Mike DeWine

Mr. DeWINE

Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, I rise this afternoon to join my distinguished colleagues, Senators Lugar, Leahy, Harkin, Durbin, and others, as well as Representative Jo Ann Emerson and Representative Jim McGovern in the House, to speak in favor of the International Food For Education and Nutrition Act of 2001. Mr. President, former Senators Bob Dole and Senator George McGovern developed the concept of this bipartisan bill last year. This legislation, which links food to education, is really brilliant in its simplicity, by making permanent an existing international school nutrition pilot program. These two dedicated public servants, Senator Dole and Senator McGovern, worked tirelessly in the Senate in years past to feed needy children both in this country and around the world. Because of them and because of their leadership and their vision, millions and millions of children have received nutritious meals and an education. Through their efforts, they have given millions of children hope and a future. Mr. President, nearly 30 years ago, on this Senate floor, Senator Bob Dole and Senator George McGovern formed a bipartisan coalition on matters that had to do with agriculture and domestic food assistance. They led the way in putting in place an expanded network of food stamps for the poor, school lunches and breakfast on a much wider scale, a supplementary feeding program for low-income pregnant and nursing mothers and their infants, and nutrition guidelines for the American people. Indeed, Senators Dole and McGovern, through their words and their deeds, have demonstrated a deep and enduring commitment to children around the globe. But there is still more to do--much more. Today, we still cannot understate the importance of school feeding programs in impoverished countries throughout this world. Currently, there are hundreds of millions of children worldwide who are not enrolled in school, in part because of hunger or malnourishment. We know if there is food at school, children will come, children will attend. The fact is that school feeding programs can reach the poorest of the poor, providing necessary nutrition to children who often do not receive any other food throughout the entire day. As a result, these programs have had a substantial and very positive impact on school enrollment levels and attendance. More and more children are going to school around the world, and more and more children are able to learn and become educated. With an education, a child has a future. There is a very simplistic and important link between food and education. My wife, Fran, and I have seen it in our travels to Haiti. We have become good friends with Father Hagan--Tom Hagan--an American priest who works so very hard with the poorest of the poor in Haiti. One of the things that Father Hagan does, and is doing today, is making that link between food and education. Father Tom waits until after the school year starts and he sees what children don't have the money, don't have the ability to enroll in school. He waits a couple weeks and then he opens up his school and takes those children in from the city of Port au Prince, the Cite Soleil, the poorest part of the city, the slum, and provides them with education. He not only provides them with education, he provides them with what for most of them is the only meal they will receive, the only food they will receive all day. So the food serves as sort of a magnet, but, at the same time, it gives these young children the nourishment they need so they can concentrate and study and they can learn. Fran and I have seen it firsthand in Haiti. We have seen it in Nicaragua, we have seen it in other countries where people are working to make a difference. What this bill does is put the Congress and this country on record as saying we are committed to doing this around the world. We want to work with other countries and the United States to lead by example. We cannot do this all ourselves, but we can provide the initial leadership. The specific initiative we are introducing today advances and expands current feeding programs by establishing the International Food for Education and Nutrition Program. This new program will enable the U.S. Department of Agriculture to use funds from the Commodity Credit Corporation to purchase U.S. agricultural commodities for use in global school feeding programs. These commodities then would be provided to private organizations for distribution in recipient countries throughout the world. To facilitate enactment of these programs, our bill also would provide adequate funds for transportation and distribution costs associated with these efforts. It does no good to give food if you cannot get it distributed. Our legislation stems from the 1-year pilot program I referenced a moment ago which Senators Dole and McGovern developed and the previous administration launched a year ago. Known as the Global Food for Education Initiative, this $300 million pilot program provides nutritious meals to children in 38 countries. Under the program, 14 private volunteer organizations, together with the United Nations World Food Program, are working to provide a free breakfast or free lunch to some 7 million schoolchildren in developing countries. Our legislation is a perfect complement to the current Public Law 480 title II emergency feeding program which helps nourish more than 40 million children and adults worldwide. Let me highlight just one of the many success stories we have already seen with the current pilot program. In Cameroon, for example, we are providing nutritious meals to more than 50,000 schoolchildren, helping to increase school enrollment by over 50 percent and cutting the dropout rate for girls to virtually zero. These findings are not unique. We find, for example, similar success stories in Vietnam and in Honduras. Our bill will continue to build upon the initial success of the pilot project, and we will make this program permanent. By making it permanent, we can reach even more impoverished children and have a lasting, long-term effect on global educational development and work to eradicate childhood hunger. Furthermore, the investment in international school feeding programs not only will help children in developing countries, but it also will, of course, benefit our U.S. farmers. The program provides our farmers with a steady opportunity to sell the goods they produce. This is definitely a win-win situation. I look forward to continuing our work on this important initiative, and I urge my colleagues to join in support of our legislation.

Mr. DeWINE

Mr. DeWINE. I think my colleague from Tennessee will proceed for a couple minutes.

Mr. DeWINE

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

Mr. DeWINE

Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, I come to the floor today to discuss an issue that I have raised many times before, and that is the tragic problem of American children being abducted from this country and taken abroad. This international parental kidnapping is a tragic problem in our country today. One country in particular has had a really poor record of returning abducted children, and that country, amazingly, is the country of Germany. So I am raising this issue again today on the floor because our President, President Bush, will be in Europe next week to meet with German Chancellor Schroeder. Today's Washington Post has an editorial that discusses how vitally important it is that we make international parental kidnapping a top priority. I could not agree more. Today I have written to President Bush, asking him to raise this issue of international parental kidnapping when he meets with the Chancellor. I am hopeful he will do just that. Let me take a few minutes to update my colleagues about what is happening in our relations with Germany on this issue. As you know, the Hague Convention on the international aspects of child abduction, which the United States and Germany have both signed, is in place to facilitate the return of internationally abducted children to their countries of ``habitual residence'' for custody determination. That is where the issue is supposed to be adjudicated. Unfortunately, it has become clear that all countries that have signed the convention do not take their obligations seriously. Germany has performed especially poorly in returning children and allowing family visitation options. According to the General Accounting Office, 215 Hague Convention cases seeking the return of children have been opened with Germany, just since 1995. Of those cases opened, 172 of them have been closed with the children being returned only 67 times, or 39 percent of the time, and not returned 105 times, or 61 percent of the time. Because of this disturbing return rate, during the past year both former President Clinton and former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright raised with German officials the problems with their country's poor compliance rate. Additionally, this Senate and the House of Representatives passed a resolution I sponsored which urged the signatories--namely Germany, Austria, and Sweden--to comply with their Hague Convention obligations. In response to these efforts, an American-German working group on child custody issues has been established. While this group has made some progress in handling future cases of child abduction, momentum seems to have slowed, and essentially no progress has been made regarding the open cases, either in the return of children to the United States or in allowing left-behind parents adequate visits with their children. To that end, I believe we simply must not allow Germany or any signatory nation to ignore their convention obligations and turn blindly against the parents who have suffered unbelievable heartache because of the loss of their children. Ultimately, we cannot understate nor can we ignore the importance of getting these children returned to their homes in the United States. We must make the return of all internationally abducted children a top foreign policy priority. This is obviously not a partisan issue. Rather, this is a humanitarian issue, an ethical issue, an issue about children and how we can reunite families. I urge my colleagues to support efforts to bring these children home. Ultimately, the great tragedy is not the loss that these parents feel. The great tragedy is that there are children growing up without a parent who wants to be a loving parent but who, because of illegal action of the other parent, no longer can see that child. That is a tragic loss for the child. Mr. President, I yield the floor. I do note the absence of a quorum.

