Christopher Dodd

Mr. DODD

Mr. DODD. Madam President, I thank Senator Leahy and Senator Hatch for moving the nomination of Mark Kravitz. This is a first-rate nomination. I commend the President and others who recommended Mark Kravitz. He is a first-class nominee to sit on the Federal bench. My colleague Senator Lieberman and I strongly support this nomination. He has been a wonderful lawyer in Connecticut, a graduate of Wellesley University, Georgetown Law School, a clerk for then-Justice Rehnquist, has written extensively and taught at the University of Connecticut Law School. He is going to be a wonderful addition to the district court bench. We wanted our colleagues to know how strongly Senator Lieberman and I felt about this nomination. We urge our colleagues to give their unanimous support. I yield back my remaining time.

Mr. DODD

Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Focus on Committed and Underpaid Staff for Children's Sake Act. I am pleased that Senators Kennedy, Murray, and Bingaman are joining me as original cosponsors and that companion legislation is being introduced in the House today by Representatives George Miller and Patrick Kennedy. The need for child care has become a daily fact of life for millions of parents nationwide. Sixty-five percent of mothers with children under age six and 78 percent of mothers with children ages 6 to 13 are in the labor force. Each day, 13 million preschool children, including 6 million infants and toddlers, spend some part of their day in child care. The quality of that care has a tremendous impact on the critical early years of children's development. And, the most powerful determinant of the quality of child care is the training, education, and pay of those who spend 8-10 hours a day caring for our children. Yet, what we know about the child care field is alarming. Despite the fact that continuity of care is critical for the emotional development of children, staff turnover at child care centers averages 30 percent per year--four times greater than the turnover rate for elementary school teachers. We as a society say there is no more important task than helping to raise a child. Yet, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, we pay the average child care worker about $16,500 a year--barely above the poverty level for a family of three. Few child care providers have basic benefits like health coverage or paid leave. Only a small fraction of child care workers have graduated from college. We pay people millions of dollars a year to throw baseballs, to shoot basketballs and to swing golf clubs. What does that say about our priorities when at the same time we pay those who care for our most precious resource--our children--poverty-level wages? A report by the University of California, Berkeley and the Center for Child Care Workforce on child care providers' pay, training and education highlighted the current crisis in the child care field. In a survey of child care centers in three California communities, the study found that three-quarters of all child care staff employed in 1996 were no longer on the job in 2000. Some centers reported 100 percent turnover. Additionally, nearly half of the child care providers who had left had a Bachelor's degree, compared to only one-third of the new teachers. Some 49 percent, nearly half, of those who had left their job, left the child care field entirely. It's clear that if we want to attract quality teachers to the child care field, the pay has to better reflect the value we place on their work. We can't attract them and we can't keep them if we don't pay them a living wage. The legislation I am introducing today will provide states with funds to increase child care worker pay based on the level of education--the greater the level of education, the greater the increase in pay. In addition, the legislation will provide scholarships of up to $1,500 for child care workers who want to further their early childhood education training by getting a college degree, an Associate's degree, or a child development associate credential. The legislation also includes a separate allotment to states to address access to health care coverage by child care workers. States would be free to develop their own creative methods to improve access to health care, but the intent is to ensure that an industry that works with children--who as many parents know, often come down with a variety of illnesses, particularly preschool age children--would have greater access to comprehensive and affordable health care coverage. We will never make significant strides in improving the quality of child care in this Nation if we fail to address one of the leading problems--attracting and retaining a quality child care workforce. It is time to invest in our children by investing in those who dedicate their lives to caring for our children. I ask unanimous consent to print a short summary of the bill following my remarks.

Mr. DODD

Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Focus on Committed and Underpaid Staff for Children's Sake Act. I am pleased that Senators Kennedy, Murray, and Bingaman are joining me as original cosponsors and that companion legislation is being introduced in the House today by Representatives George Miller and Patrick Kennedy. The need for child care has become a daily fact of life for millions of parents nationwide. Sixty-five percent of mothers with children under age six and 78 percent of mothers with children ages 6 to 13 are in the labor force. Each day, 13 million preschool children, including 6 million infants and toddlers, spend some part of their day in child care. The quality of that care has a tremendous impact on the critical early years of children's development. And, the most powerful determinant of the quality of child care is the training, education, and pay of those who spend 8-10 hours a day caring for our children. Yet, what we know about the child care field is alarming. Despite the fact that continuity of care is critical for the emotional development of children, staff turnover at child care centers averages 30 percent per year--four times greater than the turnover rate for elementary school teachers. We as a society say there is no more important task than helping to raise a child. Yet, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, we pay the average child care worker about $16,500 a year--barely above the poverty level for a family of three. Few child care providers have basic benefits like health coverage or paid leave. Only a small fraction of child care workers have graduated from college. We pay people millions of dollars a year to throw baseballs, to shoot basketballs and to swing golf clubs. What does that say about our priorities when at the same time we pay those who care for our most precious resource--our children--poverty-level wages? A report by the University of California, Berkeley and the Center for Child Care Workforce on child care providers' pay, training and education highlighted the current crisis in the child care field. In a survey of child care centers in three California communities, the study found that three-quarters of all child care staff employed in 1996 were no longer on the job in 2000. Some centers reported 100 percent turnover. Additionally, nearly half of the child care providers who had left had a Bachelor's degree, compared to only one-third of the new teachers. Some 49 percent, nearly half, of those who had left their job, left the child care field entirely. It's clear that if we want to attract quality teachers to the child care field, the pay has to better reflect the value we place on their work. We can't attract them and we can't keep them if we don't pay them a living wage. The legislation I am introducing today will provide states with funds to increase child care worker pay based on the level of education--the greater the level of education, the greater the increase in pay. In addition, the legislation will provide scholarships of up to $1,500 for child care workers who want to further their early childhood education training by getting a college degree, an Associate's degree, or a child development associate credential. The legislation also includes a separate allotment to states to address access to health care coverage by child care workers. States would be free to develop their own creative methods to improve access to health care, but the intent is to ensure that an industry that works with children--who as many parents know, often come down with a variety of illnesses, particularly preschool age children--would have greater access to comprehensive and affordable health care coverage. We will never make significant strides in improving the quality of child care in this Nation if we fail to address one of the leading problems--attracting and retaining a quality child care workforce. It is time to invest in our children by investing in those who dedicate their lives to caring for our children. I ask unanimous consent to print a short summary of the bill following my remarks.

