Norm Coleman

Mr. COLEMAN

Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the bill I introduce today be printed in the Record.

Mr. COLEMAN

Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. President, I appreciate the opportunity to pay my respects to a simple, humble man who achieved historic greatness--Pope John Paul II. The Archbishop of Minneapolis-St. Paul, Harry Flynn, had a quote the other day. I was home this weekend with my wife and was looking over remarks made about John Paul II. The Archbishop said this: He will be known, I firmly believe, as John Paul the Great in the long history of the church. This will be because of his profound writings and for his unceasing focus on the dignity of each and every human being and the paramount value of human life. To my mind, his election to the pontificate was made possible by the providence of God and demonstrates God's love for his church. I agree with my friend Archbishop Flynn that John Paul II will be known in history as John Paul the Great. The human family is plagued by many artificial divisions. Once in a great while, a figure emerges whose ideas and example resonate across all boundaries and brings us together. John Paul II was such a person. As a Jew, I feel a deep sense of personal loss because the person I looked to for leadership and who I deeply and profoundly respected has passed on. I have the image of John Paul II at the western wall in Jerusalem, the Wailing Wall it has been called, the last remains of the outer part of the second temple, perhaps one of the holiest spots in the Jewish faith. I believe, if my recollection of Jewish tradition is correct, as you walk along the western wall, about 100 yards inward is the place where Abraham was going to sacrifice his son and the covenant with God was formed. I remember John Paul there praying, inserting his prayer--one of the things you do at the western wall is oftentimes you take a prayer and put it in one of the crevices of the wall as you say a prayer. His feeling was so deep and rich. I can see him there praying in front of the western wall, I believe asking for forgiveness for the church for the history of antisemitism. I have heard the essence of leadership described in this way: A leader maintains order in the midst of change and change in the midst of order. That was John Paul's outstanding gift. He held strongly to eternal values while he was a force for dynamic and even revolutionary change. He played a decisive role in the liberation of Eastern Europe and the fall of the Soviet Union. He has passed on within a few months of the other central figure in that historic change, Ronald Reagan. But Pope John Paul II did not wield military power. He was a man whose strength came from moral force and a conscience governed by peace. Remarkably, he was able to lead with equal impact in the vigorous early days of his papacy and in the weakness of his latter years. There has been so much that has been written and said about this Pope in the last few days that I believe has captured the essence of this great man. There is a piece I saw in Larry Kudlow's column. I would like to read from it: John Paul II reached across all religious lines, becoming the most evangelical pope in recent memory. He was tireless as he spread his message of traditional religious faith and values to anyone who would listen--believers, nonbelievers, Catholics, Protestants, Muslims, Jews. This will surely be one of his most enduring legacies. You do not have to be Catholic to be grateful for the service John Paul II rendered to all mankind. He did a tremendous service by the way he reached out to Israel and Jews around the world. His visits to Holocaust sites healed generations of misunderstanding and underscored the world's conviction that events such as this must never be allowed to happen again. His constancy showed us how to live. His forgiveness showed us how to deal with evil. His generosity showed us our obligation to the less fortunate. His faith showed us that we all live for purposes far beyond ourselves. I was the mayor of St. Paul, MN, so I am happy to quote St. Paul's words to sum up the Holy Father's life: Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rude, it is not self- seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres. Love never fails. John Paul II was an ambassador of love, and his love will continue to bless the world. I said to my wife the other day: How blessed we are to have lived in his time. John Paul the Great is no longer physically with us, but he has touched all our souls in extraordinary ways. We thank God to have known him. Mr. President, I yield the floor, and I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. COLEMAN

Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the bill I introduce today be printed in the Record.

Mr. COLEMAN

Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. President, it broke my heart to miss my good friend Sidney Goodman's birthday today. So I wanted to memorialize this great occasion in a way that would be remembered. As I told Sidney in a letter, if he hadn't made something out of me, I would be there to celebrate with him instead of working here in Washington. Thomas Jefferson said that, ``The test of every generation is giving a better world to its children than it got from its parents.'' By that standard, Sidney is one of the greatest of the Greatest Generation. As you well know, it is not the years of life but the life in years that counts. Sidney has lived many years and lived them to the hilt. He has poured so much love and energy into those around him, including me. I hope he can receive all the richly deserved honor bestowed on him on this special day. He is 1 in 5 billion. Sidney A. Goodman is the quintessential entrepreneur, with heart. His charisma instantly draws people, and his expectations encourage them to become the very best they can be. His uncanny business sense makes him the consummate deal maker and natural leader. His honesty, integrity and warmth have cultivated thousands of business relationships that have become genuine friendships. These abilities enabled him to set the foundation of what would become the Goodman Group, one of the Nation's most unique and innovative privately held companies, in which he is still actively involved today. The Goodman Group is made up of: Sage Company, which has communities in 11 States and has been a national leader in developing and managing commercial properties, residential and senior living communities, and health care facilities since the 1970s. Sage is actually an acronym for Sidney Albert Goodman Enterprises; John B. Goodman Limited Partnership, a development and design company; Sage Travel, a full-service travel agency. Sidney started this organization from a single real estate holding which he acquired in 1952. At that time, he had a Hamms beer distributorship, which was very successful. However, when Hamms was purchased in 1970, he preferred to run his own business. So, like any good entrepreneur, he sold it back to them and focused on developing his real estate business, Sage Company. Through his business dealings, Sidney has been a mentor to hundreds of people over the years. He attentively listens to their challenges and offers guidance based on knowledge that can only be gained through experience. He does more than simply ask people to carry out an action; he explains why, based on wisdom that can only be attained from decades as a successful businessman. Sidney is generous with his knowledge, the most valuable asset anyone can have, because he genuinely cares about people. Whether they are an assistant or a company president, he sincerely wants to know about their life, their hopes, and dreams. He loves to give people the opportunity to challenge themselves and expand their horizons. And when they think they can't succeed, he is there to tell them they can. And they do. While Sidney is undoubtedly a very successful businessman, it is this concern for every individual that makes him an exceptional human being. I am proud to be Sidney Goodman's friend and I wish him a happy and blessed birthday celebration.

Mr. COLEMAN

Mr. COLEMAN. I move to reconsider the vote. MR. SARBANES. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. Amendment No. 208

Mr. COLEMAN. Yes, I yield.

Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. President, my amendment is simple. It says no cuts in the Community Development Block Grant Program or other programs such as the Community Service Block Grant Program, the Brownfield Redevelopment Program, and the Rural Housing and Economic Development Program. My amendment is fully offset by function 920.