Mr. DeWINE

Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, I rise today to submit a Resolution to honor a group of Americans who have dedicated their lives to serving and protecting our Nation. As we approach Memorial Day, we should take time to remember the sacrifices and achievements of our armed forces. In doing so, I would like to recognize the heroic African Americans who served in the Ninth and Tenth Horse Cavalry Units of the U.S. Army. These units first were established at the end of the Civil War and eventually were ordered to the Western Frontier, where they earned the name ``Buffalo Soldiers.'' These men were instrumental in the realization of our Manifest Destiny by guarding settler communities and securing new western land. These brave American soldiers continued to serve our country in the Spanish- American War as part of Theodore Roosevelt's Rough Riders and again in during World War II, both in Europe and here at home as our domestic defense in California against a possible Japanese invasion. The Buffalo Soldiers were truly brave Americans to which our country owes a great debt. I would like to draw special attention to a soldier in their ranks--Colonel Charles Denton Young. Colonel Young was a lifelong resident of my home state of Ohio and contributed greatly to his country. He graduated from West Point in 1884 as only the third African American to ever receive a diploma from the Academy. Owing to his strength, perseverance, mental and physical toughness, and a natural ability to lead, Young eventually was promoted to the rank of Colonel, which was the highest rank ever achieved by an African American at that time. Leading his men on the battle field, however, was not the only way Colonel Young had an influence on the people around him. He took an active role in his community as an educator and mentor to students at Wilberforce University in Ohio. Colonel Young was a person whom others wished to emulate, and continue to emulate today, as Secretary of State Colin Powell has cited Colonel Young as one of his earliest role models. I believe I can speak for all Ohioans when I say that we are extremely proud of Colonel Young and his contributions to our nation, and I believe that America has great cause to share in this pride. I ask that when celebrating the great accomplishments of our armed forces this Memorial Day, we do not forget our Buffalo Soldiers. I would like to urge all Americans to honor the Buffalo Soldiers for the strength, valor, dedication, and courage they exhibited during their service. The sacrifices they made allow us to live as we do today--in a proud and free United States of America.

Mr. DeWINE

Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, I rise today to discuss an emergency situation facing many of our hospitals across the country. It is an emergency that faces our hospitals, many of our doctors but, much more importantly, it is an emergency that faces the tiniest members of our society, and they are babies who are about to be born and premature babies. Right now, we have a drastically short supply of a vital drug that is used to help save the lives of babies who are born prematurely. Let me explain. There is a drug called beta-methasone, commonly known as Celestone, which is given to mothers who are about to deliver their child early. The drug is designed to help the premature baby's lungs develop more fully and more completely and to help reduce the risk of bleeding in the baby's brain. This drug is absolutely essential to giving these tiny newborns a chance to live and grow into healthy children. An obstetrician at Riverside Hospital in Columbus, Dr. Tracy Cook, contacted me about the current shortage of this very necessary drug. From what I understand, many hospitals no longer have a supply of the drug on hand at all, and others have only a few day's worth left in stock. In fact, I have taken a survey around Ohio, and I suspect what I found in Ohio is true across the country, that doctors and hospitals are running low, many are out, some will be out in just a few days. I have contacted the Secretary of HHS, Mr. Tommy Thompson, as well as the FDA, to enlist their help in getting emergency supplies of the drug shipped to hospitals as soon as possible. The FDA tells us there are some manufacturing problems with the drug which is causing this shortage. Whatever the delay, I believe it is absolutely critical that we get these drugs to our hospitals so that no lives are lost, no matter what the cause is for this delay. This is a problem which has to be dealt with. This drug is critical to the health and future of premature babies. I urge my colleagues to support me in urging the FDA to take whatever action is necessary to resolve this problem. The lives of so many newborns hang in the balance. This is a problem the FDA must address immediately. We have contacted the FDA, and the response we get back is: These are manufacturing problems. That does not tell us what the exact problem is, nor does it tell us what the FDA is doing and what the manufacturer is doing to resolve this problem. We need some answers from the FDA. This is something that cannot wait 2 weeks or 1 month or 6 months. This problem has to be resolved over the next few days. It is critical for the safety of these newborn children. I thank the Chair. I yield the floor.

Mr. DeWINE

Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, I congratulate my colleagues from Iowa and Montana for the great job they have done. It was a tremendous amount of work, a tremendous amount of patience. I congratulate them.

Mr. DeWINE

Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, as we continue to debate the education reform legislation and the importance of teachers, in particular, I would like to recognize and congratulate an outstanding teacher from my home state, Mr. Douglass W. Cooper, who has been named the Ohio Teacher of the Year for 2001. Nothing is as important to our children's education than the quality of their teachers. My own high school principal, Mr. Malone, once told me that when it comes to education in our schools, only two things really matter, a student who wants to learn and a teacher who can teach. Mr. Malone was right 35 years ago, and he's still right today! A good teacher has the power to fundamentally change the course of a child's life. I'm sure that each of us can recall at least one great teacher who inspired us, or motivated us and changed our lives. These teachers guided us then and continue to influence us today. Douglass Cooper is one of those teachers. He is the kind of teacher who has a life-lasting impact on his students. And, as Ohio Teacher of the Year, Mr. Cooper is being recognized for this and for his outstanding dedication and leadership in the classroom, school, and community. Mr. Cooper, who received both a bachelor's and a master's degree from Wright State University, is currently a social studies teacher in Clinton County, Ohio, and has been teaching in the Wilmington School System for the last ten years. He serves as the chair of the social studies department at Wilmington High School. Mr. Cooper is a member of the Wilmington Local Professional Development Committee and serves his school as a mentor for entry-year teachers. He is a National Board Certified teacher and received the Ohio Governor's Educational Leadership Award in 1999. Additionally, Mr. Cooper has spent much of his free time volunteering in his community. He is involved in the Clinton County Kids Voting Steering Committee and serves as Scoutmaster of Boy Scout Troop 909. I commend Douglass Cooper for his exceptional service and his unending dedication to his students and community. He is a great role model for our young people in school, as well as for his colleagues in the teaching profession. Ohio is honored to have him as a representative this year for teachers all over our State.

Mr. DeWINE

Mr. DeWINE. I commend and congratulate Commander Thomas Richey of the United States Coast Guard for his more than 20 years of service to our country. Commander Richey has had a distinguished career of public service in defense of our great nation. I greatly appreciate all he has done to assist me and my staff over the past three years with maritime transportation issues on the Great Lakes. Additionally, Commander Richey played a vital part in helping me gain a better understanding of the varied and critical role our Coast Guard plays in the war on drugs. I've been fortunate to travel with Commander Richey, where I had the opportunity to observe, first-hand, Coast Guard drug interdiction efforts off the coast of the island of Hispanola and Puerto Rico. Commander Richey's accomplishments have been great and his presence here on Capitol Hill will be sorely missed. I thank him for his dedication and his service to our nation. I wish him and his family all my best.

