fail to recognize their extraordinary service. Chief Warrant Officer Patrick Dorff of Elk River, on the banks of the Mississippi. He died in Iraq on January 25, 2003. He was 32 years old. He died trying to rescue a fellow soldier from a patrol boat that had capsized in the Tigris River. He left behind a wife, a daughter, his parents and siblings in Elk River. From an early age, he always wanted to fly. He brought his passion to his military service. He called himself a ``sky cop'' over Iraq. Who knows how many lives he saved by providing air support. He was a great man. Now he is a great hero. SSG Brian Hellerman was from Freeport, MN, home of Charlie's Cafe. He was 35 when he died on August 6, 2003, in Baghdad. He lost his own dad as a teenager and joined the military to honor his memory. He left behind a wife and two kids, who have also lost their dad. He wrote in an e-mail, ``I am still in because I want to provide freedom for those I love and care about.'' He was a great man. Now he is a great hero. PFC Edward Herrgott, age 20, was from Shakopee, MN on the Minnesota River. He died the day before Independence Day last year. He was killed by a sniper as he guarded the Iraqi National Museum from looters. He joined the military to prepare for a career in law enforcement. He was dedicated to a keeping others safe, even if it meant putting himself in danger. He was a great man. Now he is a great hero. SSG Dale Panchot, 26, was from Northome, in Minnesota's north woods. He died on November 17, 2003 north of Baghdad in a grenade attack. He wanted to be a soldier as far back as his parents could remember. He idolized his World War II veteran grandfather, and joined the Minnesota National Guard in high school. At his funeral, the whole town came together to honor his faithful service. He was a great man. Now he is a great hero. LCpl Levi Angell, age 20, was from Cloquet of Minnesota's Northland near Duluth. He was killed on April 8, 2004, in a rocket-propelled grenade attack. He joined the Marines after graduating from high school. He completed a tour in Kuwait and then volunteered to be redeployed to the region. He leaves behind his parents and eight brothers and sisters. He was a great man. Now he is a great hero. Cpl Tyler Fey, aged 22, was from Eden Prairie in the Southwest area of the Twin Cities. He died on April 4, 2004, in Anbar Province, west of Baghdad. He was a combat engineer and a proud soldier who served 2 tours in Iraq. He was remembered as a kind and loveable person by his friends at Holy Angels High School in Richfield, MN. He was a great man. Now he is a great hero. PFC Moises Langhorst, 19, of Moose Lake, died April 5 in Iraq. Moy, as he was called, aspired to a military career from a young age, wearing camo clothing and even driving a truck with a camouflage pattern. A few weeks before he died, he wrote to his church, ``Between my good training and my faith in God, I have noting to worry about.'' He joined the Marines right out of high school with his buddy Matthew Milczark of Kettle River, just down the road. He was a great man. Now he is a great American hero. PFC Milczark, 18, died in Kuwait on March 8, six weeks before his friend. He was the Moose Lake Homecoming King 2 years ago this month. His grandfather and three uncles have also served in the U.S. military. He was a great man. Now he is a great American hero. SP James Holmes, of East Grand Forks, died in Germany on May 8 from injuries he sustained in Iraq. He had suffered shrapnel wounds after an improvised explosive device detonated near his military vehicle while he was on patrol in Baghdad. Holmes was 28. He grew up in Arizona. He had been living in East Grand Forks, MN, and worked for Valley Petroleum across the border in Grand Forks, ND. His best friend, Howard McDonald recalled, ``He felt he had a bigger part to play and answered the call to duty without hesitation. He was doing exactly what he wanted to do, and he died with honor.'' He was a great man. Now he is a great American hero. Those are 9 young men. Nine families. Nine home towns. How incredibly sad it is that the promise of their lives was snuffed out. But we take comfort in the knowledge that they were doing what they wanted to do, many of them from an early age. ``Greater love has no man than this,'' the Scriptures tell us, ``than to lay down his life for his friends.'' Though we never knew them, they laid down their lives for us. They laid down their lives for a free Iraq and generations who will live free because of their sacrifice. As we remember them and pray for them, together we hope for a new birth of freedom and a time of peace in the Middle East. Thank God for the memory of these and all our veterans. Thank God we live in a Nation of great American heroes such as these. I yield the floor.

Mr. COLEMAN

Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. President, I rise today to honor Manuel Rodriguez Gomez, MD, Emeritus Professor of Pediatric Neurology at Mayo Medical School in Rochester, Minnesota, for his lifetime of education and as one of the first physicians in the United States to champion tuberous sclerosis complex, TSC. Dr. Gomez is considered by many to be the ``father'' of tuberous sclerosis complex research because of his many contributions to the field of TSC research and passionate patient care. Through his work to describe TSC over the lifespan of an individual with the disorder and the extraordinary resources provided by the Mayo Clinic, Dr. Gomez published extensively on his growing knowledge of the multiple organ involvement in TSC. He passionately encouraged his colleagues to not only provide medical care for individuals with TSC, but to also share their knowledge through conferences, publications and the three editions of the book, ``Tuberous Sclerosis Complex.'' This book is considered by his peers to be the premier medical textbook for care of TSC patients. For his dedication to the many individuals he treated throughout his medical practice and his guidance of the Tuberous Sclerosis Alliance, Dr. Gomez made the world a better place for individuals living with TSC by providing exceptional medical care and guidance through the many challenges associated with living with the disease. His quest to better understand the nature and cause of the disease will benefit all patients diagnosed with this condition and possible unlock the secret to a cure that will eradicate this disease once and for all. Because of his dedication to his patients and his contribution to the research community, it is my pleasure to rise today, and offer this tribute to Dr. Gomez.

