Mike DeWine

Mr. DeWINE

Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, I rise this afternoon to pay tribute to an exceptional young man who gave his life in the defense of freedom. Marine Cpl Todd Godwin, from Zanesville, OH, died on July 20, 2004, when the Humvee he was riding in was struck by shrapnel from a roadside explosive in the Al Anbar province in Iraq. He was 21 years old. CPL Godwin was a sniper with the 1st Battalion, 8th Marines, 2nd Marine Division and was on his second tour-of-duty in Iraq. Always ready with a smile or a joke, Todd was an easy going, respectful person with a big heart. He was also a Marine through and through--something he took very seriously--something he had been training for his whole life. Born on March 4, 1983, to Bill and Kathy Godwin, Todd was an alert, energetic child who grew up with an interest in the military. His father remembers him playing with G.I. Joes, wearing fatigues, and simulating wars. According to his brother, Aaron, the two boys would hang dolls outside and shoot at them with a BB gun, honing their targeting skills. Apart from these activities, Todd sought to perfect his body. He could often be found working out at ``the Fieldhouse'' fitness center or practicing his Tae Kwon Do, for which he received two black-belts. Whether intentional or not, Todd seemed to be grooming himself for the military, acquiring a host of skills that would serve him well in the Marines. After graduating from Zanesville Christian School in June 2001, he joined the Marines. His high school principal said that Todd ``had a goal of being a Marine, and he wasn't going to let anything get in the way of that.'' Todd excelled as a Marine and completed the intensely competitive and selective sniper training to win a spot in the sniper platoon. It was a spot he wanted because, according to his mother, ``He wanted to be with people who were really serious about what they did.'' Indeed, Todd Godwin was a serious Marine who took pride in his duty to defend our country and to spread freedom to other parts of the world. Todd was an exemplary Marine and also just a good, decent person--the type of person others remember as having ``a way about them''--the type of person who was quick to smile, who was compassionate, and who was good at making people feel at ease. It seems as though everyone who knew Todd liked him. One of his friends, Austin Thompson, remembers Todd's ability to laugh in almost any situation: ``He always had a great sense of humor, and he was also very loyal to his friends. He always looked out for them and loved to be with them.'' Todd encouraged one of his friends, Josh Carpenter, to ``hang tough'' in Marine boot camp. He wrote a letter to Josh that said, ``I'm sure you can't wait to graduate and get some of the comforts of life back. Just remember you have to pay your dues, just like every Marine. I'm sure you'll do fine--I have confidence you'll succeed.'' Josh had joined the Marines because he looked up to Todd. Todd's letter helped Josh get through the challenges of boot camp, so that he, too, could be one of the few and the proud. A letter like that is a little thing, a small deed, but Todd Godwin was always doing those ``little things'' for others. That is just who he was. When Todd saw that his fiancee's younger brother, Caleb, was wearing a U.S. Navy tie clasp, he brought him a Marine clasp to wear, instead. It was a small gift that meant a great deal to Caleb, who describes Todd as ``my best buddy I ever had.'' One of Todd's friends from high school, Kimberly Burley, remembers another of his deeds that took place on the night of the Zanesville Christian School junior-senior banquet: It was raining that night, and he came out to greet all the girls at their car with an umbrella. Such a gallant act was really typical of Todd. It was just another ``little thing'' he had done for others. But, when we look at all the ``little things'' together--the letters, the tie clasps, the way he acted always, the jokes that made people smile--we see such a much bigger picture, a picture of an exceptionally caring, thoughtful, generous young man. We see that he did the ``little things'' for people because he had a very big heart. Todd also had big plans. He was engaged to Andrea Mendenhall, whom he loved dearly. They were planning on getting married when Todd finished his tour of duty in Iraq. Todd and Andrea were going to go to college with money Todd was saving through the GI bill. They also talked of someday moving to Corpus Christi, TX. These plans, of course, were not realized because Todd, once again, was looking out for others, as he did all his life. His dreams were put on hold so that others could be free and safe and able to fulfill their own dreams. Mr. President, and Members of the Senate, a uniform does not make a marine. The person wearing that uniform makes a marine. And, each color of that uniform signifies the characteristics of the marine inside it. Todd Godwin wore his uniform with pride. He exemplified the blue standing for bravery, the white standing for honor, and the red standing for sacrifice. Unique to the Marine uniform, of course, is the bright, red stripe that runs the length of each trouser leg--the ``bloodstripe.'' It represents all the blood shed by marines in battle. It is a red stripe of sacrifice--and for Todd Godwin, it represents the ultimate sacrifice. Todd was truly a man of faith, who lived the Marine credo ``Semper Fidelis,'' which means, of course, ``always faithful.'' Todd was forever faithful to his friends and family, through his love and care; to his community, through his respect and good deeds; and to his country, through his courage and his sacrifice. For all that Todd gave us, we honor him today. My wife, Fran, and I continue to keep Todd's parents, Bill and Kathy; his brother, Aaron; his sisters, Sarah and Anna; his grandparents, Clement and Esther Jones; and, the love of his life, Andrea Mendenhall, in our thoughts and in our prayers. Mr. President, I thank the Chair and yield the floor.

Mr. DeWINE

Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, today I join with Senator Feinstein to submit a resolution to designate June 2005 as ``National Safety Month.'' This year, the National Safety Council has selected ``Safety: Where We Live, Work, and Play'' as the theme for National Safety Month. Public safety in our homes, communities, workplace, and on our roads and highways is a vital challenge that we must constantly address. According to the National Safety Council, more than 20 million Americans suffer disabling injuries and 100,000 people die from their injuries each year. In the United States, nearly 43,000 people die each year from motor vehicle crashes, making auto fatalities the number one killer of those between the ages of 4 and 34. Many of these deaths and injuries can be prevented with proper education and precautionary measures. The goal of National Safety Month is to raise public awareness of safety and prevention in hopes of reducing these deaths and injuries. June also is an appropriate month to focus our efforts on public safety since the summer season is traditionally a time of increased unintentional injuries and fatalities. Throughout the month, the National Safety Council and other safety organizations will urge businesses to increase their standards of safety in the workplace and provide information to individuals regarding injury prevention in homes, communities, and on roads and highways. I look forward to working with other members of the Senate and House and the safety organizations to help educate the public on the importance of injury prevention, so that we can reach our goal of saving more lives. I thank Senator Feinstein for her support of this resolution and for her continued dedication to public safety. I would also like to thank the National Safety Council and congratulate them as the Council celebrates its 92nd anniversary in 2005, as a leading source of safety and health information, education, and training in the United States.

Mr. DeWINE

Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, I appreciate what my colleague has done. The Senator from Oklahoma is absolutely correct that if this bill is passed, these provisions will be in there, as well as a lot of new construction that will save lives as well.