Mr. DeWINE

Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, this is the Senate. We do believe in free and open debate and amendments. But we go on hour after hour after hour. I have not counted the number of amendments on which we have voted. We are probably over 40 amendments. It seems we need to move on; we need to pass this bill and we need to move forward. This is a bill that has been debated; it has been compromised. I think the Senate needs to work its will. I know the amendments keep coming, but at some point we need to pass it and get to conference and send it to the President.

Mr. DeWINE

Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the ``William Howard Taft National Historic Site Boundary Adjustment Act of 2001.'' This legislation would do three things: First, it would authorize the expansion of the historic grounds of the William Howard Taft's childhood home; second it would allow the Secretary of the Interior, through the National Park Service, to swap one section of equal-valued land for another; and third, it would allow the National Park Service to extend the boundary line of the Historic Site. As you may know, I strongly support the preservation of Presidential Historic Sites. Sadly, a number of these Presidential Historic sites are becoming run down and are in dire need of our help to secure their existence for future generations. These sites are great educational tools for our children. We must ensure their survival. If we don't, we will lose a valuable part of our American history. That is why I introduced the Presidential Sites Improvement Act last year and plan to reintroduce it later this year. This legislation is designed to provide grant money for the protection and improvement of Presidential sites, like the William Howard Taft home in Ohio. President Taft was born in Cincinnati, Ohio, in 1857. He was the son of a distinguished judge and former Ohio Attorney General. Taft graduated from Yale, and then returned to Cincinnati to study and practice law. As my colleagues know, Taft went on to become our 27th U.S. President. He is the only President in U.S. history who went on to become the Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court. In describing his illustrious career as a public servant, Taft once wrote that he always had his ``plate the right side up when offices were falling.'' With the bill I am introducing today, we can make a lasting commitment to future generations by preserving the memory and contributions of our nation's former leaders. Our children and grandchildren should have the opportunity to understand the richness of our country's history.

Mr. DeWINE

Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the ``William Howard Taft National Historic Site Boundary Adjustment Act of 2001.'' This legislation would do three things: First, it would authorize the expansion of the historic grounds of the William Howard Taft's childhood home; second it would allow the Secretary of the Interior, through the National Park Service, to swap one section of equal-valued land for another; and third, it would allow the National Park Service to extend the boundary line of the Historic Site. As you may know, I strongly support the preservation of Presidential Historic Sites. Sadly, a number of these Presidential Historic sites are becoming run down and are in dire need of our help to secure their existence for future generations. These sites are great educational tools for our children. We must ensure their survival. If we don't, we will lose a valuable part of our American history. That is why I introduced the Presidential Sites Improvement Act last year and plan to reintroduce it later this year. This legislation is designed to provide grant money for the protection and improvement of Presidential sites, like the William Howard Taft home in Ohio. President Taft was born in Cincinnati, Ohio, in 1857. He was the son of a distinguished judge and former Ohio Attorney General. Taft graduated from Yale, and then returned to Cincinnati to study and practice law. As my colleagues know, Taft went on to become our 27th U.S. President. He is the only President in U.S. history who went on to become the Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court. In describing his illustrious career as a public servant, Taft once wrote that he always had his ``plate the right side up when offices were falling.'' With the bill I am introducing today, we can make a lasting commitment to future generations by preserving the memory and contributions of our nation's former leaders. Our children and grandchildren should have the opportunity to understand the richness of our country's history.

Mr. DeWINE

Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, I rise today to celebrate the life of Bill Ellison, a courageous and heroic man from my home State of Ohio, who died on March 20, 2001, at the age of 38. Bill was a paramedic and firefighter who died of burn injuries he incurred while fighting a house fire in Miami Township, OH. I am honored to recognize him today for his heroism and his commitment and dedication to his local community and State. Since 1997, Bill Ellison served as a full-time firefighter for Anderson Township, OH, as well as a part-time firefighter for Miami Township. He also worked for the Western Joint Ambulance District. Bill began dedicating himself to his community early on, when, at age 16, he first volunteered for the Melbourne, OH, Fire Department. His exceptional commitment to protecting his community deserves our respect and thanks. On March 8, 2001, Bill left the Miami Township fire station to respond to a nearby house fire. Upon learning of a possible victim trapped in the house, he joined other firefighters to search for the individual. During the search, Bill fell through the first floor of the home into the basement, where he was knocked unconscious and sustained serious burn injuries. Nearly two weeks after the fire, he passed away as a result of these critical injuries. Bill's many friends and colleagues often called him ``Doc,'' because he was constantly reading medical texts. They will remember ``Doc'' for his warm and generous heart and his sense of humor. As the father of two daughters, Maryssa and Michaela, and husband to Victoria, Bill Ellison and his legacy will live on through his family and his work. It is the work of people, like Bill Ellison, that provides us with peace of mind, with the knowledge that there are people who we can count on in case of an emergency. These individuals, who often make grave sacrifices on our behalf, are role models for our communities. I cannot adequately emphasize how important their work, and the work of Bill Ellison, are to our society. Today, I express my deep gratitude to Bill Ellison, his colleagues, and his family and friends. He did not die in vain, he died in the line of duty to his fellow man. And for that, we will always remember his sacrifices and his life with great respect and admiration.

Mr. DeWINE

Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce a bill with my colleague, Senator Lincoln, to help those with End Stage Renal Disease, ESRD, who receive Medicare-eligible kidney transplants. Our bill would help these patients maintain access to life-saving drugs needed to prevent their immune systems from rejecting their new organs. With each kidney that is successfully transplanted, a gift of new life is given to the recipient. This precious gift should not be jeopardized simply because the recipient is unable to pay for the immunosuppressive drugs that help ensure that his or her immune system does not reject the new organ. It defies common sense for Medicare to cover expensive kidney transplant operations, but not cover the drugs necessary to preserve the transplanted organ. I would like to thank my colleagues for supporting the passage of most of the bill that I introduced last Congress--S. 631--which was passed as part of the Medicare Benefits and Improvement Protection Act, BIPA. This law eliminated the 36-month time limitation for Medicare coverage of immunosuppressive medications for transplant recipients who (1) received a Medicare transplant and (2) have Medicare-age or disability status. However, transplant recipients whose Medicare eligibility is based solely on their End Stage Renal Disease, ESRD, status did not qualify for the extended coverage under BIPA and remain limited to coverage for 36 months post-transplant. The bill we are introducing today simply would eliminate the 36-month time limitation for Medicare immunosuppressive drug coverage for the population that was not covered under last year's BIPA provision. Under current law, an individual with ESRD retains his or her Medicare coverage for all medical needs for 36 months post-transplant. This bill would eliminate the 36-month time limitation for the purpose of paying for the immunosuppressive drugs only--all other Medicare coverage, including that related to other post-transplant needs, would cease after 36 months, as under current law. A 1999 Institute of Medicine, IOM, study estimated the cost of providing indefinite coverage of all Medicare-covered kidney transplants at $848 million over five years. The IOM estimate of eliminating the time limitation for Medicare-aged and disabled transplant recipients only, covered under BIPA, was $566 million over five years. This represents a difference of only $282 million over five years to cover the rest of the ESRD population. Furthermore, our bill would make Medicare the secondary payer after 36 months for beneficiaries who do not have Medicare-age or disability status, which the IOM report did not consider. Recipients covered by our bill would be subject to the same Part B premium, deductible, and coinsurance that other beneficiaries pay to receive full Part B coverage. Medicare will pay for another transplant (average cost is $100,000) or dialysis, annual cost is more than $50,000, if a transplant fails. It makes far better sense from an economic and social perspective to extend Medicare coverage for the anti-rejection medications especially at a time when the number of people waiting for a kidney transplant in this country exceeds 48,000 people. I urge my colleagues to support our bill and help those who receive Medicare-eligible transplants gain access to the immunosuppressive drugs they need to prevent their bodies from rejecting transplanted kidneys. This legislation is supported by the National Kidney Foundation, the American Society of Transplantation, the American Society of Pediatric Nephrology, the North American Transplant Coordinators Organization, LifeCenter, the Association of Organ Procurement Organizations, the American Kidney Fund, and the Polycystic Kidney Disease Foundation. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. DeWINE

Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce a bill with my colleague, Senator Lincoln, to help those with End Stage Renal Disease, ESRD, who receive Medicare-eligible kidney transplants. Our bill would help these patients maintain access to life-saving drugs needed to prevent their immune systems from rejecting their new organs. With each kidney that is successfully transplanted, a gift of new life is given to the recipient. This precious gift should not be jeopardized simply because the recipient is unable to pay for the immunosuppressive drugs that help ensure that his or her immune system does not reject the new organ. It defies common sense for Medicare to cover expensive kidney transplant operations, but not cover the drugs necessary to preserve the transplanted organ. I would like to thank my colleagues for supporting the passage of most of the bill that I introduced last Congress--S. 631--which was passed as part of the Medicare Benefits and Improvement Protection Act, BIPA. This law eliminated the 36-month time limitation for Medicare coverage of immunosuppressive medications for transplant recipients who (1) received a Medicare transplant and (2) have Medicare-age or disability status. However, transplant recipients whose Medicare eligibility is based solely on their End Stage Renal Disease, ESRD, status did not qualify for the extended coverage under BIPA and remain limited to coverage for 36 months post-transplant. The bill we are introducing today simply would eliminate the 36-month time limitation for Medicare immunosuppressive drug coverage for the population that was not covered under last year's BIPA provision. Under current law, an individual with ESRD retains his or her Medicare coverage for all medical needs for 36 months post-transplant. This bill would eliminate the 36-month time limitation for the purpose of paying for the immunosuppressive drugs only--all other Medicare coverage, including that related to other post-transplant needs, would cease after 36 months, as under current law. A 1999 Institute of Medicine, IOM, study estimated the cost of providing indefinite coverage of all Medicare-covered kidney transplants at $848 million over five years. The IOM estimate of eliminating the time limitation for Medicare-aged and disabled transplant recipients only, covered under BIPA, was $566 million over five years. This represents a difference of only $282 million over five years to cover the rest of the ESRD population. Furthermore, our bill would make Medicare the secondary payer after 36 months for beneficiaries who do not have Medicare-age or disability status, which the IOM report did not consider. Recipients covered by our bill would be subject to the same Part B premium, deductible, and coinsurance that other beneficiaries pay to receive full Part B coverage. Medicare will pay for another transplant (average cost is $100,000) or dialysis, annual cost is more than $50,000, if a transplant fails. It makes far better sense from an economic and social perspective to extend Medicare coverage for the anti-rejection medications especially at a time when the number of people waiting for a kidney transplant in this country exceeds 48,000 people. I urge my colleagues to support our bill and help those who receive Medicare-eligible transplants gain access to the immunosuppressive drugs they need to prevent their bodies from rejecting transplanted kidneys. This legislation is supported by the National Kidney Foundation, the American Society of Transplantation, the American Society of Pediatric Nephrology, the North American Transplant Coordinators Organization, LifeCenter, the Association of Organ Procurement Organizations, the American Kidney Fund, and the Polycystic Kidney Disease Foundation. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. DeWINE

Mr. DeWINE. I thank the Chair. Mr. President, I congratulate my colleagues from Texas, Minnesota, and New York for the great work they have done on this bill. This bill goes to the heart of the challenge we face in the next few years in education. We know a lot of things are important in education. We know we have to have a good building, laboratory equipment, and good books. We have to have different items, but we know the most important thing in education is the teacher. As my high school principal, Mr. Malone, told me years ago, there are only two things that really count in education: One is a student who wants to learn and the other is a teacher who can teach. This amendment goes directly to the heart of this issue. We face a challenge in this country. In the next decade, we will have to produce 1.6 million to 2.6 million new teachers just to replace the teachers today who are getting ready to retire--1.6 to 2.6 million. We know from our experience that the greatest challenge with regard to recruiting these teachers is in the poorer parts of the country--in the inner cities many times, in areas of Appalachia. This is where it is so vitally important for us to attract, retain, and keep the best teachers we can find. We absolutely have to do that. This amendment is targeted directly at that. I wish to talk for a moment about the part of the bill that we refer to as Troops to Teachers. This is not a new program. It is a program, frankly, we had to fight last year to keep afloat. It is a program that has been proven to work. The concept is very simple. Every year in this country we have tens of thousands of men and women who retire from the military, and they retire many times at, at least from my point of view now, a relatively young age, the age of 57. They have a lot of time ahead of them, and they have a great deal of experience. We want to encourage as many of these people as we can who have already proven they can lead other people to go into education, to teach, to take that leadership ability and lead our young people and mold them and work with them to, in turn, become leaders. It has been a very successful program. This bill expands that program. Let me briefly tell the Members of the Senate what the results of this program have been. A 1999 study found that 30 percent of Troops to Teachers, 30 percent of the people who go from the military into teaching under this program, are minorities. That is compared to only 10 percent of all teachers. Thirty percent of these former troops are now teachers and teaching math. Many of them are involved in teaching science. These are two subjects for which we know it is always difficult to find quality people to teach and people who have that background. Twenty-five percent of the Troops to Teachers teach in urban schools; 90 percent are male, compared to the current teaching force, which is 74 percent female. Many educators tell us we need more males to go into teaching, particularly in K-6, 7, 8, the primary education. Troops to Teachers has proven this will, in fact, work and helps to do that. I congratulate my colleagues for their work on this issue. The Troops to Teachers provision is something I have worked on for some time. I have had the chance in my State of Ohio to meet with people who have been troops who are now teachers. It is phenomenal to see their enthusiasm but, more importantly, to see the enthusiasm of their students. It really makes a difference in these children's lives. This is an amendment that goes right at the heart of our problems and our concerns and that is to improve the quality of teaching in this country and to continue to do what we can to recruit the best people we can and put them into education and let them teach our young people. I thank the Chair and yield the floor.