Mr. DODD

Mr. DODD. Mr. President, just before the Memorial Day recess, the distinguished Presiding Officer and I had the great honor of introducing bipartisan legislation, S. 1157, to create a National Museum of African American History and Culture within the Smithsonian Institution. We were joined in that effort by 44 of our colleagues, and I might point out that another four have joined since that time, bringing the total number of cosponsors to this legislation to 48. I presume before the day is out we will have a clear majority of our colleagues who endorse the legislation introduced by the distinguished Senator from Kansas. Senator Brownback and I introduced similar legislation in the last Congress and I am pleased that we have such strong continuing interest from our colleagues, ensuring this important museum be created. This long overdue legislation will guarantee that the compelling stories and invaluable contributions of African Americans to our Nation will finally be shared with all Americans, indeed all peoples of the world. This legislation also allows us to publicly display the contributions of African Americans to the founding of our Nation and educate students of all ages about the importance of their experience. This museum is not intended to replace the numerous museums and institutions of African American culture and history that already exist in our country. Instead, it will bring a national focus and prominence to the contributions and experiences of African Americans. In New Haven, CT, for example, we are fortunate to be the home port of the 19th century freedom schooner, Amistad. The recreated Amistad is a floating classroom and reminder of the devastating effects of the transatlantic slave trade. Amistad America is dedicated to promoting the legacies of the Amistad incident of 1839 and to celebrating and teaching the historic lessons of perseverance, leadership, justice, and freedom experienced by African Americans during that incident, and similar ones like it during the centuries before 1839. It is my hope, of course, that organizations such as Amistad America and numerous others will be able to work with the Smithsonian to ensure that these important stories may be told. I am pleased that we have been able to provide support for these numerous organizations and associations, such as Amistad, in this bill as well. During my tenure as chairman of the Senate Rules Committee, I was pleased to work with colleagues to pass legislation to establish the Presidential Commission on the National Museum of African American History and Culture action plan. In April, the Presidential commission issued its report in which it documented the voices of African Americans across the Nation, calling for a national place to tell their individually collective stories. This long overdue legislation will provide such a place, and I commend the distinguished Presiding Officer for his leadership on this issue. The mission statement contained in that report sums up the purpose of this legislation: This museum will give voice to the centrality of the African American experience and will make it possible for all people to understand the depth, complexity, and promise of the American experience. It is that very goal, of completing the American story of our quest for freedom and truth by publicly incorporating the experience and contribution of African Americans, that is the essence of this legislation. This museum offers the promise and the hope that all Americans can come to understand the full story of how this Nation was formed. It is past time that we publicly acknowledge and incorporate the African Americans' experience into our collective identity and this museum will provide the appropriate means for accomplishing that very goal. Again, I congratulate my colleague, Senator Brownback, and I want to specifically highlight the tremendous contribution of Representative John Lewis of Georgia, who is the lead sponsor in the House of Representatives for this bill, on their perseverance in this matter. I am honored today to join them as their lead sponsor on this side of the aisle. I see my colleague from Mississippi, who I know has some comments he wants to make on this as well. I thank him for his leadership. As the chairman of the Rules Committee, he will have a lot to say about how this bill moves through the committee and comes to the floor. My congratulations to the Presiding Officer from Kansas and all others who have joined with us in this collective effort this morning. I yield the floor.