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

Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, the SAFETEA bill in the Senate today is a good bill. I strongly support its passage. I thank Senator Inhofe, Senator Jeffords, Senator Bond, and Senator Baucus for their good leadership and their good work, particularly on the Environment and Public Works title of this bill. The roadway safety and funding provisions they have crafted are vitally important. Let me also thank Senators Stevens, Lott, Inouye, and McCain for their hard work on the Commerce Committee vehicle and behavioral safety title. Finally, let me thank Senator Rockefeller for his support as the lead cosponsor of the safety provisions I have authored that are part of this bill. Staff on both the Commerce Committee and the EPW Committee also deserve praise and thanks for their hard work on this bill. In particular, I thank Ruth Van Mark, Chris Bertram, David Strickland, and James O'Keeffe and JC Sandberg for their willingness to work with my office on portions of the bill I wanted included. These are portions of the bill I will describe in a minute that have to do with highway safety, provisions that I believe truly will save lives. I thank them for their very good and diligent work. I also thank Kevin King of my staff for his hard work on these safety provisions in the bill. While certainly we would like to include more funding for highway and transit projects, I commend my colleagues for doing an excellent job in stretching the funding that is available as far as it can go. The language Senators Grassley and Baucus have drafted adding additional funding helps. I am a strong supporter of their efforts. We need the funding that the managers' package provides to improve the rate of return for donor States, such as my home State of Ohio, to get those levels up as high as possible. Additionally, the managers' package contains the Commerce Committee title of the bill relating to safety programs. This title is comprehensive and deserves the full support of the Senate. I will take a few minutes now to talk about the safety provisions I have asked to be included in the bill. First, I will say something about Senator Lott's provisions on the Primary Safety Belt Incentive Grant Program. I thank Senator Lott. I congratulate him for including this provision, a provision that will clearly save lives. Senator Lott came to the Senate floor earlier and spoke about the importance of this provision. I must say what Senator Lott said is absolutely correct. This provision must be kept in the Senate bill. It must be kept through conference. Efforts to modify or remove primary safety belt incentive grants will undermine the national goal of reaching 90 percent safety belt usage. Encouraging States to aim low when it comes to saving lives makes no sense. Such efforts to change this language in the bill must be opposed. Some States already have primary enforcement laws. Those laws are the single cheapest and most effective means for saving lives on our Nation's roads. Those States that have already enacted primary seatbelt laws have seen lives saved. Other States, such as my home State of Ohio, do not have primary seatbelt laws. These States would benefit tremendously in terms of lives saved and financial bonuses under Senator Lott's program. The incentive program may be the only way to get some States to adopt primary laws. In Ohio alone, it is estimated we could save nearly 100 lives per year if we added primary belt laws. If we maintain this provision, countless lives will, in fact, be saved. The highway experts, the people who study this issue, who understand it, tell us this is the simplest, cheapest, easiest way to save lives. It is the one thing we could do to save lives in this country the easiest way. So I thank Senator Lott and commend his efforts and urge my colleagues, if there is an amendment offered to take this provision out, that they oppose that amendment. Let me say a few things about the provisions in the bill that I have been working on and I have asked to have included and that have, in fact, been included. First, Senator Rockefeller is the lead cosponsor on our provision that we call Stars on Cars. While the name is kind of cute, its focus is quite serious. Today, when you go to buy a new car, we all know there is a large label on that car, a large label on the window telling the price, the features, and other information about the vehicle. Most of the content on the sticker is actually mandated by the Federal Government. The sticker has to tell you whether the vehicle has a stereo, the car's mileage, how many miles per gallon, and so on. But one piece of vital information, amazingly, is not there, and that is the safety ratings. How safe is that car? That piece of information is not on the sticker. Citizens have a right to know this information, and our provision would provide, for the first time, that information would be available right on that car, right in the showroom when you walk in to buy the car. Taxpayers have already paid to have the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, NHTSA, test cars for this information. We have already paid for the information. In fact, NHTSA has put this information up on the Internet. It is available on the Internet now. But, nonetheless, this information is not available to the American consumer in the one place where it would be most helpful, the one place where it would truly make a difference: where you buy the car, on the face of the car when you buy it at the dealership. Our provision would add a new section to the label that would clearly lay out information from each of the crash tests. You would have the information about frontal crash impact, side impact, and rollover resistance. It would show the test results as star ratings on the label, just like many automakers already do in their commercials. This is a commonsense provision, and it is one that will allow consumers the opportunity to make more informed decisions for themselves and their families. We have found over the last few years that consumers are much more conscious about the safety of the cars they buy, wanting to put their families in safe cars. This is a proconsumer, prosafety provision that makes good common sense. I congratulate the committee for including it in this bill. Another provision in this package that Senator Rockefeller has cosponsored with me is what we call the Safe Kids and Cars Act. Now, according to NHTSA, automobile crashes are the leading cause of death for those ages 4 to 34. More than cancer, more than fire, more than anything else, auto accidents are the source of child fatalities. We all know that. The focus of the child safety initiative we have incorporated in this bill is on an emerging danger for small children that is often overlooked. It is referred to as ``nontraffic, noncrash'' accidents. What are those? Well, these are incidents in which there is an interaction between an automobile and a child which leads to injury or death when the vehicle is not on the road or there is no actual crash which has occurred. Instead, these are accidents that happen inside parked cars, in driveways, or other common, potentially deadly situations. We provide two different things in this title. The title includes two very different sections relating to the Safe Kids and Cars initiative. The first one directs NHTSA, for the very first time, to perform regular collection of data on nontraffic, noncrash injuries and deaths. We need that information. We need that as a matter of public policy. If we are going to prevent them, we have to understand them. We are not collecting the data today. We do not fully understand it. Further, we have another section that deals with the so-called back- over deaths and requires NHTSA to investigate this issue and the technologies that might help prevent such accidents in the future. These back-over deaths occur in driveways, people's homes. Quite often, every year, a child is backed over and killed. They are becoming more frequent, as people have vans where you cannot see out of the back of the van very well. We need to better understand the cause of these accidents. We need to have better information. NHTSA needs to investigate this issue and needs to look at the technologies that might help prevent such accidents. Another provision we have included in this bill we call dangerous roads and intersections. Senator Rockefeller and I have worked on this provision. Every State in the Union, of course, has dangerous roads, dangerous intersections. Most States, fortunately, rank these. Most States come up with a list of what are the dangerous roads, the most dangerous places in the State. They keep a list of them. But, amazingly, there are many States that keep this information secret and never tell the public. Citizens have a right to know this information. What would you do with the information? Well, if you are a parent, you might tell your child to avoid a certain road: Don't go that way to the movie. Don't go that way to the restaurant. Don't go that way on a date. Go a different way. You have a right to know that information. Or if the public knew about a road that was statistically very dangerous or the State knew that it was dangerous, maybe the public would demand that road be fixed. That is the type of vital information the public has every right to know. Our provision requires that safety information be disclosed to the public as an eligibility requirement for a new Federal safety funding program, the Highway Safety Improvement Program. States seeking additional Federal dollars for safety construction projects will have to identify their danger spots, rank them according to severity, and then disclose them to the public. It is pretty simple. Most States are already doing it; they just have to disclose it. This is another commonsense provision that truly is going to save lives. I am pleased it has been incorporated into this highway bill. The fourth issue covered by language in the bill that I included, along with Senator Rockefeller, has to do with driver education and licensing. Teen driving is an area where the fatality rates are very high. Unfortunately, current programs are many times not getting the job done. Higher crash and fatality rates for teenage drivers can be reduced if we work at it. The Federal Government can't run driver education. It is a State responsibility to set standards. But the Federal Government can play a small yet significant role and a productive role. Revitalized driver education needs to be data driven. We can help teenage drivers avoid high-risk situations, particularly in the first 6 months behind the wheel. Integration of driver education with graduated licensing must also be addressed. The language we have included in the bill creates a driver education and licensing research program within NHTSA. This program will go out and test what works and what doesn't and come up with a ``best practices'' model that States can implement. The time has come to take serious action on driver education and licensing. This program is a solid first step. We need to have scientific data, and the Federal Government is in a good position to come up with this data to assist States as they develop good criteria. Finally, I have worked with Senator Lautenberg to include a provision in the highway bill to reduce the number of drinking and driving deaths and injuries each year. Statistics are staggering. In 2003, 17,013 Americans died in what we believe were alcohol-related incidents. NHTSA projects this number dropped to 16,654 in 2004, a 2.1-percent reduction. While this is good news, it certainly is still too high. We do want to see the trend continue. To help accomplish that, the language we have supported requires NHTSA to work with the States to conduct combined media-law enforcement campaigns aimed at reducing drunk driving fatalities. Specifically, the law enforcement portion of this bill consists of sobriety