Mr. COLEMAN

Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. President, today I am reintroducing the Central Contractor Registry Act. This legislation is particularly relevant this week, as we debate a tough budget to restore fiscal discipline. Last year the Government Accountability Office testified at a hearing before the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations that over 27,000 contractors at the Department of Defense owed over $3 billion in unpaid Federal taxes. If we want to demonstrate fiscal discipline, it seems to me that we ought to be looking at places like this before we start talking about cuts to Medicaid or the farm bill. Asking companies that win lucrative government contracts to simply pay their taxes seems like common sense to me. That's why I have introduced the Central Contractor Registry Act. This bill will close a $3 billion tax loophole and will help to recover over $100 million annually from federal contractors who have not filed federal tax returns or who have not paid the taxes they owe the government. The bill is simple: it establishes a centralized contractor database within the Department of Defense, and requires federal contractors who register in that database to provide their taxpayer identification number and their consent to verifying that number with the Internal Revenue Service as a condition that must precede the awarding of a contract by the Department of Defense. Normally, companies that are delinquent in paying their taxes are levied 15 percent of the payments they receive as government contractors. In fiscal year 2002, this should have amounted to over $100 million from tax delinquent Department of Defense contractors. However, actual collections for that year were less than $500,000. And in 2001, over 26,000 of the defense contracts submitted to the IRS to determine contractors' tax liability were unusable. One of the principal reasons for this anemic state of collections and the large volume of unusable information returns is the inability of the Department of Defense and the Internal Revenue Service to reach an accord on verifying the taxpayer identification numbers of the contractors who have registered in the Department of Defense's Central Contractor Registration database. Under current law, the Department of Defense's authority to verify contractors' taxpayer identification numbers is limited to those contractors who have contracts with the Department of Defense and for whom the department is required to report miscellaneous income to the Internal Revenue Service on a Form 1099 information return. However, there are contractors who have registered in the Central Contractor Registration for whom the Department of Defense lacks authority to verify their taxpayer identification numbers, including individuals and companies who would like to contract with the federal government and contractors who have contracts with agencies and departments other than the Department of Defense. And often the numbers provided are incorrect, but there is no recourse. My bill will resolve the impasse between the Department of Defense and the Internal Revenue Service by requesting contractors' consent to the validation of their taxpayer identification number as part of the registration process. Contractors will not be required to provide their consent. But if they do not, they will not be awarded a contract by the Department of Defense. Further, my bill requires the Department of Defense to warn contractors as part of the registration process that if they do not provide a valid taxpayer identification number they may be subject to backup withholding. This would apply to those contractors who list an invalid taxpayer identification number, have a contract with the Department of Defense, and will earn miscellaneous income that is required to be reported to the Internal Revenue Service. I would like to briefly summarize the major provisions of my bill. It provides a statutory basis for the Central Contractor Registration and renames the database as the Central Contractor Registry. It requires that the registry contain contractors' taxpayer identification numbers, their consent to verifying their numbers with the Internal Revenue Service and for the Internal Revenue Service to provide a corrected number if possible. It requires that registrants furnish this information as a condition for registration, and requires the Department of Defense to warn contractors who fail to provide a valid taxpayer identification number that they may be subject to backup withholding and requires implementation of backup withholding in cases where it is required. It precludes awarding a contract to any registrant who has not provided a valid taxpayer identification number and excludes from coverage any registrant who is not required to have a taxpayer identification number. It directs the Secretary of Defense to apply to the Internal Revenue Service for inclusion in the Taxpayer Identification Number Matching Program and directs the Commissioner of Internal Revenue to provide response to the Department of Defense. It directs the Secretary of Defense to provide any registrant who is determined to have an invalid taxpayer identification number with an opportunity to provide a valid number. It further requires that the Central Contractor Registry clearly indicate whether a registrant's taxpayer identification number is valid, under review, invalid, or not required. Finally, it requires that contractors' taxpayer identification numbers be treated as confidential by federal contract officers who have access to the Central Contractor Registry. This bill will ensure that tax cheats are not rewarded with Federal contracts. As we debate the budget this week, I encourage my colleagues to join me in supporting this bill. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. COLEMAN

Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. President, today I am reintroducing the Central Contractor Registry Act. This legislation is particularly relevant this week, as we debate a tough budget to restore fiscal discipline. Last year the Government Accountability Office testified at a hearing before the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations that over 27,000 contractors at the Department of Defense owed over $3 billion in unpaid Federal taxes. If we want to demonstrate fiscal discipline, it seems to me that we ought to be looking at places like this before we start talking about cuts to Medicaid or the farm bill. Asking companies that win lucrative government contracts to simply pay their taxes seems like common sense to me. That's why I have introduced the Central Contractor Registry Act. This bill will close a $3 billion tax loophole and will help to recover over $100 million annually from federal contractors who have not filed federal tax returns or who have not paid the taxes they owe the government. The bill is simple: it establishes a centralized contractor database within the Department of Defense, and requires federal contractors who register in that database to provide their taxpayer identification number and their consent to verifying that number with the Internal Revenue Service as a condition that must precede the awarding of a contract by the Department of Defense. Normally, companies that are delinquent in paying their taxes are levied 15 percent of the payments they receive as government contractors. In fiscal year 2002, this should have amounted to over $100 million from tax delinquent Department of Defense contractors. However, actual collections for that year were less than $500,000. And in 2001, over 26,000 of the defense contracts submitted to the IRS to determine contractors' tax liability were unusable. One of the principal reasons for this anemic state of collections and the large volume of unusable information returns is the inability of the Department of Defense and the Internal Revenue Service to reach an accord on verifying the taxpayer identification numbers of the contractors who have registered in the Department of Defense's Central Contractor Registration database. Under current law, the Department of Defense's authority to verify contractors' taxpayer identification numbers is limited to those contractors who have contracts with the Department of Defense and for whom the department is required to report miscellaneous income to the Internal Revenue Service on a Form 1099 information return. However, there are contractors who have registered in the Central Contractor Registration for whom the Department of Defense lacks authority to verify their taxpayer identification numbers, including individuals and companies who would like to contract with the federal government and contractors who have contracts with agencies and departments other than the Department of Defense. And often the numbers provided are incorrect, but there is no recourse. My bill will resolve the impasse between the Department of Defense and the Internal Revenue Service by requesting contractors' consent to the validation of their taxpayer identification number as part of the registration process. Contractors will not be required to provide their consent. But if they do not, they will not be awarded a contract by the Department of Defense. Further, my bill requires the Department of Defense to warn contractors as part of the registration process that if they do not provide a valid taxpayer identification number they may be subject to backup withholding. This would apply to those contractors who list an invalid taxpayer identification number, have a contract with the Department of Defense, and will earn miscellaneous income that is required to be reported to the Internal Revenue Service. I would like to briefly summarize the major provisions of my bill. It provides a statutory basis for the Central Contractor Registration and renames the database as the Central Contractor Registry. It requires that the registry contain contractors' taxpayer identification numbers, their consent to verifying their numbers with the Internal Revenue Service and for the Internal Revenue Service to provide a corrected number if possible. It requires that registrants furnish this information as a condition for registration, and requires the Department of Defense to warn contractors who fail to provide a valid taxpayer identification number that they may be subject to backup withholding and requires implementation of backup withholding in cases where it is required. It precludes awarding a contract to any registrant who has not provided a valid taxpayer identification number and excludes from coverage any registrant who is not required to have a taxpayer identification number. It directs the Secretary of Defense to apply to the Internal Revenue Service for inclusion in the Taxpayer Identification Number Matching Program and directs the Commissioner of Internal Revenue to provide response to the Department of Defense. It directs the Secretary of Defense to provide any registrant who is determined to have an invalid taxpayer identification number with an opportunity to provide a valid number. It further requires that the Central Contractor Registry clearly indicate whether a registrant's taxpayer identification number is valid, under review, invalid, or not required. Finally, it requires that contractors' taxpayer identification numbers be treated as confidential by federal contract officers who have access to the Central Contractor Registry. This bill will ensure that tax cheats are not rewarded with Federal contracts. As we debate the budget this week, I encourage my colleagues to join me in supporting this bill. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. COLEMAN

Mr. COLEMAN. Madam President, I have an amendment I send to the desk for immediate consideration.