Mr. DODD

Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I rise today to express my opposition to the conference report on the tax cut legislation that the Senate just considered. I find it regrettable that we were forced to speed through debate on the tax cut bill last week, and were once again forced to hurry through this conference report. This is probably the most important bill that we will be debating and voting on this year. Its repercussions will be felt for years to come, and yet it seems that very little thought has really been given to it. Regrettably, I could not in good faith support this Reconciliation in its current form for three reasons. First, it will be ineffective in reviving the economy now. Second, it is irresponsible insofar as it adds tremendously to the national debt for no compelling purpose. Third, it is unfair to working families across the country insofar as it drains resources from investments in education and health care to fund tax breaks that overwhelmingly benefit the most affluent. I will discuss these points in turn. First, the resolution we have before us fails to effectively address the needs of our country. Instead of investing in a stronger economy for the future, the conference agreement provides little assistance and stimulus to our struggling economy now. In the nearly 2\1/2\ years since the President has come into office, our nation has suffered a dramatic decline. We went from unparalleled job creation, economic growth, and opportunity to skyrocketing deficits and national debt, high unemployment, and uncertainty about the future. Contrary to the claims of its proponents, it is by no means certain this conference agreement will create jobs or provide millions of working families with the relief they need. What is certain, however, is that it will drastically increase the national debt, and severely weaken key national priorities including homeland security, education, and health care. According to Economy.com, the massive deficits that will be caused by the administration's tax cut will decrease gross domestic product by 0.25 percent annually beginning in 2005. GDP will be lower by 1.0 percent in 2013 than it would be without the Bush plan. The result is a loss of 750,000 jobs by 2013 according to Mark Zandi, a well-respected, non-partisan economist at Economy.com. The administration's policies are not considered to be ineffective on a partisan basis, they are considered to be ineffective on a bipartisan basis, as well. Republican Senators have voiced concern about the ineffectiveness and irresponsibleness of this proposal. The Chairman of the Federal Reserve has said that these large tax cuts, if not paid for by offsetting cuts in spending, will drive us deeper into deficit and that such high deficits and debt will actually hurt our long-term economic growth. Other respected conservative economists have also warned us about the direction we are taking. For instance, AEI economist Kevin Hasset stated that the proposal, by cutting taxes in one year and then raising them in another, ``is one of the most patently absurd tax policies ever proposed,'' Similarly, Robert Bixby of the Concord Coalition said that the tax plan passed by the Senate just keeps ``building one gimmick on top of another gimmick.'' However, this administration continues to turn a deaf ear to their warnings, as it pursues its discredited economic theories. Second, this conference agreement is irresponsible. Two years ago, economists projected record surpluses; now they forecast record deficits. Recently the Congressional Budget Office raised its estimate of the deficit this year to more than $300 billion. This is the largest federal deficit ever in the history of our country. And it does not include the tax cut that is before us. It is a fact that high deficits mean an increase in long-term interest rates on small business loans, families' mortgages, and education loans. These deficits therefore act as a hidden tax on working people. Also the cost of all of the President's tax cuts and the deficits will explode just as baby boomers start to retire. Over the next ten years, more than $2 trillion will be raided from Social Security in order to pay for the President's tax cuts and spending plans. The Social Security surplus is going to be consumed. Last month, Congressional Budget Office Director Douglas Holtz-Eakin said that the retirement of the baby boomers will drive spending on Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid alone from 8 percent of the economy's output today to 14 percent in 2030, and to 21 percent by 2075. When you also consider national defense, homeland security, education, health care, and other vital national priorities, you are left with a fiscal breakdown. But again, the administration is ignoring these warnings. At the very time the President is asking for massive tax reductions, he is also asking for the largest debt limit increase in the history of the United States. He is seeking an increase of $984 billion. The President has dug this economy into a debt hole. He needs to stop digging. Yet, instead, he is reaching for a bigger shovel. From coast to coast, states are facing the most serious fiscal crisis since World War II. States are in need of fiscal relief now. In Connecticut, we know that all too well. While there is a State relief package in the conference agreement, the overall agreement is going to hurt States not help them since this legislation will mean less resources for Connecticut and other States to invest in infrastructure, education, homeland security, and health care for needy children and the elderly. Americans all over the country have expressed their opinions in poll after poll. They believe that we should not be passing a massive tax cut if it means cutting Medicare, if it means cutting social security, and if it means cutting education. This conference agreement ignores the concerns of the American people. Third, this tax bill is unfair to working families. Yesterday's Wall Street Journal had an article that says that through the President's tax proposal, some affluent investors may be able to avoid paying almost any taxes. Their tax bill would be almost near zero. This is unfair to middle-class Americans. It is bad enough that we are going to force our children and grandchildren to shoulder the costs of this tax cut. It is bad enough that this costly and irresponsible tax cut will bring about an average tax cut of $93,500 to tax filers who earn more than $1 million, while those households in the middle of the income spectrum, which includes the average family in Connecticut, would receive a tax cut of about $217. It is bad enough that according to an analysis done by the Tax Policy Center, 36 percent of all U.S. households would receive no tax cut whatsoever in 2003 under the conference agreement, and 53 percent of households would receive a tax cut of $100 or less. This bill also fails to address a crisis affecting Americans and small businesses--the burden of the high costs of health insurance. In the past year alone, health care premiums for businesses have risen more than 13 percent. This is extremely burdensome for small businesses, which employ 50 percent of the workers in this country. The Democratic alternative to the tax bill, which did not pass, provided small businesses with a 50 percent tax credit in 2003 to help pay their share of insurance premiums. This conference agreement that is before us contains nothing to assist small businesses that are struggling to keep their employees insured during these times when cash is tight and health care costs are rising. In order to fit the massive tax breaks for the most privileged into the $350 billion limit that was agreed upon, the marriage penalty relief and the child tax credit increase will expire next year, which means a tax increase of $850 for a family of four with an income of $40,000 in 2005. Also, the small business expensing and bonus depreciation provisions, which would encourage business investments and provide them with needed relief, will also expire. This is essentially increasing taxes on small business owners. In closing, I believe that the conference agreement before the Senate fails the test of common sense. It also fails the test of common decency. At a time of war, at a time of economic stagnation, at a time of rising national debt, and of rising national concern about how we will educate America's children and care for the health needs of our people, one might expect our national leaders to pursue policies calling for shared sacrifice to achieve shared benefits. Regrettably, that is not the case. This administration has a clear vision: to benefit the privileged few even if it means sacrificing the hopes and aspirations of the rest of the people. We can do better as a Senate, and do better for our country. ceo signature legislation

Mr. DODD

Mr. DODD. Mr. President, yesterday there were reports in the stock market that companies facing asbestos-related lawsuits had falling stock prices, some of them rather precipitously, in the New York stock exchange. USG fell more than $2, 17 percent; Georgia Pacific, Crown Holdings, R.W. Grace, and on and on, companies that have the potential of significant lawsuits. The Senator from Vermont and the Senator from Utah and the Senator from Nebraska, as well as the Senator from Delaware, are trying to pull a bill together. We have not done that yet. I thought it important before we leave on this break to express to our colleagues that we are working very hard to come up with a compromise proposal on the asbestos issue. We have taken major steps in that direction, working with organized labor, with the insurance industry, with the insured, and many others that have a stakeholding in the outcome of this particular effort. It is a critically important effort. We say to those out there wondering whether or not we will be able to get a bill, we believe we will. It will take time. It is hard work to pull this together properly. It is a lot of detailed work that needs to be done. We thought it was important to send a message to those interested in the subject matter that we are confident it can be done. We will have to work very hard in the coming days, particularly over this break, to try to resolve the differences that exist, and they are not insignificant. We believe there is such good will on the part of all to resolve this matter that it is in our interests to spend the time and effort. I thank the distinguished Senator from Vermont, Mr. Leahy, who has been tremendously helpful and productive in working with us. I yield to him for any comments he may want to make. We are all determined to get a bill. We believe we can get that done. It will take hard work.

Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I rise today to speak about the vote that just took place to increase the debt ceiling. The national debt is growing larger and larger, and yet just several hours ago the Senate passed another massive irresponsible tax cut that will add to our debt and lead this Nation down a fiscally perilous path. Two years ago, the President assured the Nation that if we adopted his tax cut, we would see job growth, and we would still be able to eliminate the publicly held debt by 2008. The result was far from this. In the more than 2 years that he has been President, 2.7 million jobs have been lost, and we are now having to increase the debt to $7.384 trillion, an increase of $984 billion--almost $1 trillion. This is the largest debt increase in the history of our country. The debt limit was last increased on June 28 of last year by $450 billion. Prior to that increase, the limit had not been raised since August 1997. The administration's request to raise the debt limit by almost $1 trillion confirms that it is unwise to make long-term commitments to tax cuts based on shaky projections and gimmicks. I truly think this increase is a mistake, and for that reason I voted against the debt limit increase. Just several hours ago, the Senate approved a $350 billion tax cut that will further deteriorate our fiscal outlook. It will worsen the already skyrocketing deficit and our national debt. Increasing deficits will decrease national savings and increase long- term interest rates, which effectively lowers the incomes of working Americans. Also, the national debt is not free. The hard working men and women in this country have to pay interest on the debt for decades, and when the deficit is high, it requires so much Federal borrowing that it displaces private investment and pushes up interest rates on mortgages, consumer credit, business borrowing, and capital investment. This in turn leads to less private investment, which reduces the size of the economy and future standards of living in the long run. There are consequences to our actions, and yet the administration and the majority of this Congress are turning a blind eye to these consequences. We unfortunately are in a position where we have to increase the debt, because we do not want to see the country in default. But we should be doing it in a responsible manner which is why I voted in support of an amendment which would have increased the debt limit by $350 billion. An amendment was also proposed today that would have prohibited the Treasury Department from disinvesting the Social Security trust fund to stay under the debt limit. This amendment would have kept the Social Security trust fund safe for our retirees, and yet it was defeated by this body under the leadership of the majority party. I believe we have a responsibility in the Senate to always do what is right for future generations. I think that the tax cut that was passed earlier today, and the debt increase that was passed several moments ago, fails to take the needs and hopes of future generations into consideration.

Mr. DODD. Madam President, if I may just conclude, I thank again the Senator from Vermont for his comments. He has outlined this very well. It must truly be a no fault system. It must be truly no fault so both industry as well as victims have certainty. Medical criteria, medical monitoring--a variety of other provisions must be part of the effort. Those are major agreements that have already been struck. Getting down to the details is the hard part. We are confident it will happen. It will require a lot of work. It can't be done on the fly, if we are going to take the unprecedented step dealing with the asbestos issue. Amendment No. 834

Mr. DODD

Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I rise to join with my colleague, Senator Brownback, in introducing legislation to create a National Museum of African American History and Culture within the Smithsonian Institution. This legislation will help ensure that the compelling stories and invaluable contributions of African-Americans to our national fabric will no longer be ignored, but shared with all Americans, indeed, all peoples of the world. Senator Brownback introduced similar legislation in the last Congress, and I was pleased to be an original cosponsor of that bill. During my tenure as chairman of the Senate Rules Committee, I was pleased to work with my colleagues to pass legislation to establish the Presidential Commission on the National Museum of African American History and Culture Action Plan. That Presidential Commission spent a year traveling across the nation, and at more than 50 meetings, heard the voices of African- Americans calling for a national place to tell their individual and collective stories. This long overdue legislation will provide such a place. In their report issued last month, the Presidential Commission identified a mission statement for the proposed museum that states, in part: The museum will give voice to the centrality of the African American experience and will make it possible for all people to understand the depth, complexity, and promise of the American experience. It is that very goal of completing the American story of our quest for freedom and truth by publicly incorporating the experience and contributions of African Americans--that is the essence of this legislation. This museum offers the promise and hope that all Americans can come to understand the full story of how this nation was formed. Since 1929, efforts have been made to recognize the contributions and unique history of Americans of African descent. This museum offers an historic opportunity to document, preserve, and educate this history for generations to come. It is past time that we publicly acknowledge and incorporate the African American experience into our collective identity and this museum will provide the appropriate means for accomplishing that goal. In brief, within 18 months of enactment, the Smithsonian Board of Regents will choose a site for this museum from among four sites listed in the bill. The bill directs that, prior to the selection, the Board of Regents will consult with the National Capital Planning Commission, the chairman of the Presidential Commission, Congressional oversight committees, and others. In the meantime, the Smithsonian Board of Regents will appoint a 19 member council, comprised of leaders within the African-American community and others, to advise the regents on the development, design and construction of the museum. The museum will include exhibits and programs relating to all aspects of African American life, art, history, and culture from the time of slavery through present day. The museum will also provide leadership to other museums and will collaborate with historically black colleges and universities and educational organizations to ensure the integrity of the exhibits and programming and to broaden the reach of its story and mission. I am honored to be the lead Democratic sponsor of this legislation, and I look forward to working with my colleagues on the Rules Committee to seeing this bill enacted this year.