checkpoints in the 39 States that allow them. In the States that don't allow them, it provides for saturation patrols. The Centers for Disease Control estimates the sobriety checkpoints may reduce alcohol-related crashes by as much as 20 percent. That is a significant amount. We should do all we can to help States reduce drinking and driving. This provision will do that. In conclusion, the fact is that auto fatalities represent the No. 1 killer in this country of those between the ages of 4 and 34. In 2004, NHTSA projects that almost 43,000 people were killed on our Nation's roads. In 2003, the number was 42,643. In fact, in the next 12 minutes, at least one person will be killed in an automobile accident, while nearly 6 people will be injured in the next 60 seconds. This is a tragedy we as a society are much too willing to tolerate. It is so common we kind of shrug it off and put up with it. These auto fatalities occur every day, every hour. And yet somehow we all have become immune to it. This year's highway bill takes some positive steps toward reducing those deaths. I thank the sponsors for working with me on these safety measures that truly will save lives. I commend them for their efforts and for including these provisions in the bill. I urge my colleagues, once this bill goes to conference, to continue to include these provisions in conference. I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, one of the most gratifying aspects of serving in the U.S. Senate is the opportunity to come to this Chamber and talk about and celebrate the great events in American and world history. One such event occurred 57 years ago today, and that is the creation of the nation of Israel, the only democracy in the Middle East and the eternal homeland for all Jews around the world. Israel, our enduring friend and everlasting ally, was reborn from its biblical birthright on this day in 1948. Two years ago on the 58th anniversary of the end of World War II in Europe and again this week on its 60th anniversary, I spoke about how American soldiers successfully fought both the fascism in Europe that spread like a cancer across that continent and Adolf Hitler's efforts to eradicate the Jewish race. Last week, we honored the souls of those murdered in the holocaust on Yom Ha-shoa--the Day of Remembrance. And today we celebrate the result of all of this history which is Israel's independence. My father, Richard DeWine, when he was serving in World War II in K Company, which was part of the Army's 103rd Infantry Division, went into one of the Nazi concentration camps--Dachau--after it had been liberated. Although K company did not participate in the liberation of Dachau, the 411th Regiment of their 103rd Division did liberate the camp at Landsburg, Germany. When my father was at Dachau, a camp where over 28,000 Jews had perished, the prisoners had already left the camp. He has a vivid recollection, though, of seeing the ovens that the Nazis used to burn the bodies of so many of the prisoners. He can still picture in his mind the devices they used to slide the bodies into the ovens and the many urns that contained the prisoners' ashes. He remembers going into a room next to the ovens and seeing fixtures on the walls that looked like showerheads. Those at the camp told him the prisoners were taken into these rooms and the prisoners were told they were going to take showers, but instead of water coming out of the nozzles, poisonous gas was emitted, killing them. My dad remembers walking down the road near the camp and encountering a very weak, emaciated man who had, a short time before that, been a prisoner. My dad and his buddies talked to the man and gave him food and cigarettes. They asked the man, who a short time before had been a prisoner, if they could take his picture. He said, yes, as long as it is with an American soldier. So they did. My dad still has that picture today. Carl Greene, who was also a member of K Company, remembers their visit to Dachau. He says some of the former prisoners in the camp still wearing those unforgettable striped uniforms actually served as their guides to show them around the camp, showing them the gas chambers and the crematorium and the area in the camp where the Nazis would shoot prisoners in the back of their heads. K Company member Al Eucare, Sr., who was 18 years old at the time, remembers what he describes as one-man pillboxes that stood outside the gates of Dachau. These were cylindrical pipes that stood upright, just big enough for a man to fit inside. They were something of a sentry post. Each of these concrete tubes contained an open slat at the top and the bottom, where guns were placed to shoot at prisoners if there was a disorder as the prisoners went in and out of the gates. Like my dad, Al also remembers the ovens at Dachau. He said when he was there, even though it was after the camp was liberated and the war had ended, there were still ashes and skeletal remains inside those horrible ovens. Al also remembers seeing hooks--something akin to meat hooks--that the Nazis would hook dead bodies on like cattle, to move them more easily. He said they would put the bodies on by hooking them right underneath the jaw. He had heard stories that sometimes live Jews were placed on the hooks and left until they died. General Dwight Eisenhower visited some of the death camps and reported back what he saw. In one of his reports, this is what the general described: On April 12, 1945, I saw my first horror camp. It was near the town of Gotha. I have never felt able to describe my emotional reactions when I first came face to face with indisputable evidence of Nazi brutality and ruthless disregard of every shred of decency. Up to that time, I had known about it only generally or through secondary sources. I am certain, however, that I have never at any other time experienced an equal sense of shock. I visited every nook and cranny of the camp because I felt it my duty to be in a position from then on to testify at firsthand about these things in case there ever grew up at home the belief or assumption that ``the stories of Nazi brutality were just propaganda.'' Some members of the visiting party were unable to go through the ordeal. I not only did so, but as soon as I returned to Patton's headquarters that evening, I sent communications to both Washington and London, urging the two governments to send instantly to Germany a random group of newspaper editors and representative groups from the national legislatures. I felt that the evidence should be immediately placed before the American and British publics in a fashion that would leave no room for cynical doubt. That was Dwight David Eisenhower. To think about it now, it defies credulity to consider that these atrocities were occurring and there were those who questioned their reality or those who today even question their reality. My father said that was one of the things that struck him when he visited Dachau 60 years ago--the idea that there were townspeople right there who would never admit the death camp was out there. He talked to people and they would not admit it. They said they didn't know anything about it. They didn't know what was going on so close. They acted as though it didn't exist. Fortunately, the world came to reveal what was happening. The world knew, and although the rebirth of Israel came upon the heels of the modern tragedy of the Nazi death camps, it is important to remember that the Jewish people have struggled to regain their homeland ever since biblical times. The year 1948 marked the culmination of those efforts. After 6 million Jews were murdered in World War II, surviving Jews from across Europe and Asia made the trek to the holy land. They sought their homeland and peace. They obtained the former but not the latter. One such man seeking a homeland and peace was Mark Steinbuch, the late father of one of my Judiciary staffers, Robert Steinbuch. Born in Poland, Mark and his family lived under Nazi occupation, relocated to Siberia shortly after the start of World War II, and then traveled for 2 weeks by cattle car to live in Soviet Kazakhstan. Mark's extended family faced some horrific challenges. Many were killed by the Nazis. His cousins, the Hershenfis family, were forced into labor in the Pionki ghetto in Poland. In 1941, the family was shipped off to Auschwitz. Hanna and her brother Harry were separated from each other and from their parents Fay and Harvey. Fay and Harvey never made it out of the death camp. Hanna, tattooed with the number A14699, was shipped to an intermediate camp and then Bergen-Belsen. Harry--B416 to the Nazis--worked hard labor in Auschwitz for 4 years, and then, in 1944, was sent to another camp called Mauthausen. On May 3, 1945, the Nazis fled the camp. That night, the skies opened and sent down a rainfall as if the world were being cleansed from the horrors it had seen. The next morning, the Americans arrived and the 11th Armored Division liberated the camp. Three days later, Harry turned 26. After 5 weeks in an American hospital, Harry spent the next 3 years in a displaced persons camp in Austria. In 1949, Harry's wishes were answered, and he set off for America. Four years later, when Hanna also came to the United States, the siblings were reunited for the first time since they were shipped off to Auschwitz 13 years prior. Harry is 86 now and Hanna is a few years younger. Both are alive and well. Harry's sense of humor is strong, and he plays down the difficulties he faced. But we all know better. Upon the defeat of the Nazis, Mark Steinbuch's immediate family went to Germany because, as Mark described it, ``that is where the Americans were and, if you wanted to live, you went to the Americans.'' From there, Mark joined the Zionist youth movement and set off for Israel. That, however, was no easy task. Traveling across Europe, often on foot to a southern port, he, his brother, and many others like them boarded an overloaded freighter renamed the ``Theodore Hertzl,'' after the founder of the Zionist movement. Upon the ship's arrival in Israel, the British quickly arrested its passengers and sent them to a holding camp in Cypress. Months later, Mark and the others were allowed to enter Israel. Upon the joyous declaration of independence, seven Arab nations invaded Israel, and Mark quickly joined the army. Underage and flatfooted, he fought for the independence of this new democracy. Mark's story is by no means unique. It not only represented the goals and desires of the Jews of postwar Europe but the dreams of a nation of people dispersed from their homeland for millennia. Mark's dreams were realized a year later when armistice was struck. Israel survived its first challenge. It, like the Jewish people after the Holocaust, was still alive. Since then, Israel's existence has been continuously challenged. Israel defended itself from foreign aggression during the Suez Canal crisis, the Six Day War, the War of Attrition, the Yom Kippur War, the war in Lebanon, and periods of extreme terrorism. Israel survived it all. OPEC blackmailed the world by withholding oil from the West because of their support for Israel. Israel's Olympic athletes were murdered by terrorists. And the United Nations equated Zionism with fascism. Israel survived it all and much more. Israel is a survivor, but it is also so much more. The people of Israel have forested the desert, revived their language, built cities, and established a vigorous and ever-growing community. We support Israel because it is a democracy, because it shares our values and ideals, because it has been willing to suffer attacks at our request, and because simply it is our friend. We welcome other nations to choose to be the same, and for the many that have, we share the same relationship. America is a nation of justice, fairness, and principles. So is Israel. And on this day, we wish our friend a happy and joyous anniversary. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. DeWINE. If the Senator will yield?