Mr. COLEMAN. I ask unanimous consent that the reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Mr. COLEMAN. Madam President, let me express my thanks to my colleague from Maryland, Senator Sarbanes, for his work on this issue and for his leadership in the Senate. We serve together on the Foreign Relations Committee. It is a great honor. He brings great compassion, great respect, great dignity to the committee, to the institution, and his service is greatly appreciated. It is my honor as a relatively new Senator to be working on an issue that is so important to him as it is to me and to the folks I represent, both as a Senator from Minnesota, but as I represented as mayor in the city of St. Paul. My amendment is simple. It says no cuts to the Community Development Block Grant Program. It says no moving CDBG, no to program changes that limit CDBG's effectiveness. I share the President's goal of reducing the deficit and bringing fiscal accountability to Washington. But like so many things in Washington, the devil is in the details. In the case of CDBG, the details in the budget need to be reworked quite a bit. I have a simple philosophy: Don't kill those things that build the economy and help cut deficits. I strongly supported tax cuts that create investment and grow jobs. CDBG grows jobs. Community development block grants grow communities. When I talk to the folks back in Minnesota, whether they are city administrators or mayors or county commissioners, they all say the same thing: The Community Development Block Grant Program is the lifeblood of community development. That is why I am offering this amendment to fully fund CDBG along with the Community Service Block Grant Program, the Brownfield Redevelopment Program, and the Rural Housing and Economic Development Program, to name a few. These are things that work. Let's change and reshape things that do not work. But when you go home and folks say across the board--big town, small town, urban, rural--that it works, work with it. CDBG was enacted in 1974 and has been assisting America's communities for 30 years. It is a program that helps State and local government tap their most serious community development challenges, including infrastructure, housing, and economic development. Over the first 25 years, it has created 2 million jobs and contributed in excess of $129 billion to the Nation's gross domestic product. CDBG and public-private partnerships are the cornerstone of the economic revitalization across the country and in many of our cities in recent years. They have provided the tools to provide economic opportunity and hold jobs. When you deal with the budget, there is a question of fiscal responsibility. Does the program work? Fair question. Is it cost effective? Fair question. What does it achieve? I know CDBG works because when I was mayor, before coming to Washington, I worked with it. In coming here, my hope was to be Minnesota's mayor in Washington. I always take pride in the fact that a mayor's focus is on getting things done. They are at the bottom of the political food chain but really responsive. That was the bottom line. It was getting things done. If streets were unplowed in the city of St. Paul, I heard about it. So as a former mayor I know something about fiscal responsibility, about having to reduce needless bureaucracy, about turning deficits into surpluses, and setting money aside for a rainy day, all while submitting budgets that contained no tax increases in 8 years. Part of my ability to do that was the growth I saw in my communities and the public-private partnerships that CDBG created and shaped and was a part of. Community centers and crime prevention, affordable housing, and business and economic development--the heart and soul of Federal help to our cities. The Presiding Officer serves the great State of Alaska, which has challenges. They are not awash in a surplus of cash. The Presiding Officer understands, as I understand, we have to support those things that grow our communities. The fact is, jobs in St. Paul's economy have not grown without CDBG. We used CDBG to revitalize neighborhoods, and it is through this effort we were successful. I can personally testify that dollar for dollar there is no better initiative to help States and localities renew and rebuild our cities and create economic growth and jobs than the Community Development Block Grant Program. As Minnesota's mayor in Washington, I still believe that Government is beholden to the people; that individuals, with the help of their local representatives, can plan their lives better than bureaucrats in some distant capital. That is what I like, and the idea behind CDBG, a very conservative idea that we should not have 1,500 command and control programs rush out of Washington trying to micromanage the needs of communities. Instead, we should help communities meet those needs and priorities through one block grant. With all the unfunded mandates coming from Washington, CDBG is a way we help communities across the country meet some very critical priorities. CDBG is a fiscally responsible program that exponentially produces more than it costs and is a truly conservative initiative enabling local leaders to meet local needs. CDBG works. Last year, the Office of Management and Budget celebrated CDBG under the theme ``performance counts.'' Since then, the Office of Management and Budget may have changed its mind, but America hasn't. Let me state what CDBG means to my home State in Minnesota. When I became mayor of St. Paul, we got businesses and jobs growing. But not all St. Paul was benefiting from the turnaround. An area around Ames Lake on the east side of St. Paul, one of my toughest neighborhoods, needed help, needed growth. They could not take part in the surrounding economic boom because the buildings were in total disrepair and businesses were looking to move out, not move in. It would have been an impossible situation if not for CDBG. But thanks to CDBG, we were able to leverage Federal funds to attract millions of private dollars to improve infrastructure and replace the blight of city sprawl with green space, and build a community center to keep kids off the street. I was at the League of City meetings the other day and talking to the member who represents the east side of St. Paul. In that community, they had a shopping center that was blighted, with nothing there. Reeds grew up through the concrete. We figured out the Good Lord was saying there was a wetland in the heart of the city. We got rid of the shopping center, got rid of the concrete, and created wetlands. Now he is telling me we have housing in the worst areas of St. Paul; the most blighted areas are growing and prospering. Again, CDBG was an important part of it. In other words, thanks to CDBG, Ames Lake is now moving in the right direction. St. Paul is located within Ramsey County. And like all counties with a big city, Ramsey County struggles with sort of a split identity. On one hand, it has suburbs that are doing well compared to parts of the big city. Within the city is land intense with industrial projects such as car parks and truck sites that big cities need. Now these projects are great to have when they are up and running, but when they shut down, they are so large they take whole communities with them that is happened with the Glendenning Truck site. It was in bad condition, and local officials knew something had to be done about it. Using CDBG, they were able to replace a dilapidated truck site with thriving businesses and jobs. Ramsey County also used CDBG to transform the Vadnais Highlands apartment complex into safe, attractive and affordable housing. I give another example of how community development becomes economic development. There is a town of 502 people in Minnesota called Brewster. In 1997, Brewster was awarded a one time community development block grant. This grant allowed Brewster to renew and rejuvenate its infrastructure by tearing down its dilapidated structures and replacing them with 40 homes. As a result of this investment, when Minnesota Soybean Processors was looking for a new home, there was no better place than Brewster. The relocation of Minnesota Soybean Processors immediately created 40 jobs. In fact, that CDBG grant is still creating jobs as Minnesota Soybean Processors are now opening a biodiesel division which will employ 10 more people. In another example, the city of Rochester, MN, used CDBG to fund the Aldrich Memorial Nursery School, providing pre-school kids with a safe place to be while mom and dad are working. The city of Minneapolis uses CDBG to improve housing, stimulate job growth, improve public infrastructure, provide public health services, and school readiness programs. A reduction in CDBG could hinder the city's current efforts to help 200 moms and dads to find jobs; efforts to develop 150 multifamily homes; efforts to acquire and demolish 110 vacant and boarded up houses; efforts to provide capital improvements to child care facilities, and efforts to reduce lead hazards in 70 homes and provide youth employment training to 300 kids. That is a lot of bang for the buck. Minneapolis is a big city, but community development block grants are just as important to our rural communities. As you may know, America's rural communities often lack the resources to improve their infrastructure and housing. The town of Detroit Lakes is located in Becker County, MN, and has about 7,500 residents. It is the heart of Lake Country in the land of 10,000 lakes. If you have not visited there, you should. Spend some money there while enjoying the lakes. The beach is right in town. At 119 Pioneer Street is the Graystone Hotel. Built in 1916 to accommodate the region's growing tourism industry, the Graystone Hotel had since fallen on hard times. Its once grand exterior had degenerated into an unsightly mess, and its rooms all but abandoned. In short, what was once one of Detroit Lakes' flagship buildings, was now its biggest detraction. Using CDBG along with private funding, the Graystone Hotel now includes 41 residential units and a variety of businesses and nonprofit enterprises ranging from Lakeland Medical Health Center to Godfather's Pizza. St. Louis County, which is located in northern Minnesota and is one of the more rural areas in Minnesota, has also used CDBG. Since 1993, CDBG has helped create 560 jobs in St. Louis County; it has provided 2,900 residents of St. Louis County with business training resulting in 159 new start-up businesses; 450 homes were improved through local housing rehabilitation programs in the county. Hundreds of first-time home buyers participated in a first-time home buyer program, resulting in the purchase of 600 single family homes. In St. Louis County, CDBG also helps fund community soup kitchens, emergency shelters, child daycare projects, programs combating domestic violence, and a number of infrastructure improvements such as the water treatment facility in Aurora. St. Louis County has been able to leverage $5 in private dollars for every dollar they received through the CDBG program. CDBG works, but don't take my word for it, just 1 ask the folks in Detroit Lakes, St. Paul, or St. Louis County. I was pleased to work with Senator Patrick Leahy in leading a bipartisan coalition of 57 Senators in sending a message to the Senate Budget Committee signifying our strong commitment to CDBG and reminding folks that cities from Montpelier to Minneapolis need CDBG to create economic opportunity and to grow jobs.