Mr. DODD

Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I rise to join with my colleague, Senator Brownback, in introducing legislation to create a National Museum of African American History and Culture within the Smithsonian Institution. This legislation will help ensure that the compelling stories and invaluable contributions of African-Americans to our national fabric will no longer be ignored, but shared with all Americans, indeed, all peoples of the world. Senator Brownback introduced similar legislation in the last Congress, and I was pleased to be an original cosponsor of that bill. During my tenure as chairman of the Senate Rules Committee, I was pleased to work with my colleagues to pass legislation to establish the Presidential Commission on the National Museum of African American History and Culture Action Plan. That Presidential Commission spent a year traveling across the nation, and at more than 50 meetings, heard the voices of African- Americans calling for a national place to tell their individual and collective stories. This long overdue legislation will provide such a place. In their report issued last month, the Presidential Commission identified a mission statement for the proposed museum that states, in part: The museum will give voice to the centrality of the African American experience and will make it possible for all people to understand the depth, complexity, and promise of the American experience. It is that very goal of completing the American story of our quest for freedom and truth by publicly incorporating the experience and contributions of African Americans--that is the essence of this legislation. This museum offers the promise and hope that all Americans can come to understand the full story of how this nation was formed. Since 1929, efforts have been made to recognize the contributions and unique history of Americans of African descent. This museum offers an historic opportunity to document, preserve, and educate this history for generations to come. It is past time that we publicly acknowledge and incorporate the African American experience into our collective identity and this museum will provide the appropriate means for accomplishing that goal. In brief, within 18 months of enactment, the Smithsonian Board of Regents will choose a site for this museum from among four sites listed in the bill. The bill directs that, prior to the selection, the Board of Regents will consult with the National Capital Planning Commission, the chairman of the Presidential Commission, Congressional oversight committees, and others. In the meantime, the Smithsonian Board of Regents will appoint a 19 member council, comprised of leaders within the African-American community and others, to advise the regents on the development, design and construction of the museum. The museum will include exhibits and programs relating to all aspects of African American life, art, history, and culture from the time of slavery through present day. The museum will also provide leadership to other museums and will collaborate with historically black colleges and universities and educational organizations to ensure the integrity of the exhibits and programming and to broaden the reach of its story and mission. I am honored to be the lead Democratic sponsor of this legislation, and I look forward to working with my colleagues on the Rules Committee to seeing this bill enacted this year.

Mr. DODD

Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I rise today to thank my colleagues, especially Chairman Warner and Senator Levin, for their support in approving amendment No. 785 that I offered to help America's firefighters and ensure that our Nation will be prepared to respond to future acts of terrorism, should they occur. The amendment, which was approved by the Senate yesterday as part of the Department of Defense Authorization Act, will authorize the creation of a grant initiative to help local governments hire the firefighters they need to address the threat of terrorism and the dangers posed by more ordinary crises. This amendment, Senate Amendment No. 785, is nearly identical to the Staffing for Adequate Fire and Emergency Response, SAFER, Act, which I am pleased to have co-authored with the distinguished Senator and chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee--Mr. Warner. I am happy to say that this amendment has enjoyed strong support on both sides of the aisle. The amendment I offered will help ensure that America's local fire agencies have the human resources they need to meet the challenge of an extended war against terrorism. The amendment authorizes the President to provide up to $3 billion in firefighter staffing grants to State and local governments over the next 3 years. These grants will provide a portion of the salary for new firefighters hired by State and local agencies. Many of us in Congress have long understood that America's firefighters make extraordinary contributions to their communities every day. But on September 11, 2001, we got a glimpse of the larger role that the men and women of the fire service play. The National role of our firefighters has become apparent and our firefighters have made the Nation proud. After September 11, we know that America needs its firefighters to be better prepared to respond to deliberate acts of mass destruction. The fire service needs to be better prepared to deal with acts of bioterrorism and it needs to be prepared to help save people who have been attacked with toxic chemical weapons. In short, America's fire departments need to be prepared for what once seemed unthinkable. Despite the increasingly important role firefighters play as part of our National homeland defense system, communities over the years have not been able to maintain the level of staffing necessary to ensure the safety of the public of our firefighters themselves. Since 1970, the number of firefighters as a percentage of the U.S. workforce has steadily declined and the budget crises that our State and local governments are now enduring have only made matters worse. Across the country today, firefighter staffing is being cut and fire stations are even being closed because of State and local budget shortfalls. That is not to say that we haven't made progress--we have. In recent years, the Federal Government has recognized that it can and should be a better partner with local firefighters. In 2000, my colleagues Senator DeWine, Senator Levin, Senator Warner, and I worked successfully on this floor to help create the FIRE Act. The FIRE Act was the first Federal grant program explicitly designed to help fire departments throughout America obtain better equipment, improved training, and much needed personnel. Since September 11, 2001, Congress and the administration have provided billions of dollars to help local firefighters purchase equipment and training to respond to acts of terrorism, accidental fires, chemical spills, and natural disasters. Over the last 2 years, the Federal FIRE Act grant initiative has provided nearly $\1/2\ billion in direct assistance to local fire departments across the country and will provide another $750 million this year. We are beginning to significantly improve the quality of the equipment available to firefighters in every State and in communities large and small. Today, with passage of the SAFER provision, we have taken a giant step forward toward improving staffing conditions for America's fire service. The need for this legislation is abundantly clear. Currently two-thirds of all fire departments operate with inadequate staffing. Experts believe that previous hiring limitations and the increased demands for first responder services have resulted in a shortage of 85,000 firefighters. According to a ``Needs Assessment Study'' recently released by the U.S. Fire Administration, USFA, and the National Fire Protection Association, NFPA, understaffing contributes to enormous problems. For example, USFA and NFPA have found that only 11 percent of our Nation's fire departments have the personnel and equipment they need to respond to a building collapse involving 50 or more occupants. I am delighted that the Senate has taken steps to address these problems and, again, I thank my colleagues for joining me in this important effort. In closing, let me say that this legislation honors America's firefighters. It acknowledges the men and women who charge up the stairs while everybody else is running down. But it does more than that. This legislation is an investment in America's security, an investment to ensure the safety of our firefighters, our families, our homes, and our businesses. Both the International Association of Firefighters and the International Association of Fire Chiefs have expressed their strong support for this legislation.