Mr. DeWINE. I have a tribute to a soldier who was killed, and it will take no more than 10 minutes. So once I start, I would not want to stop. But I will not start until you want me to start.

Mr. DeWINE. Yes. I will certainly do it in 10 minutes.

Mr. DeWINE. I could wait to start until later if you want.

Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, I rise this evening to oppose the amendment my colleague from Virginia offered. With all due respect to my good friend from Virginia, I do so because I believe the bill, as currently written, is a good one, as I said earlier today. I believe the language in the bill on primary seatbelt usage that has been written by Senator Lott will, in fact, save lives. In this country every year, we lose over 40,000 Americans in highway deaths, 40,000 Americans who are killed in auto fatalities. This bill is aimed at, in many different respects, trying to reduce the number of Americans who die by building better roads, by dealing with dangerous intersections, and some of the safety provisions we have already talked about in this bill. If you talk to anyone who is a highway safety expert or if you talk to the real experts who are the men and women who patrol our highways every day--in Ohio it is the Ohio State Highway Patrol or it might be the local sheriff's department, State troopers, whatever they are called in your local jurisdiction--I believe the experts who have looked at and studied this issue will tell you that the use of primary seatbelt laws clearly saves lives. Why is that? It is pretty simple and pretty basic. The reason is this: Of all the things we can do to save lives, the easiest and simplest is to increase the number of people in this country who buckle up, who put on a seatbelt. Every car that is manufactured in this country today has a seatbelt. It is not adding any new equipment. It is getting people to put on their seatbelts. It is a question of getting people to use equipment that is already in the car. If people use seatbelts, they are safer and the auto fatalities go down. The highway safety experts, the people who have studied this issue, will tell you when the usage of seatbelts goes up, the auto fatalities go down. It is that simple. The other thing we know is States that have passed primary seatbelt laws have seen the use of seatbelts dramatically go up. In Ohio, for example, we do not have that law, unfortunately, and we are hovering at about 75-percent use. We are probably never going to get beyond 75- percent. We are not going to get to 80 or 85 or 90 percent unless we have a primary seatbelt law. If a State gets a primary seatbelt law, that usage will go up. It will go up 5, 10, 15 percent, and when you see that happen, the number of lives will be saved. In Ohio--I am using my home State as an example, but you can extrapolate these figures from Ohio to any other State in the Union--in Ohio, we estimate if we had a primary seatbelt law and our usage went from 75 percent up to, say, 90 percent, we would save 100 lives per year. That is a lot of people. We would save lives every year. Whatever the figure, we are going to save lives. So this is a very simple provision Senator Lott and the managers have included in this bill. What the amendment of my good friend from Virginia would do is basically take that out. Now, for my colleagues who worry about the Federal Government being oppressive and using the stick, this is not a stick approach. This is a carrot approach. This is extra incentive to the State to do it. It will save lives. There are very few times when one can come to this floor and know that their vote will save lives. When we get to the point where we vote on this, a vote to retain this language in this bill will, in fact, save lives because States will enact it; the usage of seatbelts will go up, and when the usage of seatbelts goes up, lives will be saved. It is pretty simple. So I urge my colleagues to defeat the Allen amendment and to keep this language in the bill. One last comment. My colleague has talked in his speech about the highway patrol and the police have other things to do. Yes, they have other things to do. The point of a primary seatbelt law is akin to most other laws. It is a deterrent. That is why we have speed laws. That is why we have every other kind of laws. It is a deterrent, and the deterrent changes behavior. Because that law is on the books, because people know they have to have it, because they know they can be pulled over for not having it, they will put it on and usage will simply go up. It works. It has worked in State after State, and lives will be saved. So I urge my colleagues to keep this in and to defeat the amendment of my colleague from Virginia. I yield the floor.