Mr. COLEMAN. I also ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record a letter of support for the community development block grant program from the U.S. Conference of Mayors, the National Governors Association, the National Community Development Association, National Association of Counties, the National League of Cities, the Council of State Community Development Agencies, the Local Initiatives Support Corporation, the Enterprise Foundation, the National Association of Housing and Redevelopment Officials, the National Association of Local Housing Finance Agencies, the National Council of State Housing Agencies, and the National Congress for Community Economic Development.

Mr. COLEMAN. I urge my colleagues to adopt my amendment and show their support for these community leaders by fully funding the community development block grant program, keeping it at HUD, and rejecting any harmful changes.

Mr. COLEMAN

Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. President, first, I am pleased to rise in support of the amendment offered by my colleague from Oregon, Senator Smith, as well as Senator Bingaman. I appreciate the challenges faced by the Budget Committee. Finances are tight. Tough decisions have to be made. We understand that. My dad is a carpenter. He builds with his hands. He is very good at it. I think in this case I am not so good and I think greatness skipped a generation. But my dad builds with his hands. Early on he tried to teach me: Measure twice before we cut once. Medicaid is the Nation's single largest payer of children's health services. Medicaid accounts, on average, for nearly 50 percent of the patient care revenue in children's hospitals. One out of every four children in the United States relies upon Medicaid for health coverage. It is an essential partner in providing high quality care to all children. Before we start restructuring or talk about cutting growth--which is what my colleagues who support the chairman's mark will say, that we are just cutting growth--I suggest that we measure twice and cut once. Medicaid is a safety net program that is intended, as my colleague from Oregon talked about, to protect vulnerable children as well as adults struggling with severe chronic illness and disabilities and mental illness. I suggest we need to measure twice and cut once. Minnesota's Medicaid Program is the largest health care program, providing coverage for a monthly average of 464,000 low-income seniors, children, families, and people with disabilities. Families, children, and pregnant women make up the largest group, 69 percent, but only capped at 22 percent of expenditures. The majority of expenditures, more than 78 percent, are for people who are elderly or have a disability. As I said, let us measure twice and cut once. What we are proposing is simply a commonsense approach to carefully consider an action of this magnitude before we are committed to it. With the commission, we stand a much better chance of doing the right thing, in the right way, with broad support. Let us sit down at the table with all the stakeholders and together decide how to make Medicaid better. We pride ourselves on being the world's greatest deliberative body. Yet today we are faced with the proposal that will substantially change and provide funding limitations impacting, as my colleague from Oregon said, the most vulnerable of Americans, the most vulnerable among us, and we are doing it without the kind of rigorous examination that this body should demand, should cry out for. This amendment simply provides that kind of rigorous, vigorous examination--a years's worth--saying step back for 1 year, then put together a process that allows us to do the examination, deliberation, allow the commission to hold public hearings, conduct examination, issue its report and recommendations to the President and to the Congress and the public. Let us do Medicaid reform. We need to do it. We need to get rid of the gaming. We need to get rid of those who are abusing the system. We need to cut the waste and the fraud, but let us do it in a way which ensures that any changes to Medicaid provide sustainability, promote access to health care, and doesn't hurt those who need the program the most. Let us look before we leap. We need to look at Medicaid to be sure we are on solid ground. I appreciate the tough challenges the Budget Committee is facing. I have deep respect for Chairman Gregg. He has a great heart. He wants the program to work. The chairman's mark is substantially better from where we began with this proposal. Again, let us do the kind of review that needs to be done. I urge my colleagues to vote for this amendment and establish a Medicaid commission to study this proposal before we act. I urge my colleagues to support this thoughtful amendment. I yield to my colleague who is a coauthor of the amendment, Senator Bingaman.

Mr. COLEMAN

Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. President, this week is National Peace Corps Week. It is with great pleasure that I send my congratulations to the Peace Corps volunteers serving throughout the world as we celebrate the Peace Corps' 44th year of service. Currently, more than 7,700 volunteers are answering the call to serve in 72 countries around the world. It is a list that is growing. In an historic agreement focused on science and technology, the Peace Corps entered Mexico last year. And over 20 other countries have expressed interest in establishing a partnership with the Peace Corps. Peace Corps volunteers have made a 27-month commitment to serve overseas typically in undeveloped or rural areas devoid of many modern necessities such as sanitation, transportation, and electricity. They work to achieve the first goal of the Peace Corps: training and educating people around the world. Volunteers are serving as teachers, business advisors, information technology consultants, agricultural workers, and as HIV/AIDS educators. Today over 3,100 Peace Corps volunteers are helping to implement President Bush's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief. Even as they work on their projects to help those in the countries they serve, Peace Corps volunteers become America's unofficial ``ambassadors'' of goodwill, fulfilling the Peace Corps' second goal of helping to promote a better understanding of America. In the words of former U.S. Ambassador Tibor Nagy: ``During my long overseas service, I consistently met two categories of people who were highly favorable toward our country: those who had close contact with Peace Corps volunteers, and those who had studied in the U.S.'' These kinds of public diplomacy efforts are more important today than ever. What's more, Peace Corps volunteers' unofficial ``ambassador'' duties do not conclude when they return home to the United States. Rather, they set about completing the third goal of the Peace Corps by promoting a better understanding of other countries here in America. In this way, Peace Corps volunteers give back much to their communities here at home. As chairman of the Subcommittee on Western Hemisphere, Peace Corps, and Narcotics Affairs, it is my desire to continue to assist in the growth of Peace Corps, and the well-being of its volunteers. As the Peace Corps continues to expand, I believe it is necessary to provide this agency the resources it needs to continue to ensure volunteer safety, productivity, and satisfaction. And I applaud efforts by the Peace Corps to further diversity our volunteers. It is my pleasure to recognize 223 Minnesota volunteers who right now are serving our Nation around the globe in countries from Albania to Uzbekistan. I would also like to recognize the over 5,000 returned Peace Corps volunteers who have already represented Minnesota and the United States abroad. Finally, I am happy to join with all past and present Peace Corps volunteers as we celebrate Peace Corps Week 2005, February 28-March 6.