Mr. DeWINE

Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, I rise today to join my friend and colleague from Connecticut, Senator Dodd, to introduce a bill that builds on a previous law that he and I wrote four years ago, called the ``Better Pharmaceuticals for Children Act.'' The bill we are introducing today the ``Best Pharmaceuticals for Children Act'', re- authorizes our 1997 law and makes additional improvements. I'd like to thank Senator Dodd for his tireless dedication to this effort and to other vital children's health initiatives. We have worked together on many bipartisan efforts that protect children, and I commend him for his commitment to ensuring that all children are safe and healthy. I also would like to recognize the efforts of Elaine Vining with the American Academy of Pediatrics and Mark Isaac with the Elizabeth Glaser Pediatric AIDS Foundation, who have devoted countless hours to providing us with technical assistance and ideas for how to improve our already successful pediatric studies law. Under our law, the FDA has granted market exclusivity extensions for 28 products, of which 18 include new labeling. Let me tell you what this means for me as a parent: We now have dosage, safety and adverse event information that we did not previously have to help us provide our children the correct dose of these medicines and to avoid potential adverse effects. The more information doctors and parents have on dosing, toxicity, adverse effects, and adverse drug interactions--the more informed our decisions will be when giving medicines to children and ultimately, the more we will be protecting our kids. Creating the proper formulation, such as a liquid form, of a drug is also essential. I know that my children all went through a stage in which a pill form was problematic for them to swallow or the taste of the medicine was unacceptable. Having a child spit out a tablet or having to crush a tablet in order to give half of the recommended adult dose are compliance issues that we, as parents, have all experienced. When Senator Dodd and I set out in 1997 to change the fact that only 20 percent of all prescription drugs marketed in this country were labeled for pediatric use, we heard many proposals on how to fix the problem, from giving tax incentives for research to offering this market exclusivity extension. Since children only account for 30 percent of the population and less than 12 percent of personal health care spending, they were not getting the kind of pediatric-focused research that they deserve. Because of the help and support of many of my colleagues like Senators Frist, Kennedy, Jeffords, Bond, Mikulski, Hutchinson, Collins, and many others who helped us pass this landmark law, we have begun to turn the tide in favor of children. In considering any proposals to change the current law, however, we must not lose sight of the fact that the goal of this law is to encourage pediatric studies of new and already marketed drugs that are currently used in children, but are not labeled for such use. Anything that hinders the ability of the FDA to implement this law will impede future progress in pediatric research and ultimately defeat the purposes of this law. FDA and others, including the American Academy of Pediatrics and the Elizabeth Glaser Pediatric AIDS Foundation, have offered many helpful suggestions on how we can improve the current law. The most significant improvement I would like to stress is something our original law was never intended to address--the issue of how to get off-patent drugs tested for use in children. The market exclusivity extension only works as a pediatric testing incentive if a company has an existing patent to which we can attach an additional six months of market exclusivity. Once the patent expires, however, there is no way to prevent competition from entering the market for that drug. So, in the new bill that Senator Dodd and I are introducing today-- the ``Best Pharmaceuticals for Children Act'', we propose creating a ``Research Fund.'' This Fund would require the Secretary of HHS to award contracts for entities with expertise in conducting pediatric clinical trials (such as PPRU's, hospitals, universities) to conduct pediatric studies of certain drugs that are off-patent. The list of these off-patent drugs would be developed according to criteria--such as whether new studies might produce health benefits for children, and then prioritized and published by the Secretary, acting through the NIH Director and in consultation with the FDA Commissioner and experts in pediatric research. Written requests would be issued by the FDA Commissioner. The significance of this Research Fund is that off-patent drugs, like Ritalin, would be tested for pediatric use. Currently, many drugs are being prescribed off-label, based on limited, if any, pediatric studies and/or on the personal experiences of health professionals. Ritalin, for example, includes the following precaution and warning: Precaution: Long-term effects of Ritalin in children have not been well established. Warning: Ritalin should not be used in children under six years, since safety and [effectiveness] in this age group has not been established. The point is that Ritalin is being prescribed off-label for children under six, and yet we don't know the safety and long-term effects on children. This Research Fund would establish the means by which testing on this and other off-patent drugs could be performed. Our new bill makes other improvements to current law including: expediting the dissemination of information generated by pediatric studies to the public; expediting labeling changes; acknowledging the need to study the neonate, zero to one month in age, population if appropriate and at the appropriate point in pediatric studies; applying prescription drug user fees to pediatric studies to give FDA the resources it needs to conduct timely reviews of studies and labeling changes; and establishing an Office of Pediatric Therapeutics within FDA to coordinate activities among review divisions and provide oversight for all pediatric activities undertaken by FDA. Finally, I would like to address a concern that has been expressed by many in the press, and rightfully so. No one can ignore the risk involved in having children participate in clinical trials. Parents with sick children, sadly, have to weigh these risks and make treatment decisions. I want to commend Senator Dodd for his foresight in this area of providing research protections for children involved in clinical trials. With the increase in pediatric research through this law and other laws, we needed to ensure that research protections exist and are strengthened, if necessary. That is why last year, in the ``Children's Health Act,'' Senator Dodd and I proposed language that would ensure that federally funded, conducted, and regulated research adheres to scientific and ethical review standards. There is currently a review of these federal protections for children involved in clinical trials to further ensure that the highest standards of scientific and ethical review are in place. The alternative to clinical trials is uncontrolled, unregulated, and unreported studies of smaller groups of children. Pediatric experts agree that controlled clinical trials are the much-preferred alternative. We must make the health of our children a priority. Through our new bill we are doing that. We are furthering the success of current law by providing parents and doctors with more information to make better informed decisions when medicating children. Our children deserve no less. I urge my colleagues to support this important measure.