Mr. DeWINE

Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, I rise this evening to pay tribute to a young Ohioan who lost his life while serving our Nation in Iraq. PFC Michael Barkey was killed on July 7, 2004, when enemy fire caused the vehicle he was riding in to overturn. He was 22 years of age. I had the opportunity to meet Michael's family and to talk to them about their extraordinary son. They shared their memories with me-- memories of Michael lighting up the room with his infectious smile and causing others to laugh at his antics. An editorial in the Canton Repository from July 9, 2004 says it best: Michael Barkey's family and friends have a long time of mourning ahead of them. But it is a testament to his vibrant personality and strong character that as the news of his death began to sink in, their memories of him made the people who loved him smile and laugh. Michael's vibrant personality, touched the lives of all who had the privilege of knowing him. As the fourth of six children of Hal and Julie Barkey, Michael learned at a young age that he loved to make people laugh and that he was good at it. When his older sister Jennifer had her first child, eight year-old Michael quipped that since he was an uncle at 8, he would be a grandma before age 30. His mother Julie could only laugh at her young son when he flubbed his words. She liked to call him a ham. Every member of Michael's family has fond memories of him. Growing up, Michael and his brother John loved to wrestle each other and-- though he wouldn't do it for anyone else--sister, Therese, remembers how Michael would dance around for hours to entertain her and her friends. Youngest brother Tony recalls a time when Michael popped out his false tooth in church to shock a small child. Cousin Joe Mitchell remembers when they went to Myrtle Beach together and saw an attractive woman. Michael and another man argued for so long about who would speak to her first that she walked away. All who met Michael were touched by his witty humor. At Canal Fulton Northwest High School, Michael excelled both academically and athletically. He loved to play basketball and football. High school football coach, Vic Whiting, remembered that after their last game, Michael--then a senior--couldn't bring himself to take off his uniform. High school friends said that ``Mikey,'' as they called him, was always the center of attention and a natural leader. After high school, Michael enlisted in the National Guard so that he could pay his way through the University of Akron, where he earned an associate's degree in fire technology. His dream was to become a firefighter, but his unit was called to go to Iraq. Michael believed strongly that he was needed to secure freedom for others, that he was needed to help the Iraqi people. Answering the call of duty was not new in the Barkey family. Michael's grandfather, Edmund, served in Europe during WWII; father, Hal, is a Navy veteran of the Vietnam war; brother, Todd served in Operation Desert Storm; and brother, John, was an Air Force firefighter stationed in Qatar during Operation Enduring Freedom. Michael was proud to follow in what had become a family tradition. Michael and the rest of the 1484th Transportation Company trained in Indiana before being sent to Kuwait and then on to Iraq. Michael had been in the National Guard for 4 years. Soon Michael developed the reputation of being able to lighten the mood despite the chaos around them. Captain Curtis Brown, commander of the Company said that Michael was ``a remarkable young man who had the gift of making you see the good in a bad situation. He was a master of the gift of laughter.'' One young soldier, in particular, can attest to that. Specialist Jesse Hensel was Michael's bunkmate and best friend. The two were inseparable--whether they were lounging in their room or lifting weights. Jesse and Michael were like brothers and they argued like brothers. The only thing they agreed on was that Jesse was better looking and Michael was the better dancer. Michael knew that his family worried about him while he was away. He sent home recordings and pictures--all of which Hal and Julie treasure. One picture in particular always brings a smile to the Barkey family's faces. In it, Michael is lying on the desert, pulling up his shirt to reveal grains of sand arranged in the shape of a smiley-face on his stomach. Jesse accompanied his best friend on his final trip home. He said that Michael was everything he wanted to be--as a person and as a soldier. Jesse noted at a service honoring his friend that during the trip home, ``I sat by Mike the whole way home and I did a lot of talking. It was the first time Mike didn't talk back. I love him with every piece of my broken heart.'' In Michael's hometown of Canal Fulton, OH, thousands of residents came to show their support for the Barkey family. Some waited nearly two hours to pay their respects to Michael. The funeral mass was a celebration of the life of this extraordinary soldier--and Julie Barkey would have it no other way for the son who brought so much light into the world. Jennifer Barkey, Michael's older sister wrote the following remembrance letter to provide comfort to the family: Know that [Michael] was truly an uncommon man. Grieve for the incredible man, husband, and father he would have become. Know that following the example of our father, he stood up for what he believed. His conviction was such that he was willing to die for it. We know that Michael is in heaven, continuing to spread the laughter he did while on earth. And perhaps the Barkey family is right--Michael is still cracking jokes, exchanging war stories with his grandfather, and is now the patron saint of Cheetos or hamburgers, which were his favorite foods. Michael will never be forgotten.