Mr. COLEMAN

Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. President, traveling throughout rural Minnesota, I see a very real need for the revitalization and rebuilding of Main Streets, and this is why today I am introducing the Rural Renaissance Act with my good friends Senator Pryor of Arkansas, Senator Graham of South Carolina, and Senator DeWine of Ohio. This legislation acknowledges that rural America needs significant infrastructure investment if it is to join with the rest of the Nation in an economic recovery, and our bill proposes to apply $50 billion toward this end. Many Minnesota cities and towns need help with updating or expanding their drinking water supply systems or their wastewater treatment systems. The West Central Initiative and the USDA both estimate that there is a $1.5 billion gap between available local, State, and Federal resources and the amount needed by Minnesota communities. There are similar needs in communities throughout the rest of the Nation. Decaying physical infrastructure needs to be addressed because it impacts more than just health and quality of life. It also impacts the ability of a city or town to build housing, provide services, ensure access to information, and grow jobs. Throughout rural America, progress is being made in many areas, but in others, a lack of funding is impacting the ability of communities to address very critical albeit basic needs. Here is an example of the physical infrastructure challenges facing rural America: The Environmental Protection Agency estimates that communities will need an estimated $300 billion to $1 trillion over the next 20 years to repair, replace, or upgrade drinking water and wastewater facilities, accommodate a growing population, and meet water quality standards. Current residents and businesses of rural communities face a challenge when it comes to accessing the Internet. This reality means that these cities and towns are set back when it comes to attracting new residents and businesses. While the number of broadband subscribers has risen dramatically in recent years, studies conducted by the FCC, DOC, and USDA all suggest that urban and high-income areas are far outpacing deployment in rural and low-income areas. As a result of these disparities, rural America suffers adverse economic and social consequences. The USDA has reported that in 2000, less than five percent of towns with populations of 10,000 or less had access to broadband. Likewise, the Commerce Department has found that 21.2 percent of Internet users in urban areas have access to high-speed connections, while only 12.2 percent of Internet users in rural areas have this technology. Housing is essential if communities want to keep the businesses they have or attract new ones. Employers need to know that employees will be able to find housing that they can afford in or near the community. Housing efforts must emphasize new construction and rehabilitation alike. Communities need new units to attract new families and they must have the ability to help residents remodel and renovate existing housing. Housing in rural America is clearly an economic development issue. It is clear that these physical infrastructure needs have substantial financial implications for rural America. Some 1.8 million homes and apartments are moderately or severely substandard. Our Rural Renaissance Act addresses these needs. The impact of doing nothing poses great risks for the future of rural cities and towns. As you can see, the need for a rural renaissance is clear. Greater Minnesota alone needs almost $7 billion over the next 20 years to modernize infrastructure, accommodate the increasing population, and meet current water quality standards. The cost of bringing high speed Internet access to the rest of rural America is estimated at about $10.9 billion. These are just a couple of examples but the most vivid, I think, are just the closed stores you see up and down our Main Streets. We'd like to turn these towns around like we did in St. Paul, and we can. Our Rural Renaissance Act will fund these infrastructure improvements--and also provide for community facilities and farmer- owned and value-added projects--by sending $50 billion out to rural America in one to three years at a cost of about $15 billion over 10 years. It can be done through Federal bonds, just as we helped pay for the costs of World War II and as State and locals pay for many infrastructure developments. The key, however, is that these monies will be made available to States and locals, as well as farmer-owned coops and other eligible entities, in the form of grants and low interest loans. We have seen tremendous support from groups back home and across the country who share a commitment to revitalizing rural America and rebuilding our Main Streets. Those supporting this bill include, the Association of Minnesota Counties, the League of Minnesota Cities, the Minnesota Rural Water Association, the Independent Community Bankers of Minnesota, the Minnesota Rural Electric Association, the University of Minnesota, the Rural Broadband Coalition, the National Council of Farmer Cooperatives, the Telecommunications Industry Association, the American Sugarbeet Growers Association, Land O' Lakes, the Minnesota Corn Growers Association, the AgCountry Farm Credit Services, the AgStar Financial Services, the Farm Credit Services of Grand Forks, the Farm Credit Services of Minnesota Valley, AgriBank, the Minnesota Association of Wheat Growers, the Minnesota Association of Cooperatives, the Wisconsin Federation of Cooperatives, the Minnesota Barley Growers Association, the Minnesota Soybean Growers Association, the Minnesota Nursery and Landscape Association, the America Soybean Association, the Minnesota Association of Townships, the Minnesota Chapter of the National Association of Housing and Redevelopment Officials, and the Red River Valley Sugarbeet Growers Association. These groups and many others agree with us when we say that we need the Rural Renaissance Act. And we look forward to working with them on this legislation. Together, we can create economic opportunity in rural America and grow jobs. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the Rural Renaissance Act be printed in the Record.