Mr. DeWINE

Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, I rise today to join my friend and colleague from Connecticut, Senator Dodd, to introduce a bill that builds on a previous law that he and I wrote four years ago, called the ``Better Pharmaceuticals for Children Act.'' The bill we are introducing today the ``Best Pharmaceuticals for Children Act'', re- authorizes our 1997 law and makes additional improvements. I'd like to thank Senator Dodd for his tireless dedication to this effort and to other vital children's health initiatives. We have worked together on many bipartisan efforts that protect children, and I commend him for his commitment to ensuring that all children are safe and healthy. I also would like to recognize the efforts of Elaine Vining with the American Academy of Pediatrics and Mark Isaac with the Elizabeth Glaser Pediatric AIDS Foundation, who have devoted countless hours to providing us with technical assistance and ideas for how to improve our already successful pediatric studies law. Under our law, the FDA has granted market exclusivity extensions for 28 products, of which 18 include new labeling. Let me tell you what this means for me as a parent: We now have dosage, safety and adverse event information that we did not previously have to help us provide our children the correct dose of these medicines and to avoid potential adverse effects. The more information doctors and parents have on dosing, toxicity, adverse effects, and adverse drug interactions--the more informed our decisions will be when giving medicines to children and ultimately, the more we will be protecting our kids. Creating the proper formulation, such as a liquid form, of a drug is also essential. I know that my children all went through a stage in which a pill form was problematic for them to swallow or the taste of the medicine was unacceptable. Having a child spit out a tablet or having to crush a tablet in order to give half of the recommended adult dose are compliance issues that we, as parents, have all experienced. When Senator Dodd and I set out in 1997 to change the fact that only 20 percent of all prescription drugs marketed in this country were labeled for pediatric use, we heard many proposals on how to fix the problem, from giving tax incentives for research to offering this market exclusivity extension. Since children only account for 30 percent of the population and less than 12 percent of personal health care spending, they were not getting the kind of pediatric-focused research that they deserve. Because of the help and support of many of my colleagues like Senators Frist, Kennedy, Jeffords, Bond, Mikulski, Hutchinson, Collins, and many others who helped us pass this landmark law, we have begun to turn the tide in favor of children. In considering any proposals to change the current law, however, we must not lose sight of the fact that the goal of this law is to encourage pediatric studies of new and already marketed drugs that are currently used in children, but are not labeled for such use. Anything that hinders the ability of the FDA to implement this law will impede future progress in pediatric research and ultimately defeat the purposes of this law. FDA and others, including the American Academy of Pediatrics and the Elizabeth Glaser Pediatric AIDS Foundation, have offered many helpful suggestions on how we can improve the current law. The most significant improvement I would like to stress is something our original law was never intended to address--the issue of how to get off-patent drugs tested for use in children. The market exclusivity extension only works as a pediatric testing incentive if a company has an existing patent to which we can attach an additional six months of market exclusivity. Once the patent expires, however, there is no way to prevent competition from entering the market for that drug. So, in the new bill that Senator Dodd and I are introducing today-- the ``Best Pharmaceuticals for Children Act'', we propose creating a ``Research Fund.'' This Fund would require the Secretary of HHS to award contracts for entities with expertise in conducting pediatric clinical trials (such as PPRU's, hospitals, universities) to conduct pediatric studies of certain drugs that are off-patent. The list of these off-patent drugs would be developed according to criteria--such as whether new studies might produce health benefits for children, and then prioritized and published by the Secretary, acting through the NIH Director and in consultation with the FDA Commissioner and experts in pediatric research. Written requests would be issued by the FDA Commissioner. The significance of this Research Fund is that off-patent drugs, like Ritalin, would be tested for pediatric use. Currently, many drugs are being prescribed off-label, based on limited, if any, pediatric studies and/or on the personal experiences of health professionals. Ritalin, for example, includes the following precaution and warning: Precaution: Long-term effects of Ritalin in children have not been well established. Warning: Ritalin should not be used in children under six years, since safety and [effectiveness] in this age group has not been established. The point is that Ritalin is being prescribed off-label for children under six, and yet we don't know the safety and long-term effects on children. This Research Fund would establish the means by which testing on this and other off-patent drugs could be performed. Our new bill makes other improvements to current law including: expediting the dissemination of information generated by pediatric studies to the public; expediting labeling changes; acknowledging the need to study the neonate, zero to one month in age, population if appropriate and at the appropriate point in pediatric studies; applying prescription drug user fees to pediatric studies to give FDA the resources it needs to conduct timely reviews of studies and labeling changes; and establishing an Office of Pediatric Therapeutics within FDA to coordinate activities among review divisions and provide oversight for all pediatric activities undertaken by FDA. Finally, I would like to address a concern that has been expressed by many in the press, and rightfully so. No one can ignore the risk involved in having children participate in clinical trials. Parents with sick children, sadly, have to weigh these risks and make treatment decisions. I want to commend Senator Dodd for his foresight in this area of providing research protections for children involved in clinical trials. With the increase in pediatric research through this law and other laws, we needed to ensure that research protections exist and are strengthened, if necessary. That is why last year, in the ``Children's Health Act,'' Senator Dodd and I proposed language that would ensure that federally funded, conducted, and regulated research adheres to scientific and ethical review standards. There is currently a review of these federal protections for children involved in clinical trials to further ensure that the highest standards of scientific and ethical review are in place. The alternative to clinical trials is uncontrolled, unregulated, and unreported studies of smaller groups of children. Pediatric experts agree that controlled clinical trials are the much-preferred alternative. We must make the health of our children a priority. Through our new bill we are doing that. We are furthering the success of current law by providing parents and doctors with more information to make better informed decisions when medicating children. Our children deserve no less. I urge my colleagues to support this important measure.

Mr. DeWINE

Mr. DeWINE. I thank my colleague.

Mr. DeWINE. I will, indeed.

Mr. DeWINE. I certainly will yield.

Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, again on behalf of Majority Leader Lott, Senators are reminded that cloture was filed on the motion to proceed to the education bill last week. That vote will occur at 9:30 a.m. tomorrow. Following the vote, the Senate is expected to begin the 30 hours of postcloture debate. It is hoped that the debate time will not be necessary and that the Senate can begin action on that bill during Tuesday's session. Senators are further advised that they should be prepared for votes throughout the week.

Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, on behalf of Majority Leader Lott, I have the following announcement. Today the Senate will be in a period for morning business until 3 p.m. Following morning business, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate resume consideration of the majority leader's motion to proceed to S. 1, the education reform bill.