Mr. COLEMAN

Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. President, I rise to introduce two bills that expand Federal authority to prevent controlled substances from flooding into the U.S., authorizing states to shut down illegitimate virtual pharmacies, and bar Internet drug stores from dispensing drugs to customers referred to on-line doctors for a prescription. Americans are increasingly turning to the Internet for access to affordable drugs. In 2003, consumer spending on drugs procured over the Internet exceeded $3.2 billion. Unfortunately, rogue Internet sites have proliferated and rake in millions of dollars by selling unproven, counterfeit, defective or otherwise inappropriate medications to unsuspecting consumers. Even more dangerously, these sites are profiting by selling addictive and potentially deadly controlled substances to consumers without a prescription or any physician oversight. This must stop before more individuals die or become addicted to easily obtainable narcotic drugs. The first bill I am introducing was developed in close consultation with Senator Feinstein, who is an original cosponsor. In appreciation for her role in helping write this legislation it is named after a young man from her state who died from an overdose of drugs purchased over the Internet. 17-year old Ryan Haight of La Mesa, CA was an honor roll student, and avid baseball card collector about to enter college. As his mom says, ``he was a good kid.'' But in May of 2000 Ryan started hanging out with a different crowd of friends. He joined an online chat forum, which advocates the safe use of drugs, and he began buying prescription drugs from the Internet. He used the family computer late at night and a debit card his parents gave him to buy baseball cards on Ebay. You might ask, how did a healthy 17-year old obtain prescriptions for painkillers without a medical exam. He got them from Dr. Robert Ogle an ``online'' physician based out of Texas. With the prescriptions from Dr. Ogle, Ryan was able to order hydrocodone, morphine, Valium and Oxazepam and have them shipped via US mail right to his front door. In February 2001, Ryan overdosed on a combination of these prescription drugs. His mother found him dead on his bedroom floor. The Ryan Haight Internet Pharmacy Consumer Protection Act counters the growing sale of prescription drugs over the Internet without a valid prescription by 1. providing new disclosure standards for Internet pharmacies; 2. barring Internet sites from selling or dispensing prescription drugs to consumers who are provided a prescription solely on the basis of an online questionnaire; and 3. allowing State Attorneys General to go to Federal court to shut down rogue sites. The bill is geared to counter domestic Internet pharmacies that sell drugs without a valid prescription, not international pharmacies that sell drugs at a low cost to individuals who have a valid prescription from their U.S. doctors. Under current law, purchasing drugs online without a valid prescription can be simple: a consumer just types the name of the drug into a search engine, quickly identifies a site selling the medication, fills in a brief questionnaire, and then clicks to purchase. The risks of self-medicating, however, can include potential adverse reactions from inappropriately prescribed medications, dangerous drug interactions, use of counterfeit or tainted products, and addiction to habit-forming substances. Several of these illegitimate sites fail to provide information about contraindications, potential adverse effects, and efficacy. Regulating these Internet pharmacies is difficult for Federal and State authorities. State medical and pharmacy boards have expressed the concern that they do not have adequate enforcement tools to regulate practice over the Internet. It can be virtually impossible for States to identify, investigate, and prosecute these illegal pharmacies because the consumer, prescriber, and seller of a drug may be located in different States. The Internet Pharmacy Consumer Protection Act amends the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to address this problem in three steps. First, it requires Internet pharmacy websites to display information identifying the business, pharmacist, and physician associated with the website. Second, the bill bars the selling or dispensing of a prescription drug via the Internet when the website has referred the customer to a doctor who then writes a prescription without ever seeing the patient. Third, the bill provides States with new enforcement authority modeled on the Federal Telemarketing Sales Act that will allow a state attorney general to shut down a rogue site across the country, rather than only bar sales to consumers of his or her state. I am proud to say that the Ryan Haight Internet Pharmacy Consumer Protection Act is supported by the Federation of State Medical Boards, the National Community Pharmacists Association, and the American Pharmacists Association. The second bill I am introducing enables Customs and Border Protection to immediately seize and destroy any package containing a controlled substance that is illegally imported into the U.S. without having to fill out duplicative forms and other unnecessary administrative paperwork. The Act will allow Customs to focus on interdicting and destroying potentially addictive and deadly controlled substances. The Act is dedicated to Todd Rode, a young man who died after overdosing on imported drugs. Todd Rode had the heart and soul of a musician. He graduated from college magna cum laude with a major in psychology and a minor in music. The faculty named him the outstanding senior in the Psychology Department. He worked in this field for a number of years, but he constantly fought bouts of depression and anxiety. Unfortunately Todd ordered controlled drugs from a pharmacy and doctor in another country. These drugs included Venlafaxine, Propoxyphene, and Codeine. All were controlled substances and all were obtained from overseas pharmacies without any safeguards. To obtain these controlled substances all Todd had to do was to fill out an online questionnaire and with the click of a mouse they were shipped directly to his front door. In October of 1999, Todd's family found him dead in his apartment. A six-month investigation by the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations has revealed that tens of thousands of dangerous and addictive controlled substances are streaming into the U.S. on a daily basis from overseas Internet pharmacies. For example, on March 15 and 17, 2004, at JFK airport, home to the largest International Mail Branch in the U.S., at least 3,000 boxes from a single vendor in the Netherlands containing hydrocodone and Diazepam (Valium) were seized by Customs and Border Protection (Customs). In fact, senior Customs inspectors at JFK estimate that 40,000 parcels containing drugs are imported on a daily basis. During last summer's FDA/Customs blitz, 28 percent of the drugs tested were controlled substances. Extrapolating these figures, 11,200 drug parcels containing controlled substances are imported through JFK daily, 78,400 weekly, 313,600 monthly and 3,763,200 annually. top countries of origin include Brazil, India, Pakistan, Netherlands, Spain, Portugal, Canada, Mexico, and Romania. Likewise, as of March 2003, senior Customs officials at the Miami International Airport indicated that as much as 30,000 packages containing drugs were being imported on a daily basis. A large percentage of these are controlled substances as well. Customs is simply overwhelmed. At Mail facilities across the U.S., Customs regularly seizes shipments of oxycodone, hydroquinone, tranquilizers, steroids, codeine laced products, GHB, date rape drug, and morphine. In order to comply with paperwork requirements, Customs is forced to devote investigators solely to opening, counting, and analyzing drug packages, filling out duplicative forms, and logging into a computer all of the seized controlled substances. It takes Customs at least one hour to process a single shipment of a controlled substance. This minimizes the availability of inspectors to screen incoming drug packages. In fact, currently at JFK, there are 20,000 packages of seized controlled substances waiting processing. Customs acknowledges that, because of the sheer volume of product, bureaucratic regulations, and lack of manpower, the vast majority of controlled substances that are illegally imported are simply missed and allowed into the U.S. stream of commerce. The Act to Prevent the Illegal Importation of Controlled Substances is a simple bill to address this burgeoning and potentially lethal problem. I am confident that, if enacted as stand-alone measures, each of these bills will make on-line drug purchasing safer. However, I am working with Senator Gregg to ensure these safety features are included in his comprehensive reimportation bill and urge my colleagues to help make sure that this important piece of legislation becomes law this year.