Mr. COLEMAN

Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. President, traveling throughout rural Minnesota, I see a very real need for the revitalization and rebuilding of Main Streets, and this is why today I am introducing the Rural Renaissance Act with my good friends Senator Pryor of Arkansas, Senator Graham of South Carolina, and Senator DeWine of Ohio. This legislation acknowledges that rural America needs significant infrastructure investment if it is to join with the rest of the Nation in an economic recovery, and our bill proposes to apply $50 billion toward this end. Many Minnesota cities and towns need help with updating or expanding their drinking water supply systems or their wastewater treatment systems. The West Central Initiative and the USDA both estimate that there is a $1.5 billion gap between available local, State, and Federal resources and the amount needed by Minnesota communities. There are similar needs in communities throughout the rest of the Nation. Decaying physical infrastructure needs to be addressed because it impacts more than just health and quality of life. It also impacts the ability of a city or town to build housing, provide services, ensure access to information, and grow jobs. Throughout rural America, progress is being made in many areas, but in others, a lack of funding is impacting the ability of communities to address very critical albeit basic needs. Here is an example of the physical infrastructure challenges facing rural America: The Environmental Protection Agency estimates that communities will need an estimated $300 billion to $1 trillion over the next 20 years to repair, replace, or upgrade drinking water and wastewater facilities, accommodate a growing population, and meet water quality standards. Current residents and businesses of rural communities face a challenge when it comes to accessing the Internet. This reality means that these cities and towns are set back when it comes to attracting new residents and businesses. While the number of broadband subscribers has risen dramatically in recent years, studies conducted by the FCC, DOC, and USDA all suggest that urban and high-income areas are far outpacing deployment in rural and low-income areas. As a result of these disparities, rural America suffers adverse economic and social consequences. The USDA has reported that in 2000, less than five percent of towns with populations of 10,000 or less had access to broadband. Likewise, the Commerce Department has found that 21.2 percent of Internet users in urban areas have access to high-speed connections, while only 12.2 percent of Internet users in rural areas have this technology. Housing is essential if communities want to keep the businesses they have or attract new ones. Employers need to know that employees will be able to find housing that they can afford in or near the community. Housing efforts must emphasize new construction and rehabilitation alike. Communities need new units to attract new families and they must have the ability to help residents remodel and renovate existing housing. Housing in rural America is clearly an economic development issue. It is clear that these physical infrastructure needs have substantial financial implications for rural America. Some 1.8 million homes and apartments are moderately or severely substandard. Our Rural Renaissance Act addresses these needs. The impact of doing nothing poses great risks for the future of rural cities and towns. As you can see, the need for a rural renaissance is clear. Greater Minnesota alone needs almost $7 billion over the next 20 years to modernize infrastructure, accommodate the increasing population, and meet current water quality standards. The cost of bringing high speed Internet access to the rest of rural America is estimated at about $10.9 billion. These are just a couple of examples but the most vivid, I think, are just the closed stores you see up and down our Main Streets. We'd like to turn these towns around like we did in St. Paul, and we can. Our Rural Renaissance Act will fund these infrastructure improvements--and also provide for community facilities and farmer- owned and value-added projects--by sending $50 billion out to rural America in one to three years at a cost of about $15 billion over 10 years. It can be done through Federal bonds, just as we helped pay for the costs of World War II and as State and locals pay for many infrastructure developments. The key, however, is that these monies will be made available to States and locals, as well as farmer-owned coops and other eligible entities, in the form of grants and low interest loans. We have seen tremendous support from groups back home and across the country who share a commitment to revitalizing rural America and rebuilding our Main Streets. Those supporting this bill include, the Association of Minnesota Counties, the League of Minnesota Cities, the Minnesota Rural Water Association, the Independent Community Bankers of Minnesota, the Minnesota Rural Electric Association, the University of Minnesota, the Rural Broadband Coalition, the National Council of Farmer Cooperatives, the Telecommunications Industry Association, the American Sugarbeet Growers Association, Land O' Lakes, the Minnesota Corn Growers Association, the AgCountry Farm Credit Services, the AgStar Financial Services, the Farm Credit Services of Grand Forks, the Farm Credit Services of Minnesota Valley, AgriBank, the Minnesota Association of Wheat Growers, the Minnesota Association of Cooperatives, the Wisconsin Federation of Cooperatives, the Minnesota Barley Growers Association, the Minnesota Soybean Growers Association, the Minnesota Nursery and Landscape Association, the America Soybean Association, the Minnesota Association of Townships, the Minnesota Chapter of the National Association of Housing and Redevelopment Officials, and the Red River Valley Sugarbeet Growers Association. These groups and many others agree with us when we say that we need the Rural Renaissance Act. And we look forward to working with them on this legislation. Together, we can create economic opportunity in rural America and grow jobs. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the Rural Renaissance Act be printed in the Record.

Mr. COLEMAN

Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. President, today I am introducing legislation to reverse the decline in the number of international students studying at American colleges, universities, and high schools. I am very pleased to be joined by my friend and colleague, Senator Bingaman, who cares deeply about these issues as I do. Policies implemented to keep our country safe in the wake of September 11 have had the unintended consequence of dramatically reducing the number of international students studying in the United States. Total international applications to U.S. graduate schools fell 28 percent from fall 2003 to fall 2004, and 54 percent of all English as a Second Language (ESL) programs have reported declines in overall applications at a time where countries such as the U.K., Canada, and Australia are experiencing increases. Why is this a concern for our country? From a foreign policy perspective, America needs all the Ambassadors of goodwill we can get. In a world that too often hates Americans because they do not know us, international education represents an opportunity to break down barriers. It is in our local and national interest for the best and brightest foreign students to study in America because these are people who will lead their nations one day. The experience they gain with our democratic system and our values gives them a better understanding of what America is and who Americans are. My caseworkers in Minnesota have dealt with literally hundreds of student visas cases. One case in particular stands out--that of Humphrey Tusimiirwe, a brilliant student from Uganda who was having difficulty getting his student visa for study at St. Thomas. Fortunately, after several calls to the U.S. Ambassador, Humphrey's story ultimately had a happy ending, and he is going to be part of our panel at the University of Minnesota. But too many other students are barred from coming to study in America, and far too many are choosing to not study in the U.S. and instead go elsewhere. I have heard from Minnesota's colleges and universities. The presence of international students on campuses gives American students an irreplaceable opportunity to learn about other cultures and points of view. That's why this legislation has the endorsement of the University of Minnesota, the MnSCU student association, the Minneapolis Star Tribune and Rochester Post Bulletin, and others. International education is a $13 billion industry, and foreign students who pay full tuition help keep costs down for American students. In Minnesota alone, international students contribute some $175 million to our economy. Finally, I think this is an economic competitiveness issue too. Attracting the world's top scientific scholars helps to keep our economy competitive. Too many of the world's best scientists are opting against studying in the U.S. because of the barriers we have imposed. We need the world's best and brightest to continue to do their research here, and to continue to use their talents to improve American innovation and ultimately create American jobs. Many of America's most innovative business leaders and top CEOs came to the U.S. as international students. At the same time, laws are in place to make sure companies hire American workers first, and my legislation would not change that. That's why I will introduce legislation, the COMPETE Act, that will make sure American students have the math, science, and engineering skills needed to stay competitive. While the State Department has made some very important strides, such as extending the validity of Visas Mantis security clearances and speeding up their processing time, there are still too many qualified students unable to get visas to study in America, and too many who today are deterred from even applying. That's why I am pleased once again to join with my friend the Senator from New Mexico in introducing the American Competitiveness Through International Openness Now (ACTION) Act. Our bill calls for a number of steps that would help America regain our place as the top destination for international students, scholars, scientists and exchange visitors. First, our bill calls for a strategic marketing plan similar to strategies implemented by the U.K., E.U., Canada and Australia to help America regain lost ground in attracting the world's best and brightest. There is a perception around the world that America is no longer a welcoming place, so we need to be deliberate and smart in our efforts to change that view. The bill calls for more realistic standards for visa evaluations by updating a 50-year old criterion for visa approval and admittance to the United States. Under the so-called 214(b) rule, young people currently need to prove that they have ``essential ties'' to their home countries and no intention of emigrating to the U.S. But in this age of globalization, it is increasingly difficult for a 20-year old to do this. Many have lived and studied in other countries, and some have lost their parents to AIDS. They don't own a house or a business, they don't have spouses or children. Consular officers treat every student as an intending immigrant, and it is exceedingly difficult for a student to prove otherwise. Our legislation calls for common-sense changes to management of the SEVIS system, which tracks international students and visitors. Under this legislation, the database would be run more effectively, and fees would be collected in a more fair manner. The bill also sets standards for more timeliness and certainty in the student visa process, upgrading communication between government agencies dealing with student visas and enabling them to identify security risks and clear those who are not a threat more quickly. I spent time in Minnesota last Friday listening to my constituents' views about this bill and the positive effect it would have on Minnesota colleges and universities. The response was overwhelming. These summits prompted me to add a section to the bill dealing specifically with students who have to return home for family emergencies, and a section to help intensive English programs compete with their counterparts in the U.K. and Australia. We have often seen that prejudice is bred by isolation. Those who only look at this country through a keyhole can draw all kinds of outrageous conclusions. But exposure and interaction bring people together. Especially in a time when we are burdened with the question, ``Why do they hate us?'' we need to enhance those opportunities for people to see us as we really are. International exchanges present precisely this opportunity. International education brings too much to our campuses, our communities, our economy and our national security to become another victim of the age of terrorism. If we can take ACTION to reverse the decline now, all Americans will reap the benefits for decades to come. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. COLEMAN

Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. President, I rise to extend my congratulations to Henry Herzing, founder and President of Herzing Colleges, for providing 40 years of progressive, career-focused education that has prepared a diverse student population to meet the needs of employers in technology, business, health care, design and public safety. Since the first campus opened in Milwaukee, WI in 1965 as a computer programming school, Herzing College has grown to include six campuses in the U.S. along with other affiliated colleges, five of which are in Canada. During these 40 years of expanding its campuses and diversifying its educational programs, Herzing College has also raised its level of credentials from diploma to associate of science, to most recently, Bachelor of Science degrees. In recent years, Herzing College has also brought its high-quality programs to the online environment to allow students in other locations to upgrade their career potential. I congratulate Henry Herzing and all his faculty and staff for 40 years of ``student-centered'' education and urge him to continue to play an important role in the higher education community in the United States.

Mr. COLEMAN

Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. President, today I am introducing legislation to reverse the decline in the number of international students studying at American colleges, universities, and high schools. I am very pleased to be joined by my friend and colleague, Senator Bingaman, who cares deeply about these issues as I do. Policies implemented to keep our country safe in the wake of September 11 have had the unintended consequence of dramatically reducing the number of international students studying in the United States. Total international applications to U.S. graduate schools fell 28 percent from fall 2003 to fall 2004, and 54 percent of all English as a Second Language (ESL) programs have reported declines in overall applications at a time where countries such as the U.K., Canada, and Australia are experiencing increases. Why is this a concern for our country? From a foreign policy perspective, America needs all the Ambassadors of goodwill we can get. In a world that too often hates Americans because they do not know us, international education represents an opportunity to break down barriers. It is in our local and national interest for the best and brightest foreign students to study in America because these are people who will lead their nations one day. The experience they gain with our democratic system and our values gives them a better understanding of what America is and who Americans are. My caseworkers in Minnesota have dealt with literally hundreds of student visas cases. One case in particular stands out--that of Humphrey Tusimiirwe, a brilliant student from Uganda who was having difficulty getting his student visa for study at St. Thomas. Fortunately, after several calls to the U.S. Ambassador, Humphrey's story ultimately had a happy ending, and he is going to be part of our panel at the University of Minnesota. But too many other students are barred from coming to study in America, and far too many are choosing to not study in the U.S. and instead go elsewhere. I have heard from Minnesota's colleges and universities. The presence of international students on campuses gives American students an irreplaceable opportunity to learn about other cultures and points of view. That's why this legislation has the endorsement of the University of Minnesota, the MnSCU student association, the Minneapolis Star Tribune and Rochester Post Bulletin, and others. International education is a $13 billion industry, and foreign students who pay full tuition help keep costs down for American students. In Minnesota alone, international students contribute some $175 million to our economy. Finally, I think this is an economic competitiveness issue too. Attracting the world's top scientific scholars helps to keep our economy competitive. Too many of the world's best scientists are opting against studying in the U.S. because of the barriers we have imposed. We need the world's best and brightest to continue to do their research here, and to continue to use their talents to improve American innovation and ultimately create American jobs. Many of America's most innovative business leaders and top CEOs came to the U.S. as international students. At the same time, laws are in place to make sure companies hire American workers first, and my legislation would not change that. That's why I will introduce legislation, the COMPETE Act, that will make sure American students have the math, science, and engineering skills needed to stay competitive. While the State Department has made some very important strides, such as extending the validity of Visas Mantis security clearances and speeding up their processing time, there are still too many qualified students unable to get visas to study in America, and too many who today are deterred from even applying. That's why I am pleased once again to join with my friend the Senator from New Mexico in introducing the American Competitiveness Through International Openness Now (ACTION) Act. Our bill calls for a number of steps that would help America regain our place as the top destination for international students, scholars, scientists and exchange visitors. First, our bill calls for a strategic marketing plan similar to strategies implemented by the U.K., E.U., Canada and Australia to help America regain lost ground in attracting the world's best and brightest. There is a perception around the world that America is no longer a welcoming place, so we need to be deliberate and smart in our efforts to change that view. The bill calls for more realistic standards for visa evaluations by updating a 50-year old criterion for visa approval and admittance to the United States. Under the so-called 214(b) rule, young people currently need to prove that they have ``essential ties'' to their home countries and no intention of emigrating to the U.S. But in this age of globalization, it is increasingly difficult for a 20-year old to do this. Many have lived and studied in other countries, and some have lost their parents to AIDS. They don't own a house or a business, they don't have spouses or children. Consular officers treat every student as an intending immigrant, and it is exceedingly difficult for a student to prove otherwise. Our legislation calls for common-sense changes to management of the SEVIS system, which tracks international students and visitors. Under this legislation, the database would be run more effectively, and fees would be collected in a more fair manner. The bill also sets standards for more timeliness and certainty in the student visa process, upgrading communication between government agencies dealing with student visas and enabling them to identify security risks and clear those who are not a threat more quickly. I spent time in Minnesota last Friday listening to my constituents' views about this bill and the positive effect it would have on Minnesota colleges and universities. The response was overwhelming. These summits prompted me to add a section to the bill dealing specifically with students who have to return home for family emergencies, and a section to help intensive English programs compete with their counterparts in the U.K. and Australia. We have often seen that prejudice is bred by isolation. Those who only look at this country through a keyhole can draw all kinds of outrageous conclusions. But exposure and interaction bring people together. Especially in a time when we are burdened with the question, ``Why do they hate us?'' we need to enhance those opportunities for people to see us as we really are. International exchanges present precisely this opportunity. International education brings too much to our campuses, our communities, our economy and our national security to become another victim of the age of terrorism. If we can take ACTION to reverse the decline now, all Americans will reap the benefits for decades to come. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

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. I am also pleased to announce that Congressmen Tom Davis and Henry Waxman are introducing this exact measure in the House today. The issue of rogue Internet sites and the availability of controlled substances on-line is indeed a bi-partisan and bi-cameral issue. 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 wonder 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 one, providing new disclosure standards for Internet pharmacies; two, 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 three, 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 web sites 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 3000 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 FDN 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 product, 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, last year at JFK, there were as many as 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 have worked 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. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