Mr. DODD

Mr. DODD. Mr. President, today I will join my colleagues in voting to approve the 2004 Defense authorization bill. This legislation provides a significant increase to our defense budget, a total of $400.5 billion, $17.9 billion more than was authorized for this year. This is the largest defense budget in our Nation's history, and, for the most part, it could not come at a more important time. This bill is good for our armed services, and crucial for the security of our country. Above all else, it makes a substantial investment in our military's most important assets--our soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines. It provides a 3.7 percent across-the- board pay raise for all men and women in uniform and introduces a new health care benefit to Reserve and National Guard personnel. In addition, it funds important national security programs to curb the spread of weapons of mass destruction, with $450 million going towards the Nunn-Lugar Cooperative Threat Reduction program to safeguard nuclear stockpiles and fissile material within the former Soviet Union. It ramps up research and development accounts for counterterrorism technologies as well as for intelligence and Special Operations resources. To respond to emerging threats to our country, these investments are crucial components of the Defense authorization bill. I am also especially pleased that the Senate accepted without dissent, my amendment to establish a new initiative to assist States and communities in hiring firefighters. As we saw so vividly on September 11, our firefighters play an integral part in responding to and protecting our people from terrorist attacks. No homeland security strategy can ignore the crucial role that firefighters play in keeping our Nation safe. My amendment, which was approved by the Senate, authorizes the Department of Homeland Security to invest over $3 billion over the next 3 years in partnership with States and local governments to hire firefighters so that communities are better prepared to respond to potential acts of terrorism. As this amendment underscores, our States play crucial roles in protecting our security. And the underlying bill supports a number of military initiatives that are particularly supported by the State of Connecticut. Since the days of the Revolutionary War, Connecticut has rightly taken pride in its disproportionately large role in contributing to the U.S. arsenal, earning it the nickname the ``Provision State.'' The 2004 Defense authorization bill continues this strong tradition, greatly outfitting the Nation's armed services and provisioning advanced technology from Connecticut. The projects funded in this bill from Army helicopters and Air Force fighters to new advances in submarine technology, will allow America's military to prosecute its war on terror from every corner of the globe. Included in this bill is $1 billion to fund the procurement of 36 additional UH-60 Blackhawk helicopters, manufactured by one of my State's leading manufacturers, Sikorsky. These aircraft have proven themselves repeatedly in combat on air assault and medical evacuation missions, as well as in peacekeeping missions providing important cargo and personnel transport. This bill also authorizes a multiyear procurement and $2 billion in 2004 for a Virginia class submarine, manufactured in Groton. Production of this next generation ship will further enable the Navy to extend its reach to the coasts of every continent, staying undetected as it performs various missions from special operations and intelligence- gathering to precision guided missile strikes. The bill also funds our force's next-generation fighter aircraft, the F/A-22 and Joint Strike Fighter, which will be outfitted with the finest engines in the world, developed at Pratt and Whitney. Procurement of these planes will maintain U.S. air superiority-- equipping pilots with unprecedented speed, stealth, and advanced munitions, and transforming the Nation's military into a 21st century force. I believe these investments will save lives in both the near and long term, and they will strengthen the military industrial base that is so crucial to the long-term viability of our military. I am pleased that this authorization bill continues Secretary Rumsfeld's initiative to transform the military and respond to terrorist threats to our Nation. But I would be remiss if I did not enter into this record the serious reservations I have with this bill. In particular, I am deeply concerned about the steps this legislation takes toward developing new tactical nuclear weapons. Despite the good- faith efforts of some of my colleagues, this Chamber failed to act as a check on an Executive bent on rolling back decades of strategic arms control and nonproliferation policies. At the President's recommendation, this bill repeals the 1993 Spratt-Furse provision that barred the Government from developing low-yield nuclear weapons. It also funds the study of a high-yield bunker-busting nuclear earth penetrator. Both weapons are part of the administration's long-term plan to field tactical nuclear weapons in war, as outlined in the 2001 Nuclear Posture Review. The defenders of these provisions believe that such weaponry will enhance America's security by enabling the United States to devastate terrorist targets in a more contained environment. They claim that the U.S. use of nuclear weapons during a war will not set an egregious precedent for other nations to begin fielding their own tactical nuclear arsenal. And they claim that by lifting the ban simply on research, we are not opening a new chapter of the nuclear era. They are dead wrong. And I am gravely disturbed by this shift in U.S. nonproliferation policy. In 2000, the United States joined the other permanent U.N. Security Council members in a declaration of an ``unequivocal commitment to the ultimate goals of a complete elimination of nuclear weapons and a treaty on general and complete disarmament under strict and effective international control.'' This declaration was not made on a whim. This was the culmination of decades of diplomacy that has led to the worldwide movement in arms control. But today, with this legislation, we are taking a considerable step away from the goal stated at the 2000 Non-Proliferation Treaty Conference. While we insist that others disarm and cease their development of weapons of mass destruction, we are initiating plans to use new atomic weapons on the battlefield. As our Armed Forces hone their conventional abilities to surgically strike with increasingly explosive force, it seems peculiar that the United States would now take steps backwards, and devote precious resources to expanding our nuclear arsenal. Our most recent operations in Afghanistan and Iraq have demonstrated that the United States far exceeds any other nation in its ability to strike with nonnuclear weapons anywhere in the world with great precision, and minimal collateral damage. Rather than capitalizing on these new advantages in warfare, the administration's tactical nuclear policy, would actually leave the Nation less secure, and undercut our government's 50-year attempts at averting nuclear war. But all in all, in spite of these provisions, I believe that this bill's passage is critical to sustaining our national security. Although major combat operations have ended in Afghanistan and Iraq, our military continues to be engaged in low-intensity conflict in this highly unstable region of the world. Our Armed Forces--both Active Duty and Reserve--stand ready to complete their missions in this Nation's ongoing campaign against terror, to stabilize the region, and win the peace. To do this, they will need the resources provided in this bill. For that reason, I have supported this legislation, and hope that the House and Senate Conferees move quickly toward a final version, so that this Congress will swiftly approve necessary authorizations for America's men and women in uniform.