Mr. COLEMAN

Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. President, I rise to introduce two bills that expand Federal authority to prevent controlled substances from flooding into the U.S., authorizing states to shut down illegitimate virtual pharmacies, and bar Internet drug stores from dispensing drugs to customers referred to on-line doctors for a prescription. Americans are increasingly turning to the Internet for access to affordable drugs. In 2003, consumer spending on drugs procured over the Internet exceeded $3.2 billion. Unfortunately, rogue Internet sites have proliferated and rake in millions of dollars by selling unproven, counterfeit, defective or otherwise inappropriate medications to unsuspecting consumers. Even more dangerously, these sites are profiting by selling addictive and potentially deadly controlled substances to consumers without a prescription or any physician oversight. This must stop before more individuals die or become addicted to easily obtainable narcotic drugs. The first bill I am introducing was developed in close consultation with Senator Feinstein, who is an original cosponsor. In appreciation for her role in helping write this legislation it is named after a young man from her state who died from an overdose of drugs purchased over the Internet. 17-year old Ryan Haight of La Mesa, CA was an honor roll student, and avid baseball card collector about to enter college. As his mom says, ``he was a good kid.'' But in May of 2000 Ryan started hanging out with a different crowd of friends. He joined an online chat forum, which advocates the safe use of drugs, and he began buying prescription drugs from the Internet. He used the family computer late at night and a debit card his parents gave him to buy baseball cards on Ebay. You might ask, how did a healthy 17-year old obtain prescriptions for painkillers without a medical exam. He got them from Dr. Robert Ogle an ``online'' physician based out of Texas. With the prescriptions from Dr. Ogle, Ryan was able to order hydrocodone, morphine, Valium and Oxazepam and have them shipped via US mail right to his front door. In February 2001, Ryan overdosed on a combination of these prescription drugs. His mother found him dead on his bedroom floor. The Ryan Haight Internet Pharmacy Consumer Protection Act counters the growing sale of prescription drugs over the Internet without a valid prescription by 1. providing new disclosure standards for Internet pharmacies; 2. barring Internet sites from selling or dispensing prescription drugs to consumers who are provided a prescription solely on the basis of an online questionnaire; and 3. allowing State Attorneys General to go to Federal court to shut down rogue sites. The bill is geared to counter domestic Internet pharmacies that sell drugs without a valid prescription, not international pharmacies that sell drugs at a low cost to individuals who have a valid prescription from their U.S. doctors. Under current law, purchasing drugs online without a valid prescription can be simple: a consumer just types the name of the drug into a search engine, quickly identifies a site selling the medication, fills in a brief questionnaire, and then clicks to purchase. The risks of self-medicating, however, can include potential adverse reactions from inappropriately prescribed medications, dangerous drug interactions, use of counterfeit or tainted products, and addiction to habit-forming substances. Several of these illegitimate sites fail to provide information about contraindications, potential adverse effects, and efficacy. Regulating these Internet pharmacies is difficult for Federal and State authorities. State medical and pharmacy boards have expressed the concern that they do not have adequate enforcement tools to regulate practice over the Internet. It can be virtually impossible for States to identify, investigate, and prosecute these illegal pharmacies because the consumer, prescriber, and seller of a drug may be located in different States. The Internet Pharmacy Consumer Protection Act amends the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to address this problem in three steps. First, it requires Internet pharmacy websites to display information identifying the business, pharmacist, and physician associated with the website. Second, the bill bars the selling or dispensing of a prescription drug via the Internet when the website has referred the customer to a doctor who then writes a prescription without ever seeing the patient. Third, the bill provides States with new enforcement authority modeled on the Federal Telemarketing Sales Act that will allow a state attorney general to shut down a rogue site across the country, rather than only bar sales to consumers of his or her state. I am proud to say that the Ryan Haight Internet Pharmacy Consumer Protection Act is supported by the Federation of State Medical Boards, the National Community Pharmacists Association, and the American Pharmacists Association. The second bill I am introducing enables Customs and Border Protection to immediately seize and destroy any package containing a controlled substance that is illegally imported into the U.S. without having to fill out duplicative forms and other unnecessary administrative paperwork. The Act will allow Customs to focus on interdicting and destroying potentially addictive and deadly controlled substances. The Act is dedicated to Todd Rode, a young man who died after overdosing on imported drugs. Todd Rode had the heart and soul of a musician. He graduated from college magna cum laude with a major in psychology and a minor in music. The faculty named him the outstanding senior in the Psychology Department. He worked in this field for a number of years, but he constantly fought bouts of depression and anxiety. Unfortunately Todd ordered controlled drugs from a pharmacy and doctor in another country. These drugs included Venlafaxine, Propoxyphene, and Codeine. All were controlled substances and all were obtained from overseas pharmacies without any safeguards. To obtain these controlled substances all Todd had to do was to fill out an online questionnaire and with the click of a mouse they were shipped directly to his front door. In October of 1999, Todd's family found him dead in his apartment. A six-month investigation by the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations has revealed that tens of thousands of dangerous and addictive controlled substances are streaming into the U.S. on a daily basis from overseas Internet pharmacies. For example, on March 15 and 17, 2004, at JFK airport, home to the largest International Mail Branch in the U.S., at least 3,000 boxes from a single vendor in the Netherlands containing hydrocodone and Diazepam (Valium) were seized by Customs and Border Protection (Customs). In fact, senior Customs inspectors at JFK estimate that 40,000 parcels containing drugs are imported on a daily basis. During last summer's FDA/Customs blitz, 28 percent of the drugs tested were controlled substances. Extrapolating these figures, 11,200 drug parcels containing controlled substances are imported through JFK daily, 78,400 weekly, 313,600 monthly and 3,763,200 annually. top countries of origin include Brazil, India, Pakistan, Netherlands, Spain, Portugal, Canada, Mexico, and Romania. Likewise, as of March 2003, senior Customs officials at the Miami International Airport indicated that as much as 30,000 packages containing drugs were being imported on a daily basis. A large percentage of these are controlled substances as well. Customs is simply overwhelmed. At Mail facilities across the U.S., Customs regularly seizes shipments of oxycodone, hydroquinone, tranquilizers, steroids, codeine laced products, GHB, date rape drug, and morphine. In order to comply with paperwork requirements, Customs is forced to devote investigators solely to opening, counting, and analyzing drug packages, filling out duplicative forms, and logging into a computer all of the seized controlled substances. It takes Customs at least one hour to process a single shipment of a controlled substance. This minimizes the availability of inspectors to screen incoming drug packages. In fact, currently at JFK, there are 20,000 packages of seized controlled substances waiting processing. Customs acknowledges that, because of the sheer volume of product, bureaucratic regulations, and lack of manpower, the vast majority of controlled substances that are illegally imported are simply missed and allowed into the U.S. stream of commerce. The Act to Prevent the Illegal Importation of Controlled Substances is a simple bill to address this burgeoning and potentially lethal problem. I am confident that, if enacted as stand-alone measures, each of these bills will make on-line drug purchasing safer. However, I am working with Senator Gregg to ensure these safety features are included in his comprehensive reimportation bill and urge my colleagues to help make sure that this important piece of legislation becomes law this year.

Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. President, the Mississippi River is a national treasure and this legislation authorizes programs that will help restore water quality and rehabilitate wildlife and wildlife habitat on the river. The annual operation of the Upper Mississippi River Basin needs to take into consideration opportunities for ecosystem restoration. The Upper Mississippi River ecosystem consists of hundreds of thousands of acres of bottomland forests, islands, backwaters, side channels and wetlands. The Upper Mississippi River system includes 284,688 acres of National Wildlife Refuge land that is managed as habitat for migratory birds, fish, threatened and endangered species and a diverse assortment of other species and related habitats. I am very pleased that this bill gives ecosystem restoration the attention that it deserves. The Department of Transportation projects that water transportation will play an increasing role in moving freight due to congestion on roads and railways. More efficient use of river transportation will help the environment reducing traffic congestion and emissions on our Nation's highways. For example, a 15 barge tow can carry as much as 870 semi-tractor trailer trucks. Fuel efficiency for barge transportation is 2.5 times that of rail transport and nearly 10 times that of truck transport. Improving navigation efficiency on the upper Mississippi and Illinois Rivers has been a high priority issue for Midwest farmers for years. Our agricultural competitive position in accessing world markets is greatly impacted by the efficiency of our transportation system. Farmers depend on the lock system to move grain efficiently to market. They also depend on the locks for the movement of crop production inputs up the Mississippi River. Our entire region benefits as commercial barge traffic moves not only agricultural products, but also aggregate, cement, salt, and other important items efficiently, safely and in an environmentally sound manner. The Upper Mississippi River Ecosystem Restoration and navigation bill also represents a landmark opportunity to address environmental and economic ramifications of the entire lock and dam system, rather than the previous piecemeal approaches. The Corps of Engineers has responded to critics who called for a comprehensive evaluation, coupling an assessment of the economic need for navigation improvements and the ecosystem restoration components necessary to protect our region in the process. As outlined in this legislation, the $1.46 billion ecosystem restoration package includes the construction of fish passages, floodplain restoration on thousands of acres and side channel restoration, along with other measures. This is indeed a new approach to improving our economy, by providing construction jobs and boosting our farm economy, and protecting our environment, by increasing the efficiency of barge traffic while initiating important water quality measures. I am proud to be a coauthor of this important legislation.

Mr. COLEMAN

Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. President, the Mississippi River is a national treasure and this legislation authorizes programs that will help restore water quality and rehabilitate wildlife and wildlife habitat on the river. The annual operation of the Upper Mississippi River Basin needs to take into consideration opportunities for ecosystem restoration. The Upper Mississippi River ecosystem consists of hundreds of thousands of acres of bottomland forests, islands, backwaters, side channels and wetlands. The Upper Mississippi River system includes 284,688 acres of National Wildlife Refuge land that is managed as habitat for migratory birds, fish, threatened and endangered species and a diverse assortment of other species and related habitats. I am very pleased that this bill gives ecosystem restoration the attention that it deserves. The Department of Transportation projects that water transportation will play an increasing role in moving freight due to congestion on roads and railways. More efficient use of river transportation will help the environment reducing traffic congestion and emissions on our Nation's highways. For example, a 15 barge tow can carry as much as 870 semi-tractor trailer trucks. Fuel efficiency for barge transportation is 2.5 times that of rail transport and nearly 10 times that of truck transport. Improving navigation efficiency on the upper Mississippi and Illinois Rivers has been a high priority issue for Midwest farmers for years. Our agricultural competitive position in accessing world markets is greatly impacted by the efficiency of our transportation system. Farmers depend on the lock system to move grain efficiently to market. They also depend on the locks for the movement of crop production inputs up the Mississippi River. Our entire region benefits as commercial barge traffic moves not only agricultural products, but also aggregate, cement, salt, and other important items efficiently, safely and in an environmentally sound manner. The Upper Mississippi River Ecosystem Restoration and navigation bill also represents a landmark opportunity to address environmental and economic ramifications of the entire lock and dam system, rather than the previous piecemeal approaches. The Corps of Engineers has responded to critics who called for a comprehensive evaluation, coupling an assessment of the economic need for navigation improvements and the ecosystem restoration components necessary to protect our region in the process. As outlined in this legislation, the $1.46 billion ecosystem restoration package includes the construction of fish passages, floodplain restoration on thousands of acres and side channel restoration, along with other measures. This is indeed a new approach to improving our economy, by providing construction jobs and boosting our farm economy, and protecting our environment, by increasing the efficiency of barge traffic while initiating important water quality measures. I am proud to be a coauthor of this important legislation.