Mr. DeWINE

Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, I rise today to briefly discuss the conference report to the emergency supplemental appropriations bill, which we hope to adopt later today. First, I thank my colleague from Mississippi, Senator Cochran, for the good work he has done. I plan to support adoption of this conference report. There are certainly a number of programs that will benefit greatly from passage of this bill. It is the right thing to do. I must say, though, there are a few areas, which I will discuss in a moment, where I do not think we have gone quite far enough. First, let's talk about the most important thing. Of course, that is the money that will go to support our soldiers. That is really why we are here. That is the most important provision in the bill. Let me talk about a couple of specific items that will aid our soldiers. This bill includes Senator Craig's amendment, which I cosponsored, to provide an immediate payment--it ranges from $25,000 to $100,000--to those who have suffered traumatic injuries on active duty, such as the loss of an arm or leg or the loss of their hearing or sight. The bill also includes my second-degree amendment to Senator Craig's amendment making this provision retroactive to October 7, 2001. This second-degree amendment I offered will ensure the coverage of soldiers who have been injured in Iraq, injured in Afghanistan, those soldiers who many of us have seen or talked to who are currently recuperating at Walter Reed, Bethesda, or other hospitals around our Nation, as well as those who have left the hospital and are learning to live with their injuries. This amendment would help service members, such as Army SSG Justin Shellhammer, whom I spoke to today on the phone. Justin Shellhammer is a courageous young man, someone of whom we can all be very proud. I talked to him on the phone this morning. He is excited he is going to get a leg this afternoon. He told me about how his recuperation has been coming along and what his prospects are. When you talk to someone like him, your heart goes out to him. But, frankly, you feel great admiration for him and how courageous he is. I am also pleased this bill includes an additional $150 million for the procurement of up-armored humvees. Many of us on the Senate floor and in the House have supported, for a long period of time, increases in funding for this program. It is an important program. There is a critical need for these vehicles in Iraq and Afghanistan and here in the United States where they are used for training. Quite simply, these vehicles have saved the lives of hundreds if not thousands of service men and women and enabled them to complete their mission. Just a few moments ago, I talked about the fact that there are some items that should have been included in the bill that are not. I am, frankly, a little disappointed. The conference report does not provide the death gratuity increase that we provided to all Active-Duty deaths. This bill increases the death gratuity to $100,000--and that is a very good thing--to the families of those who have died in service to our country. But the language in the bill that came out of conference provides only for deaths that occur in a combat zone or those that are ``combat- related.'' I think that is much too narrow. I think it is a shame. I think it is too bad that is what the conference did. If we do not apply the death gratuity increase to all Active-Duty deaths--which is what we should have done--we will not be covering a number of individuals who die while carrying out their orders, who die in service to our country. Their families will not be covered. For example, we will not cover the family of a service member who gets into a fatal car accident carrying out very specific orders to deliver files from one side of his home base to another, in service to his country. His family will not get that death benefit. We also will not cover the death of a service member who gets into a fatal accident en route to a conference he or she was ordered to attend. And it will not even cover a military police officer guarding the gates of one of our domestic bases who may fall from heat stroke. I do not think that is right. I think that was a mistake the conference made. As I have done since the beginning of this Congress, I will continue, as I know others will, to work to expand the applicability of this critical benefit. I must say, I was also disappointed that we were unable to pass an extended TRICARE Prime medical benefit for children of decreased service members. Under current law, the dependent child of a deceased service member receives medical benefits under TRICARE Prime for 3 years at no cost. But following that period, the dependent children may continue to receive TRICARE Prime, but they must pay for that benefit at the retiree dependent premium rate, available to children under the age of 21 or 23 if they are enrolled in school. Also, after 3 years, when a dependent child's military parent dies, and if that family elects to pay the premium and stay enrolled, even if they pay that premium, that child would move down on the food chain, so to speak, in terms of the availability of services and priority. I do not think that is right. I think we need to correct that. What that means is that if there is a doctor's appointment opening, and your parent is alive, and your parent is continuing to serve, you get preference over a child whose parent was killed in Iraq or Afghanistan. Now, do we really think that is right? I do not think so. I do not think there is any person on this floor or in the Senate who would say that is right. This is simply not fair. I don't think any Member of the Senate who really understands this would say that is right. My amendment, which was not included in this bill, would have changed that by putting surviving children of service members killed in service in the same position--no better but no worse--as if their parent would have lived and continued to serve in the military. It would have put them in no better position but, rather, in the same position, and they would continue to receive TRICARE Prime at no cost until they became an adult. I wish to let my colleagues know that I plan to continue this debate and to try to get this in the Defense authorization bill. This is a matter of simple fairness. It is the right thing to do. So this discussion will continue this week and in the weeks ahead. Let me turn to another topic that this bill addresses, and that is humanitarian assistance. I believe we did a pretty good job in this bill--again, I congratulate the chairman--as many essential priorities were funded. Because of what the chairman did and what others did, many people will be fed, many people will be helped maybe not at the level I would have liked in some cases, but we did a pretty good job. One country that certainly needs assistance in this supplemental is Haiti. Haiti is embarking on a road to attempt to move toward democracy. They have had a very troubled past, a troubled present. Its current history is troubled. They are facing elections this year. I thank Chairman Cochran and Senator Bingaman, Chairman McConnell, and all the conferees who supported my efforts to include emergency money for Haiti. Haiti needs election assistance and security. This bill provides $20 million for election assistance this year, for police training and for public works programs. All this money is urgently needed. I will be working closely with the U.S. Agency for International Development to ensure this money flows quickly into Haiti. Another troubled spot in this world is Darfur. Again, I congratulate the chairman for his work. Senator Corzine offered an amendment. Senator Corzine has been a true champion in this area. I congratulate him. He offered an amendment, of which I was the lead cosponsor, regarding Darfur. I thank him for his efforts and commitment to helping end the crisis in the region. The final conference report provides $50 million to support the African Union to stop the genocide in Darfur. Again, I thank Senator McConnell and Senator Leahy for their good work in this area as well. The conference report also provides an additional $90 million for international disaster and family assistance to help ensure humanitarian aid flows to Darfur and other African crises. We are looking at genocide in Darfur. We are staring it down, and we cannot afford to blink. It is only right that this bill contains funding for this crisis. Finally, I thank Senator Kohl for his efforts to help increase our U.S. food aid. I worked with Senator Kohl. I was his lead cosponsor on his amendment, which the Senate passed, to include $470 million in food aid to cover known worldwide aid shortages. Again, I thank Senator Cochran for his good work in this area. The conference report, unfortunately, contains only $240 million. This money will help, but it is not at the level the Senate had provided. This is not enough to cover existing shortfalls, much less new emergencies or worsening conditions in places such as Ethiopia. Last year, 300,000 children in Ethiopia died of malnutrition. This year, the situation is worse, with drought destroying crops in large parts of the country. The people of Ethiopia will avoid the starvation that is on the horizon only if we act. That means remaining open to the possibility of using the Bill Emerson Humanitarian Trust and other tools in our food aid arsenal. We must understand that it is not only Ethiopia where we have a crisis; we have crises all over the world with regard to food aid. We simply do not have enough food. I am proud to be joining Senator Kohl in sending a letter to the President asking him to look at the Bill Emerson Trust as we enter the summer season that so often results in food shortages, not just in Ethiopia but around the world. I again commend Senator Kohl for his commitment to end hunger around the world. There are good parts to the conference report we are passing today. It provides immediate and necessary help that our soldiers need to do their job. It provides our injured service men and women with care that they desperately need. It provides money for Haiti and Darfur, other African crises. However, frankly, we could have done more. Legislation, though, is never perfect. We simply need to continue to work together to address issues that are not fixed in this legislation. I thank the Chair and yield the floor.