Mr. DODD

Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I am pleased to join with my colleague from Maine, Senator Collins, and my colleague from Utah, Senator Hatch, to introduce the Prevention and Recovery of Missing Children Act of 2003, to improve the recovery of missing children and the tracking of convicted sex offenders and child predators. No child or parent should ever have to go through the recent nine- month ordeal of Elizabeth Smart and her family. Yet, from the sparse information we have, we know that over one million families have endured a similar, and sometimes far worse, trauma. In only the second study of its kind, the National Incidence Studies of Missing, Abducted, Runaway and Throwaway Children, NISMART-2, estimated that 1.3 million children met the criteria for being classified as missing, including runaway, from their caretakers in 1999. It is estimated that almost 800,000 of these cases involved notification to police or missing children agencies to help locate the child. When a parent's worst fear for a missing child materializes, in 91 percent of the cases the child became the victim of a homicide within 24 hours of abduction. In 74 percent of these cases, the homicide occurred within 3 hours of abduction. With statistics such as these, it is truly a miracle and cause for celebration that Elizabeth Smart returned to her family alive and well nine months after her abduction. We must build and expand on practices we know lead to the safe return of missing and abducted children. In Elizabeth's case, the family's circulation of the suspect's photograph led to the capture of Elizabeth's captor near her home community in Utah. This success story highlights the importance of the recently enacted National AMBER Alert Networks, which strengthens communication and notification to facilitate the recovery of other abducted children. As important as AMBER Alert systems are, these are but one tool in our arsenal against child abduction. The bill we are introducing today will strengthen other tools used by law enforcement to help take every step possible to find missing children as soon as possible. For instance, we know now that Elizabeth's captor was already in custody in California during Elizabeth's ordeal. Those officials, at that time, did not have in their possession information to connect him to the Smart case. And so, he was released. It is clear from this example that accurate, up-to-date information on missing children cases nationwide must be made available to law enforcement, as well. This act fosters the sharing of information about missing child cases among law enforcement by requiring the entry of child information into the National Crime Information Center, NCIC, within 2 hours of receipt. NCIC is a critical resource for linking 16,000 Federal, State, and local law enforcement agencies. The availability of up-to-date identifying information of known child and sexual predators is a vital investigative tool. The women who signaled police in the Elizabeth Smart case identified the captor after seeing his photograph on television. One of these responsible women noted that it was the photograph, and not the composite sketch, that helped her recognize Elizabeth's captor as he walked down the street. Whether the suspect in the Smart case had a history of sexual offenses is unclear. But, what is clear is that we can do more to help law enforcement track and investigate individuals with a history of sexual offenses. Over the last decade, Congress enacted several laws designed to improve the tracking of convicted sex offenders and the recovery of missing children, including The Jacob Wetterling Crimes Against Children and Sexually Violent Offender Registration Act of 1994, Megan's Law of 1996, and The Pam Lychner Sex Offender Tracking and Identification Act of 1996. Collectively, these acts established minimum standards for State sex offender registration programs and created systems to track convicted sex offenders. While these current federal laws address the main features of an effective registry system, the discretion over registry details and procedures is left up to the states. This has led to a lack of consistency and wide disparities between states. For example, state requirements for sex offender notification of registration changes range from 1 day to 40 days, and state requirements for a sex offender to register an address after moving to a new state range from 48 hours to 70 days. In addition, many States place the burden to notify changes in registry information solely on the sex offender. We need to tighten registry systems so that law enforcement in all states is better equipped to track sex offenders. This bill strengthens the registry foundation for all states. It builds upon successful practices already in place in some States, to better protect our communities nationwide. Sex offenders pose an enormous challenge for policy makers and create unparalleled fear among citizens. Most of their victims are children and youth. Two-thirds of imprisoned sex offenders report that their victims were under age 18, and nearly half report that their victims were ages 12 and younger. The tracking of released sex offenders is critical to protecting our children. Most sex offenders are not in prison--about 60 percent of convicted sex offenders are under conditional supervision in the community--and those who are in prison often serve limited sentences. This is of great concern because sex offenders, particularly if untreated, are at risk of re-offending. For over two years, newspapers across the country, including the Hartford Courant, have highlighted the inadequacy of reporting information in missing child cases and tracking of convicted sex offenders and known child predators. One tragic example reported a convicted sex offender who moved from Massachusetts to Montana, where police were never contacted about his history. He brutally murdered several Montana children before he was apprehended, and was later linked to 54 cases of child abduction and molestation in several states. In many cases, convicted sex offenders and child predators slip through law enforcement loopholes and continue to prey on children. While all 50 states have laws to create sex offender registry databases, states are unable to adequately track these felons. For instance, in California, 33,000, or 44 percent of registered offenders are missing; it is estimated that states on average are unable to account for 24 percent of sex offenders. Recently, the Supreme Court ruled against challenges from Alaska and Connecticut, and upheld current law pertaining to sexual offender registries. With the support of both Congress and the highest court of our land, it is inconceivable to me that we now allow bookkeeping challenges to deter law enforcements' ability to identify and locate child predators. This bill makes several important changes to improve the tracking of sex offenders and the recovery of missing children. The bill: modifies the definition of ``minimally sufficient program'' to include: the registration of all convicted sex offenders prior to release; the collection of information to assist in tracking individuals, including a DNA sample, current photograph, driver's license and vehicle information; and verification of address and employment information for all offenders every 90 days. Modifies penalties for non-compliance with registry requirements. It provides that State programs must designate non-compliance as a felony and permits the issuance of a warrant. This provision is intended to encourage compliance by offenders as well as provide a tool for law enforcement and prosecutors. Improves the chances for recovering missing children and aids law enforcement in solving cases by preventing the removal of missing children from the National Crime Information Center (NCIC) database. Improves the chances for recovery of missing children by requiring entry of child information into the NCIC database within 2 hours. We must make the tracking of convicted sex offenders and the post- release supervision of child sexual predators a higher priority. Since most sex offenders are in the community, we must ensure there is continuing contact and supervision of released sex offenders. Data management challenges are simply inexcusable reasons for not protecting our innocent children from crimes committed against them. We have an obligation to protect our children from the abductors, sex offenders and sexual predators who prey on our children. I urge my colleagues to join myself, Senator Collins and Senator Hatch in supporting and furthering this legislation.