Mr. DeWINE

Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, the issue before us now, education reform in our elementary and secondary public schools, is certainly one of the most important issues facing our Nation. Education is something about which we all care passionately. I have a deep personal interest in education as a Ohioan and especially as a parent of eight children and also now the grandparent of six. I believe that a quality education for a child today is the key to that child's quality of life in the future. As parents and grandparents and citizens of our States and communities, we have an obligation to ensure that all children receive a solid education. Failing to properly educate our children puts them at risk. As President John Kennedy once said: ``A child miseducated is a child lost.'' That is a child lost to ignorance. A child lost to drugs, alcohol, or violence. A child lost to poverty and apathy. As we debate reform of our schools, I believe it is vital that we look at exactly where we are as a society and how this is affecting our public education system. Our society, as I see it, is divided along economic and educational lines. This division is nothing new. Scholars and sociologists have been warning us for years that this is where our Nation was heading, particularly if we did not properly educate our children. Unfortunately, we did not heed the warnings, and as a result, our Nation today is a nation split into two Americas: One where children get educated, and one where they do not. This gap in educational knowledge and the gap in economic standing is entrenching thousands upon thousands of children into an underclass and into futures filled with poverty and little hope and little opportunity. That is exactly what is happening in my home State of Ohio and, tragically, what is happening across our country. Ohio generally is a microcosm of what we see in the country. When we look at this growing gap, the development of the two Americas, what we see in Ohio is also what we see in our Nation. In Ohio, growing income and educational disparities are creating our very own permanent underclass, especially in Ohio inner cities and in Appalachia. What we see in Ohio, if I can take the Presiding Officer and Members of the Senate to Ohio, is something we see in many States. Most of Ohio is doing very well economically and doing well educationally. The children have a great future. When we look across Ohio, we see two areas where that is not taking place, where the children are not being educated as well as we would like and where the income level shows that disparity. One place is in Appalachia. There are 20 or 25 counties in Ohio that are Appalachian counties. The other area is in our core cities. Call them the inner cities. Call them the core cities. Either way, this is where we face most of our challenges. We cannot underestimate or understate this problem. It is a problem that is not unique to Ohio. Rather, it is a huge societal problem, which is pushing society farther and farther apart, not closer and closer together. It is a problem we must address. How do we do that? How do we enable children in the underclass to rise above their circumstances, those circumstances which are beyond their control? How do we bring about equality and opportunity so each child has a chance to lead a full, meaningful, productive life as an adult? I believe the best way we can get to these children before we lose them is through education. Horace Mann, a former president of Antioch College in Yellow Springs, OH--a community where my wife and I grew up--who is known as the father of public education, once said: Education, beyond all other devices of human origin, is the great equalizer, the great equalizer of the conditions of man --the balance-wheel of the social machinery. This is exactly what education can and should do. It should provide all children, regardless of their economic circumstances or family backgrounds, with the tools they need to make it as adults in our society, with the tools necessary to rise above individual situations of poverty and instability, individual situations of hopelessness and despair. As my colleagues in the Senate know, today's educational system is not always meeting this goal. Do not get me wrong. I am not blaming the schools for all of society's ills. Rather, I am suggesting that we as a society are failing to use the power and the potential of our schools to the maximum extent to help give our children the futures they really deserve. No matter where a child lives, whether in Portsmouth, OH, or New York City, every one of the 1.8 million children in the Ohio public school system and every one of the nearly 47 million children in public schools nationwide, deserves the opportunity to learn and to become educated. Let's face it; our schools have our children in their custody 7 or 8 hours a day, 5 days a week. That is not a lot of time, but it is time our schools and our country simply cannot afford to waste. A line from a 1970 song says ``your dreams were your ticket out.'' For all too many children, children living in poverty and in broken homes, dreams alone are not enough. For those children, a dream and a solid education is their ticket out. This is not a new concept. Historically, our schools have been the best opportunity for children to move out, to move up, to advance, to change their lives. Education has built our Nation. We are truly a nation of immigrants, immigrants who, because of public schools, escaped ignorance, illiteracy, and lives of poverty. A strong public education tradition in this country kept entire generations from being marginalized and left behind. For them, education was their ticket out--their ticket out of despair and toward opportunity. When education is not working to give our kids the tools they need to move ahead in life, those children suffer. Many of them, for example, don't get their high school diplomas. Look at some of the class of 2000 graduation rates for my home State of Ohio; look at urban centers. In Akron, OH, 72 percent of the city's high school children graduated last year. That is actually a high rate for an urban area. In Toledo, only 67 percent graduated. In Columbus, it was only 62 percent; Youngstown, 59 percent; Dayton, 57 percent; Canton, 53 percent; Cincinnati, 51 percent; and in Cleveland, only 34 percent of the students who started high school actually finished. Yes, that is right. Only one-third of the students in Cleveland, OH, graduated. Two-thirds did not. Before anyone becomes too complacent or thinks maybe they don't have this problem in their States, let me remind the Members of the Senate that these statistics are not unusual nor only for the State of Ohio. They are typical of urban centers and urban areas. My guess is that if we look at the other major cities in this country we will find similar, disturbing statistics. There is something wrong when we see statistics such as this. There is something wrong in Ohio and this country when that many children are not graduating. There is also something wrong in this country when nearly one-third of college freshman must take remedial courses before they can begin regular college level course work. There is something wrong in this country when one-third of fourth graders cannot read. The National Assessment of Educational Progress tested 8,000, fourth graders across the country for reading skills and ranks them according to four levels of achievement: advanced, proficient, basic, and below basic. Tragically, 37 percent of those tested scored below basic. In other words, 37 percent of those children basically could not read. It gets even worse when you break the ``below basic'' group into categories. Sixty-three percent of African American fourth graders came into the category, 58 percent Hispanic, 47 percent of urban students, and 60 percent of poor children. All of them scored below basic, meaning they simply cannot read in the fourth grade. I also wonder about another statistic. Nearly three out of four teenagers today attend a high school with an enrollment of more than 1,000 students. I repeat, three-fourths of teenagers today attend high schools with enrollments topping 1,000 students. I worry about that. I worry about students in such big schools where it is too easy, many times, to get lost. I think we need to look at that. Where do we go from here? How do we go about changing our societal mindset and our perceptions and our negligence in this country? The first thing we need to do is recognize that the answers lie mainly in the hands of parents, in our local communities, among our local school boards, and among our State and local governments--not in Washington. Nevertheless, Congress has a role to play, although a small one, in prioritizing or directing our limited Federal dollars where they can best help disadvantaged students in disadvantaged districts. I believe the best place to begin on the Federal level is by restoring accountability and achievement with the single most important resource in the classroom--the teacher. When I think about teachers, I think about something else that Horace Mann once said: ``Teaching is the most difficult of all arts and the most profound of all sciences.'' I can certainly attest to that. As a college senior at Miami University in Oxford, OH, I spent 4\1/2\ months student teaching at Princeton High School, a high school north of the city of Cincinnati. That was tough work. Teaching is tough. Teaching was one of the hardest things I have ever done in my life. It was then I learned, firsthand for the first time, that Ohio and America's teachers don't get the respect, the admiration, nor the salaries they deserve. There is something wrong with that. There is something wrong with a system and a society that doesn't value the teaching profession as highly as other professions. Teachers, after all, shape lives. A good teacher has the power to fundamentally change the course of a child's life. I am sure each one of us in the Senate can recall at least one great teacher who inspired us, who motivated us, who, yes, changed our lives. These teachers guided us then, and they continue to influence us today. I can recall some of my teachers. I can still hear my senior high school teacher, Mrs. Kappell. Whenever I write a letter or whenever I try to compose a speech, I can hear her talking to me, telling me what to do, and many times, what not to do. I can hear my junior high school teacher in American history, Mr. Wingard, now Dr. Wingard, as he talked about that great American story of American history. Teachers do change our lives, Mr. President. They do make a difference. As a parent, I also know how important it is for children to have good teachers, for our children to enjoy being in the classroom and to look forward to going to school each day. When they don't have quality teachers, our children suffer for a whole year. I am sure other parents have this experience: There is nothing better than to find out that your child has a great teacher; to listen to that child, when that child comes home from school, talk about what the teacher said; to hear the excitement a teacher can inspire about a particular subject, whether it is science or American government or American history or literature. There is nothing more important for a child, other than parents, than to have a good teacher. I have also had the experience, not often but it is an experience most of us have had as parents, of our child having a teacher who wasn't that good. We all know how long 9 months can seem for the whole family. It is so important for our kids that we attract the smartest and most dedicated in our society to the profession of teaching. We had better move fast. The National Center for Educational Statistics predicts that in the next decade we will have to hire 1.7 million to 2.7 million new teachers just to replace those who retire or leave the profession. While this exodus of teachers is certainly a daunting challenge and a very real pending problem, it is also an enormous opportunity. It is the single greatest opportunity for us, as parents and as community members, to reshape the next decade of education in America. When I think about this opportunity and I think about how we can shape education to the greatest benefit of our children, I am reminded of something my own high school principal, Mr. Malone, once told me. We were getting ready to go into a new high school building. We were part of the baby-boom generation, so they were always building new buildings for us. Mr. Malone came into our class and he said, ``We are going to go into this new high school next week. We are so proud of