Mr. DeWINE

Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, yesterday was the 60th anniversary of the end of World War II in Europe. It was also, of course, Mother's Day. My speechwriter Ann O'Donnell shared a letter with me her grandfather wrote that is a fitting remembrance of both occasions. It is a letter from a young Army private, 12th Armored Division, named Glenn H. Waltner. Stationed in Germany at the time, he wrote to his mother, Mrs. J. J. Waltner in Freeman, SD. The letter is postmarked 60 years ago today, May 9, 1945, though it was written, actually, on May 3, 1945. It reads as follows: Dearest Mother, Mother's Day is only a short time away again. Since we cannot be together, I'm taking this opportunity to thank you for being my mother. You've always been all that any son could ever ask a mother to be--kind, patient, loving, considerate, and forgiving. Though Mother's Day comes but once yearly, don't think you're not appreciated the other [days of the year]. I thank God daily for the privilege of having been your son. [I] am well--have been moving so swiftly and far that mail still hasn't reached us, nor can we mail letters often. Shaved today for the first time in a long while and haven't had my hair cut for months, I guess. Hear peace rumors daily, but apparently, the Germans don't know a thing about it. Happy Mother's Day--Love from your son, Glenn. Mr. President, I imagine that many hundreds of letters just like this went out 60 years ago to mothers all across our country. Letters went out as they waited patiently, praying for the safe return of their dear, beloved sons serving overseas during the war. Fortunately, just a few short days after this particular letter was written, the rumors about peace did become a reality as Hitler's Germany surrendered to Allied forces, bringing to an end almost 6 years of brutal, bloody battle and an unparalleled threat to mankind in the Nazi's attempt to destroy the Jewish race. When I think about all those who served during World War II, I am reminded of a famous speech in William Shakespeare's play ``Henry V.'' The title character attempts to rally his men with a St. Crispin Day speech, a moving appeal to soldiers facing a vastly superior French force. Shakespeare's Henry assures his men of their place in history, creating the bond that links them all. An excerpt from that speech reads as follows: And Crispin Crispian shall ne'er go by, From this day to the ending of the world, But we in it shall be remember'd; We few, we happy few, we band of brothers. Stephen Ambrose, of course, in his book, ``Band of Brothers,'' also wrote about this fraternal bond that connects all warriors to one another. Ambrose documented the journey of the men of Easy Company, E Company, 506th Regiment, 101st Airborne Division, through their journey through World War II. While the men of the 506th seem at times lost in the confusion and tragedy of war, Ambrose ends his book with a poignant reflection on what they encountered during the war. He wrote as follows: They found combat to be ugliness, destruction, and death, and hated it. Anything was better than the blood and carnage, the grime and filth, the impossible demands made on the body--anything, that is, except letting down their buddies. They also found in combat the closest brotherhood they ever knew. They found selflessness. They found they could love the other guy in their foxhole more than themselves. They found that in war, men who love life would give their lives for them. Over the last couple of years, my staff and I have had the great privilege of getting to know a group of World War II veterans who, like the men of Easy Company, are, indeed, a band of brothers. They are a band of selfless, patriotic, quiet heroes who to this day, 60 years after the end of the war, remain in close contact, staying in touch with one another and their families through e-mails, newsletters, and reunions. They also, to this day, continue to remember and honor those in their company who never made it home, those who were killed during the fighting, those who will remain as they were at the time frozen in their youth. I am speaking about the men of Company K, the most decorated company in the 409th Regiment of the 103rd Infantry Division, 6th Corps of the 7th Army. The men of K Company, however, are not unique. The bonds they share and the sacrifices they made are no different than the bonds and the sacrifices of all those who served in World War II together. Two years ago at this time, I spoke about the 58th anniversary of V-E Day and specifically about K Company. Since that time, my staff and I have heard from many of the surviving members of K Company and their families. We have learned a great deal about what so many men and women went through both during and after the war. I must say the connection my office and I have established with the members of K Company, soldiers who saw battle in Germany, France, and Austria, has been one of the most rewarding experiences I have had during my entire time in Congress. One of the members of K Company is my dad, Richard DeWine. In talking to both my mother and my father this past weekend about the end of the fighting in Europe 60 years ago, they remember vividly what happened, where they were 60 years ago yesterday. My mother remembers riding on a firetruck during an impromptu celebration in my parents' hometown of Yellow Springs, OH. She remembers that celebration after the announcement was made of the German surrender. My dad, half a world away at the time, remembers spending the night before in a foxhole near Innsbruck, Austria, the night before the surrender. And he, like PVT Glenn Waltner who wrote in his letter to his mother, my dad also heard rumors that the war was nearing an end. My dad says the rumors were all over the place. But nevertheless, my dad stayed awake that night in that foxhole fearing that the enemy would attack. He remembers thinking he saw German soldiers coming towards them. The next morning, and later when he talked to his comrades, his buddies, when he compared notes with them, they thought the same thing, that the Germans were coming after them, coming towards them. Yet they never attacked that night, thank Heavens. My dad says when the war did end the next day, he can still remember groups of German troops surrendering, and then when he and his K Company buddies went into Innsbruck, quite shortly thereafter he remembers the people of Innsbruck throwing flowers at them as they rode into Innsbruck. My parents' recollections and the letter I read on the Senate floor from Glenn Waltner are just a couple of examples of the many stories we all have heard about those who fought during World War II. It is through the stories of those who served over half a century ago that we continue to learn about history, about humanity, and about the sacrifices that were made by our parents, grandparents, those who made the sacrifices. Sixty years later, we continue to learn from all those who served in World War II. We continue to learn about honor, respect, loyalty, humility, and sacrifice. I thank each of them for what they did, what they did for each one of us, and what they did for our country and what they did for the world, what they did over 60 years ago. They fought so that we could know peace, so that we could remain free. They will never be forgotten. I thank the Chair, and I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. DeWINE

Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that there now be a period of morning business.

Mr. DeWINE

Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, this is an amendment that will clearly save lives. It is the right thing to do and I join my colleagues in asking it be passed.

Mr. DeWINE. I have a second-degree amendment at the desk.

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

Mr. DeWINE

Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, in the Senate just a few minutes ago, we passed an amendment offered by Senator Kohl and myself, which was an amendment for international aid for $470 million to help provide food for the millions of people in the world who are in dire need of food. First, I thank Chairman Cochran for working with Senator Kohl and myself on this amendment. Senator Cochran is someone who has been a leader in this area, a leader in providing food for people around the world throughout his career. I thank him for his great work. I also thank the cosponsors: Senators Coleman, Hagel, Lugar, Roberts, Dole, Harkin, Durbin, Leahy, Mikulski, Inouye, Landrieu, Murray, Dorgan, Johnson, Corzine, and Obama. Additionally, I thank the Coalition for Food Aid, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, InterAction, and the numerous other groups who have been calling offices in the Senate in support of this important amendment. Their support has made a difference. This past year has been notable for the very high profile humanitarian crises we have seen in the world, in the Darfur region of Sudan, and the catastrophic tsunami that swept throughout Southeast Asia. Little attention, however, has been paid to other horrible crises that have occurred, such as the locust damage to crops and livelihoods in sub-Saharan Africa, or the devastating floods in Bangladesh and Haiti. They have not received nearly as much attention. These crises have drained the international food aid system, and clearly this system is now in need of replenishment. That is what this deals with. This month, the U.N. World Food Program announced that it would be forced to cut rations in Darfur. Our own U.S. Agency for International Development has been forced to cut food aid programs in such countries as the Sudan, Angola, Nicaragua, Ghana, and Eritrea. We cannot wait for the regular appropriations cycle to replenish the food aid resources that have been expended on the extraordinary emergencies that have occurred and are anticipated to occur in the remainder of this fiscal year. That is why this amendment was so very important. Waiting is simply not an option because lives are on the line. Waiting for the regular appropriations cycle will simply be too late. We have an opportunity with this amendment and this bill to help show the hungry people of the world that they are not forgotten. I thank my colleagues for their support for this amendment. It is important that we maintain it in conference. It will, in fact, make a difference. Again, I thank the chairman for his assistance and my colleagues for their support. I yield the floor.