Mr. COLEMAN

Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. President, every day, more than 1.2 million children will struggle to hear their teacher's voice. Every day, more than 26 million adults will miss important pieces of conversations. Every day, more than 10 million older Americans will consider early retirement in the face of hearing loss. Mr. President, hearing is not an accessory, but a necessity--a necessity to success in school, business, and life. In recognition of the importance of hearing, I have introduced this resolution. This resolution recognizes May as ``National Better Hearing and Speech Month,'' and transforms its ideals into action by encouraging all Americans to have their hearing checked regularly and to seek treatment for hearing loss. Despite the necessity of hearing to success, one third of all newborns leave the hospital without having their hearing tested. As a result, thirty-three babies are born each day with hearing loss, making deafness the most common birth defect in America. Mr. President, it doesn't have to be like this. Study after study has shown that through regular testing and early treatment, hearing loss can be prevented not only in infants, but in adults as well. This resolution can take the first step in preventing hearing loss. Early prevention and treatment is the key to preventing future hearing loss, but we must also care for the 28 million Americans currently suffering from deafness. Today, 95 percent of individuals with hearing loss can be successfully treated with hearing aids. However, only 22 percent of deaf Americans can afford to use this remarkable technology. In other words, over 21 million Americans will be denied the sensation of sound because they cannot afford a remedy. For this reason, I introduced the Hearing Aid Assistance Tax Credit Act or S. 2055. S. 2055 provides financial assistance for those who need it most, our elderly and young. Under this legislation, minors and seniors can take a tax credit of up to $500, once every 5 years, toward the purchase of any hearing device that is considered a ``qualified hearing aid'' under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. Hearing aids are not just portals to sound, but portals to success-- success in school, business, and life. With your support 1.2 million children will hear their teacher's voice for the first time as they learn to read and write. With your support, ten million older Americans will be able to hear their grandchildren's voices and continue working despite age-related hearing loss. With your support, we can give millions the gift of sound.

Mr. COLEMAN

Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. President, can the Chair advise where we are in the business of the Senate?

Mr. COLEMAN

Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. President, I want to spend time talking about the Defense authorization bill. Before I do, I want to respond to this question, are we better off? I think it is a good question. But the question has to be phrased: Are we better off today than we were after the impact of September 11? My colleagues across the aisle continually block out of their minds the impact of the devastating attack on American soil of September 11 and the challenges this country faced--both emotional, from the scars of the terrible loss of life, as well as the economic impact. That is the question. Are we better off today with the Taliban not operating freely in Afghanistan? Are we better off today with Saddam Hussein no longer supporting Hamas and Hezbollah, no longer operating the torture and rape chambers? Are we better off today fighting terrorism in Iraq rather than again back on our shores? Are we better off economically? Mr. President, I have in front of me an article in today's Minneapolis Star Tribune, and I will refer to a couple sections. It says, in April, Minnesota broke all kinds of job records, led by the State's largest drop in unemployment, to 4.1 percent from 4.8 percent. Economists used words such as ``spectacular'' and ``breathless'' to describe the job gains they say were part of the national turnaround. The U.S. economy added 625,000 jobs in March and April, a turnaround, I note, that was fueled by tax cuts, was fueled by bonus depreciation, was fueled by increasing expansion, fueled by lowering the top rate to give small business a tax break. The article notes that the 0.7-percent drop in the unemployment rate was the biggest since the State started keeping records in the late 1970s. Are we better off economically today than we were after the impact of 9/11? Absolutely. With the $18,000 job decline and the number of unemployed people, also going back to the 1970s, that was 13 percent fewer than the 140,000 unemployed in March. The 4,500 new manufacturing jobs is the biggest monthly increase since the State started tracking the statistic in 1992. Are we better off today, post-9/11, than we were right after that attack? Absolutely. Completing Tuesday's figures, success in more hiring suggests fewer firings. New unemployment claims dropped 14.1 percent in April. They talk about in this article the manufacturing sector. We would be better off if we didn't have the other side filibustering an energy bill. We would grow more jobs. We would be better off if my colleagues on the other side were not blocking asbestos reform, if my colleagues were not blocking class action reform, so that we could grow more jobs. We would be better off if my colleagues on the other side were not blocking the appointing of conferees to the highway bill. That is a jobs bill. Have we moved forward? Absolutely. Have we recovered from 9/11? Absolutely. But rather than criticize, my colleagues should come together and stop the obstruction and blocking and let's move America forward.

Mr. COLEMAN

Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. President, we spend a fair amount of time on this floor discussing priorities for our people and our Government. As far as I am concerned, all that talk is about what comes in second to the subject we are on today: national security. Our first obligation is to defend the American people and our interests abroad. If we don't do that with thoroughness and excellence, nothing else is going to matter for long. September 11 was a tragic day. It was also the end of a period of denial. For generations, we believed that we could sit here safely, protected by our oceans. But 2 world wars in the last century and the coming of the nuclear age changed that. But when the Berlin Wall fell down and the Soviet Union collapsed, perhaps some lapsed into a false sense of security. September 11th changed that forever. This bill--the Defense authorization bill--is an attempt to respond to the defense of American interests in the world as it is, now and for the foreseeable future. Failure to be prepared invites the threats we fear. Peace through strength must remain the governing doctrine of American national security. I support the work of the Chairman, Senator Warner, on this bill. What a tremendous asset it is to the Senate and Nation to have his expertise and experience. The fact that he served at the Pentagon, and has participated in this bill through numerous administrations gives us confidence in this work product. It has been said that the key to leadership is maintaining order in the midst of change, and change in the midst of order. With the distinguished Chairman, we have that balance. Mr. President, for a moment, I want to discuss recent developments in Iraq. You would never try to time a foot race with a sun dial. Likewise, it makes no sense to judge the progress of the war in Iraq by the top of the hour news. We are at war. That is a sentence fraught with meaning. War is by definition unpredictable. It involves a struggle against a dedicated foe, and constantly shifting conditions. Depending on your point of view, a single event for one part will be an ``ebb'', while for another it is a ``flow.'' With a short term perspective, you never know whether something is a trend or an isolated, irrelevant occurrence. One of the lessons we learned from the Vietnam era is that when the United States of America commits troops to battle, we should only do so if we are committed and confident of victory. The angst of so many Vietnam veterans is not the sacrifice they were called to make, but the betrayal of their cause and the anger of the American people at them for doing what their country asked them to do. The decision to go to war in Iraq was not a snap judgment. It was thoroughly debated here on this floor. The vote to authorize the use of force was not unanimous, but it was bipartisan. We crossed a threshold when we made that decision, and when combat began. A decision to go to war is not a stock you buy or sell depending on how it is doing. We are in this war until we finish it successfully. Is there room for debate on how the war is to be conducted? Certainly. But only to a point. We don't need 535 commanders in chief. In a world of instantaneous global communication, we need to be very sensitive to what we say on the public record, and how our words can be interpreted by those who wish to destroy us. War is a matter of armaments and troops and battle plans. But is also a matter of psychology and spirit. We should be very careful not to encourage our enemies. When Congressman Murtha made his comments last week, I vehemently disagreed with them. This war is certainly ``winnable'' but if insurgents heard his words, it was harder to win than before he spoke. I reiterate that it would be foolish to try to run this war based on public opinion. We have no General Gallup Poll. The circumstances we have learned about Abu Ghraib are very disturbing to us all. Looking at the polls, it had a short term effect on support for the war effort. But we must maintain the perspective that these are actions we are ashamed of and are working to prevent from ever re-occurring. Compare that to the villains who beheaded Mr. Berg. They reveled in the act of his murder. It was a picture of what we are there to fight against. Progress is being made. The influential Shia cleric Al-Sistani has called for people like Al Sadr to lay down their arms. The President has made it clear what to expect as the June 30 deadline approaches. Terrorists like Al Zarqawi know what the prospect of a free Iraq means, and they will do anything to stop it. We cannot let them succeed. We need to be more committed to our noble ideals than the terrorists are to their evil plans. Despite all the attempts to distract us or deter us, we need to stay focused on the transition to Iraqi sovereignty. If we fail, the fall out will be far worse than that from an artillery shell filled with sarin gas. Mr. President, our history tells us that war is hell. But it also tells us that there are some things worth fighting for. The battle is engaged. The war on terrorism is being fought in Baghdad, in the Sunni Triangle, not here. Better to fight the battle there than here. Have no doubt, if we were not fighting it there, it would be fought right here. Its poison and death would spew forth upon us. Removing Saddam Hussein from the world stage was worth fighting for. Freeing the people of Iraq from tyranny and deprivation is worth fighting for. Planting an Arab democracy in the Middle East is an historic opportunity for freedom in this world. We are committed, Mr. President. Our only option is to persevere to victory. With all people, I hope and pray it will be soon. I thank the committee for the bill they have brought here to the Senate floor to give the President the tools he needs to protect our security. I look forward to our consideration and passage of it.