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. I am also pleased to announce that Congressmen Tom Davis and Henry Waxman are introducing this exact measure in the House today. The issue of rogue Internet sites and the availability of controlled substances on-line is indeed a bi-partisan and bi-cameral issue. 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 wonder 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 one, providing new disclosure standards for Internet pharmacies; two, 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 three, 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 web sites 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 3000 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 FDN 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 product, 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, last year at JFK, there were as many as 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 have worked 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. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. COLEMAN

Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. President, today I am pleased to introduce the Federal Youth Coordination Act with my good friends, Senator Mike DeWine and Senator Lamar Alexander. The idea for this legislation emanated from the 2003 White House Task Force for Disadvantaged Youth report that indicated Federal youth programs were spread across 12 different departments and agencies. It identified 150 programs that served children and youth up to age 21, but also discovered several of these programs were no longer in existence. Today, there is a real need for strong role models in our communities to help at-risk youth. As a parent, I know there are a number of things that influence and shape our children's lives and unfortunately sometimes there are more negative things than positive. Youth programs help combat the negative influences and help restore hope, provide guidance, and help kids stay on the right track. While we have the resources to help our kids, a lack of coordination among youth programs has limited the full potential we have to change lives. Our bill will unleash that potential and bring our youth groups to full strength. The Federal Youth Coordination Act will bring efficiency and accountability to federal youth policy by developing a Federal Youth Development Council. Composed of Department Secretaries, youth serving organizations and youth themselves, the Council will coordinate existing federal programs, research and other initiatives, enabling a more comprehensive approach to serving the nation's young people. The purpose of the Council is not to eliminate existing programs, nor to create new ones. The Council will ensure communication among youth serving agencies, assess the needs of youth, set quantifiable goals and objectives for federal youth programs and develop a coordinated plan to achieve those goals. This approach is also cost-effective. The Council will only cost about $1.5 million, and the cost-savings that will be achieved through improved efficiency and reduced duplication of efforts will easily recoup those costs. This legislation has bipartisan support and the strong support of our nation's youth serving organizations including the Boy Scouts of America, the Girl Scouts of America, the Boys & Girls Clubs of America, the YMCA and the Child Welfare League of America. I hope the Senate will be able to act on this important legislation early this year to ensure our kids have the support they need. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. COLEMAN

Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. President, much of the discussion of Social Security has been dominated by the politics of fear, scaring seniors into believing their benefits will be cut or taken away. Let me be clear. Discussions about Social Security are not about the retirement security of those Americans who are 55 or older; the Social Security system for folks 55 and older is fine. It is not going to be changed. I will be one of those. If you were born before 1950, you are OK. There is nothing to worry about. In fact, I urge those 55 or older, talk to your kids; Talk to your grandkids; Start thinking a little bit about their future. Social Security is a sacred trust. Many Minnesotan seniors depend on Social Security each month to buy food and medicine. Those checks are going to continue regardless of what happens in the discussion today. The reality is we face a challenge, the challenge that the President of the United States talked about in the State of the Union, a challenge to work in a bipartisan way to fix the problems we all know Social Security faces today. Society is changing. We are living longer. We are healthier, more productive. This places greater pressures on America's retirement system. When Social Security was started, there were 41 workers for every retiree. By 1960, there were 16 workers per retiree. Today there are 3 workers per retiree. When the baby boomers start to retire in only 3 years, there will be a point where there are 2 workers for every retiree. That is the challenge we face. As we start to retire, right now we have a surplus. In 13 years, we will be paying more out of Social Security than is coming in as more and more baby boomers retire. Congress will be faced in a little over a decade and beyond with a decision of how to make up the hundreds of billions of dollars going out of a system, than is coming in. That will have an impact on many other things we need to do for the country. The challenge is, do we sit and wait? Three years comes quickly. In 13 years, the system pays out more than comes in. What do we do before we reach that point? It is not bankrupt but it means it does not have enough money to pay its obligations. Two-thirds of the folks working today every day have 12 percent from their paycheck taken out for Social Security every week. At a certain point they will not have that. That is a reality. It is not political rhetoric. It is a reflection of demographics. The question is, What do we do? I offer personal experience on an issue like this to my colleagues to reflect upon. When I was elected mayor of St. Paul in 1993, there was a contract settled before I became mayor. My budget director then walked in, and said: Mr. Mayor, we will have $200 million of unfunded liability retiree health benefits based on their contract unless we do something. The good news is it is 15 years away. My advisers said, 15 years away, that is not your problem; that is someone else's problem down the road. I had a son who was 8 years old and my daughter was 4. I thought that 8 years was a blink of the eye. Fifteen years is two blinks of the eye. It comes quickly. Any parent knows if your kid today is 3 years old, 5 years old, they will start college in 13 years. It is a blink of the eye. The reality is I got sued and picketed, but we worked out a solution. We rejected a contract and worked out a solution that did not impact those in the program today, not unlike what the President is saying, that we are not going to impact those who are 55 or older today, but for younger people coming in we are going to look at their future and figure out what we are going to do. And we did. That was a little over a decade, 12 years ago. I don't see discussion today in St. Paul, the capital city, about unfunded liability. We had the courage to address the situation. The challenge is to fix Social Security permanently in an open, candid, and bipartisan approach to reviewing the option. Any proposal must be fashioned in a bipartisan way. On this score, the President highlighted a number of proposals that friends on the other side of the aisle in the past have offered. For example, President Clinton spoke of increasing the retirement age when he was in office. Former Congressman Tim Penny from my home State of Minnesota has raised the possibility of indexing benefits to prices rather than wages. Former Senator John Breaux suggested discouraging the early collection of Social Security benefits. The late Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan recommended changing the way benefits are calculated. I am hopeful my Democratic colleagues today will have the wisdom of their predecessors to recognize a problem is on the horizon and will have the willingness to work with us to find a solution. Again, some will tie this discussion to a national scare campaign to exploit fears for political gain. Don't. Talking about the future of our kids is way too important. Today's discussion about Social Security is about giving the younger generation, in part, a higher rate of return on the paltry 1.6 percent they earn from Social Security today, a 1.6-percent return on their investment. There is a discussion we are having about allowing younger workers the opportunity to build their own nest egg, to give them a sense of ownership that they do not have over the money they themselves earn and pay into Social Security. It is their money and they are working for it. They should have the right to generate a return on that investment in a way that is not subject to speculation, not subject to rolling the dice. We can set up a system that gives younger workers an opportunity to have a nest egg that will grow. That is not the entire solution, but it is part of the solution. Let us have the willingness to work together to give young people that opportunity to have a piece of the rock for themselves and, at the same time, have the courage to deal with some of the broader issues. The question is, Will we in Congress make a political decision and do what is easy and push a $10.4 trillion gap in Social Security to another generation and another Congress or will we make the responsible decision and try to find a way to make sure America's retirement system is there for future generations? I sincerely hope we choose not to pass along to our children and grandchildren a decision which may be difficult today but devastating tomorrow. It has been said that necessity is the mother of invention. There is a real opportunity right now as parents and grandparents to come up with a plan that leaves our kids with something better than we have; that is, an opportunity to own, build, and grow a nest egg of their own. In conclusion, as President Clinton declared in 1998 about Social Security reform: We all know a demographic crisis is looming. If we act now, it will be easier and less painful than if we wait until later. It is 2005. It is time to do something. I hope my colleagues on both sides of the aisle come together and get it done. I yield the floor.