Mr. DeWINE

Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, this amendment is cosponsored by Senator Durbin, Senator Coleman, Senator Dole, Senator Kennedy, Senator Salazar, and Senator Corzine. This amendment is designed to improve the health care access for those children who have lost a parent on active military duty. To understand the need for this amendment, we have to look at the current status of the law, to understand the problem, to understand why we need to change it. Currently, the dependent child--children of a deceased service member--will receive medical benefits under the TRICARE prime, for 3 years after that service member has died, at no cost. But following that period, the dependent child may continue to receive TRICARE prime at the retiree dependent premium rate available to children until the age of 21, or 23 if enrolled in school. But they have to pay for it. Also, if a dependent child's military parent dies, that child moves down on the food chain, in terms of availability of services. What that means is that if, for example, there is a doctor's appointment opening, an Active-Duty dependent would get preference to schedule that appointment over the dependent child whose parent has died in service. Let me state that again. Let me make sure my colleagues understand me. To take one example, if there is a doctor's appointment opening and your parent is alive, you get preference over a child whose parent was killed in Iraq or killed in Afghanistan. That is simply not fair. That is not right. I don't think any Member of the Senate, who really understands that, would say that is right. Our amendment would change that. What our amendment will do is put the surviving children of service members killed in service to our country in the same position as if their parent would have lived and continued to serve in the military. It puts them in no better position, but it puts them in the same position. That is all this amendment does. That is the right thing to do. What our amendment would do simply is to extend TRICARE prime to every dependent child of a deceased service member at no cost--the same thing as if the parent would have lived--until the dependent's age of 21, or 23 if the dependent attends college. It is the same as if the service member were still alive. Maintaining this level of TRICARE coverage guarantees the surviving dependents will continue to have access to some of the best doctors this country has to offer and would receive adequate health care and treatment. This is the right thing to do, it is fair, and it is just. I believe it is what the American people, if they understood the issue, if the issue was explained to them, would clearly want us to do. To do any less for the surviving children of our service members who have been killed in service to our country is simply not right. I ask unanimous consent that two letters of support be printed in the Record.

Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, one letter is from the Reserve Officers Association and one is from the National Military Family Association. I wish to share an excerpt from the letter from the ROA. Regarding health care benefits, it reads in part as follows: Your bill will provide a limited entitlement in keeping with business case principles that allows a member to serve their country knowing that their family will be taken care of if they give the ultimate sacrifice--their life. We owe the families of those who have lost loved ones in active duty our gratitude and our support. It is time to do a better job of caring for these families. It is time to ensure that this Congress does what is right. I ask my colleagues to stand with me and with my other colleagues to support these families and do our part as they have done theirs. As I said, I am joined in this amendment by Senators Durbin, Coleman, Dole, Kennedy, Salazar, and Corzine. We believe this is the equitable thing to do, it is the fair thing to do, and it is the right thing to do. Again, to repeat: All it does is put this child who has lost a parent in Iraq, who lost a parent in Afghanistan, who has lost a parent in service to our country, in the same position that child would have been if that parent would have continued to serve in the military and would have continued to live. Today, without this amendment, that child is discriminated against. After 3 years, that child has to pay for his or her own premium, that family has to pay the premium and, not only that, even if they pay the premium, they are put in a different position than if the parent would have lived. The child of a person in the military who lives is in a better position than a child of a person in the military who is deceased, and that is wrong. This amendment corrects that. I ask unanimous consent that this amendment be set aside for the moment.

Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, I now ask that my amendment No. 342 be called up.

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

Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, this amendment is cosponsored by Senators Bingaman, Coleman, Nelson, Corzine, Dole, Chafee, Dodd, Durbin, Alexander, Martinez, Smith, Specter, Kennedy, Lautenberg, and Obama. It will provide additional emergency assistance to Haiti. Unfortunately, the fact is that the bill before us now contains virtually no additional economic assistance to Haiti, the poorest country in our hemisphere. Haiti today is on the brink of collapse. Elections are scheduled in November, but there is grave social unrest and horrible poverty that is spinning Haiti back into its previous cycles of violence and instability. Haiti is our neighbor to the south, about an hour and a half plane trip from Miami. Twice in the last decade, American marines, American troops, have had to go to Haiti. There is an interim government in Haiti, a government that was supported and is supported and backed by the United States and by the international community, but the situation is very precarious. That interim government is scheduled to give way to a permanent government after elections that are now scheduled for November of this year. There is an international peacekeeping force in Haiti, but there is significant violence, and the government is, quite frankly, tottering. Money is needed in this emergency supplemental for emergency reasons in Haiti. We cannot wait for the normal appropriations process. First of all, money is needed for the elections. The United States will have to contribute toward these elections. We will have to take the lead, and other countries, of course, will participate, if elections are going to be held. Those elections were not scheduled when the last appropriations bill went through this Congress. No one could have totally foreseen what the exact situation would have been in Haiti when the last appropriations bill was approved by this Congress. The violence has continued. The international peacekeeping force has not been as aggressive as some of us would have liked to have seen it, and therefore violence has continued. Some of the pro-Aristide forces are responsible for some of the violence, and some of the old regime people dating back to Baby Doc are responsible for some of the violence. The situation is not good. Some of this money, quite frankly, needs to be used for humanitarian assistance. Some of the money needs to be used to train the police. Some of the money needs to be used to deal with the unemployment situation. My colleagues and I--a long bipartisan list that I have read with seven Republicans have sponsored this amendment--are working with the chairman of the subcommittee and with the chairman of the full committee to see what funds might be available and what we might be able to work out with regard to this amendment. If the United States does not stay engaged in Haiti, the day will not be far off when there will be more chaos in Haiti than there already is, and the government may fall. American troops may be back in Haiti at great cost to us, potential lives as well as money, and we may once again see more people flooding toward the United States. This will be money that is very well spent, and, quite frankly, I believe we have no choice but to spend this money. I ask unanimous consent that this amendment be set aside.