Mr. COLEMAN

Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. President, I strongly support the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act--IDEA--reauthorization legislation that the Senate is considering today. I want to note for the record that I would have voted for this important legislation but for a death in the family that required me to be home. First of all, I commend Chairman Judd Gregg and Senator Ted Kennedy for working in a bipartisan manner to craft this important reform legislation. Children with disabilities ought to have the same access to a quality education as any other student. Since its enactment in 1975, IDEA has helped do this by ensuring that children with disabilities have access to a quality education. S. 1248 will make needed improvements to IDEA by improving services for these children, expanding parental involvement, and providing much needed support for special education teachers. Under current law, IDEA's complicated regulations have detracted from the success of the program. For too long, IDEA has focused on the process rather than the outcome. That is why I support simplifying the law's burdensome due-process requirements, which have created excessive amounts of paperwork for teachers. This duplicative paperwork has taken teachers' valuable time away from teaching in the classroom, and sometimes has even driven special education teachers out of the classroom. I believe that this legislation will reduce the paperwork burden for teachers and thus allow teachers to do their job--teaching children. This legislation also helps reduce misidentification of non-disabled children. Misidentification of special education students has fueled growing IDEA cost. S. 1248 provides reform by allowing for the development of new approaches to determine whether students have specific learning disabilities by clarifying that schools are not limited to using IQ-achievement tests and by providing funds for training school personnel to prevent over-identification and misidentification of children. I am, however, disappointed by the failure to pass an important amendment, which I co-authored. This amendment would have provided for annual increases in IDEA funding of $2.2 billion, allowing the program to reach full federal funding levels by 2011. When IDEA was enacted in 1975, the Federal Government promised to pay 40 percent of the costs of educating children with disabilities. Currently, however, the Federal Government contributes only 19 percent, placing an unfair and serious financial burden on States and local school districts. Due to Congress' failure to fully fund IDEA, school districts, especially those in rural areas, are forced to take funds from their general budgets to operate special education programs. As a result, schools have been forced to cut important educational programs and delay infrastructure improvements. I have met with teachers and students from rural Minnesota and know how tight school budgets there are already. This amendment would have brought much needed fiscal relief to Minnesota schools. But, I do commend my Republican colleagues and the President for their support of IDEA funding. The most dramatic increases in IDEA funding have all occurred under Republican control of Congress and, in recent years, a Republican White House. Since FY 2001, IDEA funding will have increased by $4.7 billion or 75 percent. The Republican Congress has already increased funding for IDEA by 224 percent since 1996. If the President's FY 05 budget is enacted, it will have increased by 376 percent. I encourage my colleagues to support increased funding so that we keep our promise to fully fund IDEA.

Mr. COLEMAN

Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. President, the Veterans Administration has taken remarkable strides over the years to adapt to the increasing number of women veterans using VA facilities. As of 2002, there were approximately 1.5 million women in the Armed Forces and 20,000 of these women are from Minnesota. Many of these soldiers want to start families when they return home and will need to use their VA healthcare coverage for obstetrics care. Currently, a woman can use her VA coverage for prenatal care, delivery and postnatal care. The VA will enter into a contract with a hospital to provide these services, but the VA cannot provide any coverage for the baby after it is born. The baby is uninsured until a hospital social worker or the parents can arrange for private healthcare coverage, or in most cases, for the baby to receive Medicaid assistance. This period of time, which in some cases can reach 2 weeks, is very stressful for all the parties involved. Today, I have introduced a bill that will allow the VA to provide coverage for veterans' babies for up to 14 days after delivery in a VA hospital or VA contract facility. This will help care for these children during the time needed to secure long-term coverage outside of the VA system. This bill will also make it easier for the VA to find willing hospitals. Today, many hospitals are reluctant to offer services to an insured mother and an uninsured baby. If both the mother and the baby were covered by the VA, hospitals in the veterans' local community would be more likely to accommodate them. Finally, I am hopeful that over time this legislation will save money for VA by eliminating extra surcharges and fees to hospitals which currently cover their liability for delivering an uninsured baby. I firmly believe that veterans who have gone through the traumatic experiences of war should not have to worry about the health of their newborn babies because of bureaucratic glitches in the system. This bill will cut the red tape surrounding the delivery rooms and ease the burden on our veterans who want nothing more than to bring children into the free society which they helped protect and defend. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. COLEMAN

Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. President, the Veterans Administration has taken remarkable strides over the years to adapt to the increasing number of women veterans using VA facilities. As of 2002, there were approximately 1.5 million women in the Armed Forces and 20,000 of these women are from Minnesota. Many of these soldiers want to start families when they return home and will need to use their VA healthcare coverage for obstetrics care. Currently, a woman can use her VA coverage for prenatal care, delivery and postnatal care. The VA will enter into a contract with a hospital to provide these services, but the VA cannot provide any coverage for the baby after it is born. The baby is uninsured until a hospital social worker or the parents can arrange for private healthcare coverage, or in most cases, for the baby to receive Medicaid assistance. This period of time, which in some cases can reach 2 weeks, is very stressful for all the parties involved. Today, I have introduced a bill that will allow the VA to provide coverage for veterans' babies for up to 14 days after delivery in a VA hospital or VA contract facility. This will help care for these children during the time needed to secure long-term coverage outside of the VA system. This bill will also make it easier for the VA to find willing hospitals. Today, many hospitals are reluctant to offer services to an insured mother and an uninsured baby. If both the mother and the baby were covered by the VA, hospitals in the veterans' local community would be more likely to accommodate them. Finally, I am hopeful that over time this legislation will save money for VA by eliminating extra surcharges and fees to hospitals which currently cover their liability for delivering an uninsured baby. I firmly believe that veterans who have gone through the traumatic experiences of war should not have to worry about the health of their newborn babies because of bureaucratic glitches in the system. This bill will cut the red tape surrounding the delivery rooms and ease the burden on our veterans who want nothing more than to bring children into the free society which they helped protect and defend. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. COLEMAN

Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. President, I commend my friend, the Senator from Michigan, for his leadership in protecting the interests of all taxpayers by originally bringing to light the nature of these abusive tax shelters. I had the opportunity to work with him to make a difference, to help shape this amendment. I also thank Chairman Grassley and Senator Baucus for accepting this amendment and for their leadership on this issue. I am glad the Senator from Michigan didn't try to explain and walk through all the details of his chart of these sham tax shelters. The bottom line is very clear: The Government gets ripped off. The taxpayers get ripped off. These abusive tax shelters were established for the purpose of avoiding tax liability. Those who suffer are all the taxpayers. By this amendment, by substantially increasing the penalties, by putting some real deterrent in place, I believe public trust in our laws will be restored. In November, as chairman of Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, I held two hearings on abusive tax shelters. The permanent subcommittee spent one year investigating the tax shelter industry. It became clear to the subcommittee that some tax avoidance schemes are clearly abusive. These abusive shelters relied on sham transactions with no financial or economic utility other than to manufacture tax benefits. According to GAO, abusive tax shelters robbed the Treasury of $85 billion over 6 years. The use of these tax shelters exploded during the high flying 1990s, when many firms were awash in cash and more concerned with generating fees than being compliant with the Code. The lure of millions of dollars in fees clearly played a role in the decision on the part of tax professionals to drive a Brinks truck through any purported tax loophole. Abusive tax shelters require accountants and financial advisors who develop and structure transactions to take advantage of loopholes in the tax law. Lawyers provide the cookie-cutter tax opinions deeming the transactions to be legal. Bankers provide loans with little or no risk. Yet the amount of the loan creates a multimillion-dollar tax loss. This became a game. Otherwise reputable professionals were able to earn huge profits by providing services that offered a veneer of legitimacy to the transactions. The parties were careful to hide the transaction from IRS detection by failing to register and failing to provide lists of clients who used the transactions to the IRS. It was clear to the subcommittee that the promoters of these tax shelters failed to register with the IRS partly because the penalties for failing to register were so low compared to expected profits. As my colleague from Michigan noted, with the risk-benefit ratio, it was worth avoiding the law because if you got caught it didn't matter; you made so much money. The penalties were so little that you took the risk of avoiding the law. In fact, the benefits were great. This amendment changes that. Current provisions of the JOBS bill provide for increased penalties to address abusive tax shelters. However, I agree with Senator Levin that even stronger penalties are needed. The provision to substantially increase penalties to promoters who manufacture these sham transactions so they must give back all of their ill-gotten gains is vital to restoring the integrity of our tax laws and deterring future avoidance. This amendment also increases the amount of penalties for persons who knowingly aid and abet a taxpayer in understating their tax liability. Current law and the JOBS bill only apply this penalty to tax return preparers. We now get the aiders and abettors. However, the close collaboration between the lawyers, accountants, financial advisors, and banks requires us to apply penalties to all material aiders and abettors, not just those who prepare the tax returns. This is not a victimless crime. It is not the Government that loses the money. It is the people of America, average working families who will bear the brunt of lost revenue so that a handful of lawyers and accountants and their clients can manipulate legitimate business practices to make a profit. Abusive transactions are used to avoid detection by the IRS. This amendment sends a clear message that this Congress intends to put an end to abusive sham transactions. With the passage of this amendment, the price to be paid for participating and for promoting abuse will be very steep indeed--all of your profits. I am appreciative that the managers have joined me in supporting this amendment. I yield the floor.

Mr. COLEMAN

Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. President, I strongly support the resolution which the Senate is considering today. The world has witnessed images that do not represent America's cause for freedom, democracy and human rights. While our American soldiers toil and sacrifice to bring justice and opportunity to Iraq, there is a small group of soldiers who have undermined the work of this noble mission through their despicable behavior. The acts that took place at Abu Ghraib prison were simply inexcusable. The violation of any Iraqi prisoner's human rights, dignity or life by any member of the American military--for whatever reason--defies not only international law, but basic human decency. These acts risk undermining the mission, and put at risk other American men and women working for freedom in Iraq. I am concerned that Congress was not adequately informed of the abuses and the investigations. Secretary Rumsfeld's appearance on Capitol Hill last week was welcome, and I expect that he will continue to make himself available to the Senate. I deeply appreciate the President's willingness to speak candidly and apologetically to the Arab world. I support the decision to offer compensation to the victims, and to put together commissions to ascertain how widespread the abuse and humiliation were, and what can be done to prevent future violations. I am hopeful that these steps will be part of a much needed process to make amends for the great damage that has been done by a few men and women. Abu Ghraib was home to torture under Saddam Hussein's regime, and has not yet overcome its notorious reputation. Consequently, I believe that, should the Iraqi people wish it, this prison should be wiped off the map. Tearing down Abu Ghraib prison would symbolize the definitive end to the era of torture--an era which preceded Operation Iraqi Freedom, and must be put to rest once and for all.

Mr. COLEMAN

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

Mr. COLEMAN. Are we still in morning business?