it and so happy about it. But I want you to remember one thing. I want you always to remember this: In education, there are only two things that really matter. One is the student who wants to learn and the other is a good teacher. Everything else is sort of icing on the cake.'' What Mr. Malone said 35 years ago is still true today. Recently I had the privilege of meeting with several teachers and administrators and students from two of Ohio's schools of education-- Marietta College and Ohio University. During those meetings, we discussed many of the issues today's teachers are facing and the challenges that await the future generation of teachers. Those meetings reaffirmed my belief that, when you get right down to it, good teachers are second only to good parents in helping children learn. So any effort to restore confidence and improve quality in education must begin with a national recommitment to teaching as a profession. We are doing just that with the education reform bill before us. Through the language I have written into this bill, we can expand, enhance, and encourage support for teachers all across America. First, I have written a provision that will provide support for people in other professions seeking a second career as a teacher. We need to make it easier to recruit future teachers from the military, from industry, and from research institutions. These are people with established careers and real-world life experiences. They have a great deal to give our students in the classroom. But, getting this kind of talent into the classroom is easier said than done. For example, if Albert Einstein were alive today and wanted to teach a high school physics class, requirements in some States would keep him from even setting foot in a classroom. That, I think, is just absurd. My provision would allow the use of Federal funds for alternative teacher certification programs. This would allow States to create and expand different types of alternative certification efforts. Second, I have written a provision to provide support for teachers seeking to improve subject knowledge or classroom skills. This language that we have written helps ensure that our teachers have access to training academies, where they can sharpen and improve their skills as teachers. There is just such a facility in Cincinnati called the Mayerson Academy. Teachers can go there to learn from experienced educators, seasoned educators who can help them and guide them to become stronger teachers in the classroom. Plans are already underway for a similar training academy in Dayton, OH. No doubt, some of this support should be available to teachers in every community in our country. It is not enough to train our teachers and then just send them out to the classrooms. We have to provide them with the opportunity to constantly improve their skills. It is a science. It is an art. It is both. It is a tough business, and we need to give them the help, the mentoring, and the expertise they need to continue advancing throughout their careers. The Mayerson Academy was put together by the business community in Cincinnati in cooperation with the teachers unions and in cooperation with the public schools. It is the right way to go. It is the right thing to do. Third, I have written a provision to provide support for teachers seeking new ways to teach math and science, history, or English. My language expands the mission of the Eisenhower National Clearinghouse, which is a national center located at Ohio State University that provides teachers with the best teacher training and curriculum materials in the subjects of math and science. This clearinghouse screens, evaluates, and distributes the multiple training and course materials currently available and makes it easier for teachers to quickly and efficiently access materials for the classrooms. My provision expands the clearinghouse's mission beyond just math and science to now include, under this language, subjects such as history and English. Finally, I have written a provision to provide support for new teachers from experienced teachers who will serve as mentors. Many of our most experienced, most senior, most knowledgeable teachers are, unfortunately, about to retire. It is vital that we do not lose their expertise before it is too late. We can utilize their skills through mentoring programs. My provision allows the use of Federal funds for new and existing teacher mentoring programs. I also believe we need to prioritize Federal funding to recruit and retain good teachers in our high-need urban and rural school districts. One way to do this is by recruiting teachers from the military through the Troops to Teachers Program. Last year we worked to save this program, and thank Heaven we saved it. We fully intend to do the same this year. Troops to Teachers assists retiring military personnel in gaining the State certification necessary to teach. Furthermore, Troops to Teachers helps broaden the makeup and skills of our current teacher pool. Finally, it brings the best teachers to the schools and the children who need them the most. The fact is, the Troops to Teachers Program has been an unbelievable success. We need to recruit more minorities to go into education. We need to have more teachers who have a background in math and science. And, we need to recruit more men into teaching in our primary schools. Troops to teachers brings minorities and men and those with a background in math and science into the classroom. This is a program that works. It is a program that makes a difference. Let me say how delighted I was to see that the First Lady of our country endorsed this program. She has said that we should be putting more money in the program and has been a very strong advocate for that. We can also do much more to encourage good teachers to go into the classrooms that need them most. Specifically, we can pursue efforts involving National Board certified teachers. You may ask: ``What exactly is a National Board Certified teacher?'' Well, the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards is an extremely rigorous certification program that identifies exceptional classroom educators. This certification is a difficult, challenging, year-long process that measures a teacher's knowledge of subject matter and, more importantly, his or her ability to teach that material to students. Last year, 331 teachers were certified in my home State of Ohio by the National Board, increasing the State's total to 924 educators. I am happy to say it is the third highest of any State in the Union. These teachers are some of our best educators, and we need to encourage them to teach in our most needy schools. That is why I have been working with the Board to urge them to prioritize their federal funding for teachers who teach in, or are willing to teach in low-income school districts. I am pleased to report that the Board has agreed to make this a policy. I congratulate them for it. In the future, Mr. President, we also need to increase the federal government's funding for an important program for disabled students-- the Individuals with Disabilities Act. This worthwhile federal program is one of the largest underfunded mandates on our local schools. Many of my colleagues have taken time to come to the floor in the last few weeks to talk about this. I congratulate them for drawing attention to this problem. We need to fully fund the federal government's commitment to this program, as it helps give teachers the ability to teach disabled students without detracting from the education of other students. Finally, we can encourage teachers to teach in low-income districts-- the very districts where children need them most--by re-examining the current student loan forgiveness programs. This is an issue that I intend to pursue in future legislative initiatives. I think there is more we can do. We need to look at this program and figure out what we have to do in loan forgiveness to attract students to become teachers and to go to our Appalachian counties and our inner cities, or wherever good teachers are needed. Now, while I strongly believe that the teacher is the most important resource in the classroom, there are other issues in education that we need to address, like the program of drugs and violence in our schools. I have fought for--and will continue fighting--to improve the $925 million Safe and Drug Free Schools Program. This vital program, which I have incorporated into the ESEA bill, provides funds to over 97 percent of school districts nationwide to keep our schools safe and drug-free. The reality is that for many schools this is the only money they get, or the only money that they set aside, to deal with our drug problem. It is vital that we continue to fund this program. We need this program because a child threatened by drugs and violence is not be able to learn, and a teacher afraid to stand in front of the classroom is unable to teach. And that--that is a situation we should never, ever have in our schools. I hope to say more about this very important program as the Floor debate unfolds. So I believe it is clear that the government can make a difference in restoring quality and equality to education. On a federal level and on a state level, the government can help target programs to those children in those districts most in need. However, the whole realm of education is so big and so vital and so all-encompassing that it is something we cannot leave to the government, alone, to fix. Parents and families and communities must take an active role in reforming our schools and in helping our best teachers stay in our children's classrooms. I think it is important that every capable American become involved. Each one of us needs to volunteer directly in the classroom and to participate in some way in school activities. Parents need to go into their children's schools and help the teachers, or volunteer to read to the classes, or help teach math or science, or history, or literature. As I said, I talked to several teachers in Ohio recently. They told me about how exciting it was to have senior citizens come into their classrooms and read to students on a one-on-one basis; or to help a student read; or to take a turn with the senior reading one page and the child reading another page. These teachers told me that it was not just the senior citizen teaching and a student learning, although that certainly occurred. But, it was the bonding and the relationship that developed. It was that student knew someone cared about him or her. That was just as important, or in many respects, it was more important. I think each one of us can do something in our schools. Whether we have schoolchildren in schools or not, each one of us, in some way, can make a difference. It is up to us to change our culture of complacency. It is up to us to help close the economic and educational gaps in our society. Ultimately, education reform and the paradigm shifts that go along with it are a journey toward the horizon--not a destination, but a never-ending, forward-leading journey toward the future. So, as we move toward that horizon--as we move ahead for the sake of our children--we need to get back to basics--good teachers, safe and drug-free schools, and parental and community involvement in the schools. I am confident that we will go forth in the days ahead to give children the tools they need for a bright and promising future. I am confident that we will go forth to restore quality and community in our system of education. We will go forth and establish a new way of thinking--a way of thinking that challenges and changes the current culture of education in America. We will go forth and restore education's ability to ``equalize,'' as Horace Mann suggested. And, as we do go forth toward that horizon--toward our future--we should remember something Abraham Lincoln once said: A child is a person who is going to carry on what you have started. He is going to sit where you are sitting and when you are gone attend to those things which you think are important. He will assume control over your cities, states, and nations. He is going to move in and take over your churches, schools, universities, and corporations. The fate of humanity is in his hands. That sentiment is as true today as it was when Abraham Lincoln said it. We cannot rest--we must not rest--until every child has teachers who are qualified to teach and schools that are safe, drug-free learning environments. Our children's future and the future America--hang in the balance. I thank the Chair and yield the Floor.

Mr. DeWINE

Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to proceed for 30 minutes as in morning business.