Mr. COLEMAN

Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. President, about 6, 7 months ago, I rose on the floor of the Senate to talk about some good economic news. We have gone through very difficult economic times in this country--a recession that began before President Bush got elected. There was a devastating impact on the psychology of American consumers because of corporate fraud, corporate malfeasance, the actions we saw with Enron and WorldCom, and Tyco, for which some of those folks involved in that will ultimately be brought to justice. But it had a devastating impact on the confidence of American consumers and the economy. Then we had September 11, which had a devastating physical impact, devastating psychological impact, with great suffering across the board. And, again, beyond the hurt that so many families suffered and the Nation suffered, the economy suffered. The economy suffered, and the economy slowed down. Americas had not been attacked on its own shores, I believe, since the War of 1812. In spite of that, look at where we are today, 3 years later. There is good news. With all the challenges we face in this world, sometimes you have to stand up and talk about good news. When I rose on the floor of the Senate about 6 months ago, there was a little bit of good news, and my colleagues on the other side of the aisle talked about: Let's not be premature. My colleagues on the other side of the aisle still lambasted, and continue to criticize, the vision and the actions of the President and this Congress in cutting taxes. Today, I had a chance to review the most recent numbers by the Labor Department. Mr. President, 288,000 new jobs were created in April. And it is not just April. As the Presiding Officer from Oregon is well aware, what happens is the Labor Department often recalculates the reports from months before. And the month before the job numbers were very strong. They were at 308,000 new jobs in March. Well, in today's listing of the jobs for April, the March numbers have been revised upward to 337,000 jobs. In fact, if you go back to March, what happened in March is that the Labor Department revised up the January and February job gains. So the total in January and February and March was over half a million new jobs created in this country over 3 months. Now what we see is over a million jobs--a million jobs--created in this country in the last 8 months. That is good news. That is something Americans should celebrate. When I was the mayor of St. Paul, folks used to say: Mayor, what are you doing for a kid today? And I would say: One of the best things I can do for a kid is make sure mom and dad have an opportunity to work. There are all sorts of good things that come with a job, not the least of which is health insurance. The best welfare program is a job. The best housing program is a job. There is the dignity that comes with a job, the impact it has on a family, and the lessening of the pressures that one sees in a family. So there is a whole range of great things that happen. It is interesting; I am an optimist and have always been an optimist. Sometimes there are folks who look at what is good news and what is bad news, and at times I sense that with our friends on the other side of the aisle there is a dark cloud over there waiting for the rain to happen. But the sun is beginning to shine--and not beginning to shine, it is shining on Americans who are looking for work--a million new jobs in 8 months, 288,000 jobs in April. The reason is, in large measure, because of the tax cuts this Congress enacted. Talk to any small businessperson, and they will tell you, when you give bonus depreciation, it increases their incentive to put money into new equipment. When you put money into new equipment, folks who produce that equipment have a job, and folks who run that equipment have a job. When you accelerate or increase expensing, again, it is an encouragement to small business. And small businesses are where the jobs have grown. The small business then reinvests in the business. When you reinvest in the business, you grow jobs. When you lower the top rate--which is not about tax cuts for the rich--it is tax cuts for small businesses. I had an opportunity to be in Rochester, MN, the other day. We talked about taxes. I asked the business folks: How many of you are subchapter S corporations? A lot of hands went up. I am not an accountant, and I used to be a lawyer. But subchapter S corporations are taxed at the same level as personal taxes. So when we talk about cutting the highest rate, what is happening is we are cutting the tax load for the job creators in this country, the small business men and women. Yesterday, there was good news. State initial claims for jobless benefits in April, in my State, fell 31.5 percent from last April, hitting the lowest level since before the 2001 recession. Initial claims nationally dropped, last week, by 25,000, to 350,000--the lowest number of claims since October 2000. Retailer sales are up. Productivity is up. Consumer confidence is up. Home buying is up. It is fascinating; the economy grew at a healthy 4.2-percent rate in the first quarter, up 4.1 percent in the previous quarter. When I read the Minneapolis Star Tribune yesterday, they were saying: April figures will be announced. Economists were expecting a gain of 150,000 jobs. Well, the economists were wrong. We have already doubled what was reported by the Labor Department. The unemployment rate was supposed to remain constant at 5.7 percent, but it has dipped another tenth of a percent to 5.6 percent. Mr. President, this is great news for about every American, except John Kerry. I hope we put the politics aside. I hope my colleagues on the other side of the aisle can now say, yes, President Bush was right that when you cut taxes, when you cut the tax load on small businessmen and businesswomen, it grows jobs; when you cut taxes and put money back in the pockets of moms and dads, it grows jobs. This is not a politician standing up and talking; these are the facts. This is the data the Department of Labor has reported. The President's vision was clear, the President's vision was right. Congress was right to act on that vision. The great beneficiaries today are the moms and dads in America who can now look out and say there is more job opportunity out there, and that is a very good thing. With that, I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. COLEMAN

Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary be authorized to meet to conduct a markup on Thursday, May 6, 2004, at 9:30 a.m. in Dirksen Senate Building Room 226. Agenda I. Nominations Henry W. Saad to be U.S. Circuit Judge for the Sixth Circuit. II. Legislation S. 1735, Gang Prevention and Effective Deterrence Act of 2003 [Hatch, Chambliss, Feinstein, Grassley, Cornyn, Graham, Schumer]; S. 1933, Enhancing Federal Obscenity Reporting and Copyright Enforcement (ENFORCE) Act of 2003 [Hatch, Feinstein, Cornyn]; S. 1635, A bill to amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to ensure the integrity of the L-1 visa for intracompany transferees [Chambliss]; S. 1609, Parental Responsibility Obligations Met through Immigration System Enforcement (PROMISE) Act [Hatch, Cornyn]; S. 1129, Unaccompanied Alien Child Protection Act of 2003 [Feinstein, DeWine, Feingold, Kennedy, Leahy, Specter, Edwards, Durbin, Kohl, Schumer]; and S.J. Res. 34, A joint resolution designating May 29, 2004, on the occasion of the dedication of the National World War II Memorial, as Remembrance of World War II Veterans Day [Conrad, Leahy].

Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation be authorized to meet on Thursday, May 6, 2004, at 9:30 a.m. on Impacts of Climate Change and States' Actions.

Mr. COLEMAN

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