Mr. DODD

Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I am pleased to join with my colleague from Maine, Senator Collins, and my colleague from Utah, Senator Hatch, to introduce the Prevention and Recovery of Missing Children Act of 2003, to improve the recovery of missing children and the tracking of convicted sex offenders and child predators. No child or parent should ever have to go through the recent nine- month ordeal of Elizabeth Smart and her family. Yet, from the sparse information we have, we know that over one million families have endured a similar, and sometimes far worse, trauma. In only the second study of its kind, the National Incidence Studies of Missing, Abducted, Runaway and Throwaway Children, NISMART-2, estimated that 1.3 million children met the criteria for being classified as missing, including runaway, from their caretakers in 1999. It is estimated that almost 800,000 of these cases involved notification to police or missing children agencies to help locate the child. When a parent's worst fear for a missing child materializes, in 91 percent of the cases the child became the victim of a homicide within 24 hours of abduction. In 74 percent of these cases, the homicide occurred within 3 hours of abduction. With statistics such as these, it is truly a miracle and cause for celebration that Elizabeth Smart returned to her family alive and well nine months after her abduction. We must build and expand on practices we know lead to the safe return of missing and abducted children. In Elizabeth's case, the family's circulation of the suspect's photograph led to the capture of Elizabeth's captor near her home community in Utah. This success story highlights the importance of the recently enacted National AMBER Alert Networks, which strengthens communication and notification to facilitate the recovery of other abducted children. As important as AMBER Alert systems are, these are but one tool in our arsenal against child abduction. The bill we are introducing today will strengthen other tools used by law enforcement to help take every step possible to find missing children as soon as possible. For instance, we know now that Elizabeth's captor was already in custody in California during Elizabeth's ordeal. Those officials, at that time, did not have in their possession information to connect him to the Smart case. And so, he was released. It is clear from this example that accurate, up-to-date information on missing children cases nationwide must be made available to law enforcement, as well. This act fosters the sharing of information about missing child cases among law enforcement by requiring the entry of child information into the National Crime Information Center, NCIC, within 2 hours of receipt. NCIC is a critical resource for linking 16,000 Federal, State, and local law enforcement agencies. The availability of up-to-date identifying information of known child and sexual predators is a vital investigative tool. The women who signaled police in the Elizabeth Smart case identified the captor after seeing his photograph on television. One of these responsible women noted that it was the photograph, and not the composite sketch, that helped her recognize Elizabeth's captor as he walked down the street. Whether the suspect in the Smart case had a history of sexual offenses is unclear. But, what is clear is that we can do more to help law enforcement track and investigate individuals with a history of sexual offenses. Over the last decade, Congress enacted several laws designed to improve the tracking of convicted sex offenders and the recovery of missing children, including The Jacob Wetterling Crimes Against Children and Sexually Violent Offender Registration Act of 1994, Megan's Law of 1996, and The Pam Lychner Sex Offender Tracking and Identification Act of 1996. Collectively, these acts established minimum standards for State sex offender registration programs and created systems to track convicted sex offenders. While these current federal laws address the main features of an effective registry system, the discretion over registry details and procedures is left up to the states. This has led to a lack of consistency and wide disparities between states. For example, state requirements for sex offender notification of registration changes range from 1 day to 40 days, and state requirements for a sex offender to register an address after moving to a new state range from 48 hours to 70 days. In addition, many States place the burden to notify changes in registry information solely on the sex offender. We need to tighten registry systems so that law enforcement in all states is better equipped to track sex offenders. This bill strengthens the registry foundation for all states. It builds upon successful practices already in place in some States, to better protect our communities nationwide. Sex offenders pose an enormous challenge for policy makers and create unparalleled fear among citizens. Most of their victims are children and youth. Two-thirds of imprisoned sex offenders report that their victims were under age 18, and nearly half report that their victims were ages 12 and younger. The tracking of released sex offenders is critical to protecting our children. Most sex offenders are not in prison--about 60 percent of convicted sex offenders are under conditional supervision in the community--and those who are in prison often serve limited sentences. This is of great concern because sex offenders, particularly if untreated, are at risk of re-offending. For over two years, newspapers across the country, including the Hartford Courant, have highlighted the inadequacy of reporting information in missing child cases and tracking of convicted sex offenders and known child predators. One tragic example reported a convicted sex offender who moved from Massachusetts to Montana, where police were never contacted about his history. He brutally murdered several Montana children before he was apprehended, and was later linked to 54 cases of child abduction and molestation in several states. In many cases, convicted sex offenders and child predators slip through law enforcement loopholes and continue to prey on children. While all 50 states have laws to create sex offender registry databases, states are unable to adequately track these felons. For instance, in California, 33,000, or 44 percent of registered offenders are missing; it is estimated that states on average are unable to account for 24 percent of sex offenders. Recently, the Supreme Court ruled against challenges from Alaska and Connecticut, and upheld current law pertaining to sexual offender registries. With the support of both Congress and the highest court of our land, it is inconceivable to me that we now allow bookkeeping challenges to deter law enforcements' ability to identify and locate child predators. This bill makes several important changes to improve the tracking of sex offenders and the recovery of missing children. The bill: modifies the definition of ``minimally sufficient program'' to include: the registration of all convicted sex offenders prior to release; the collection of information to assist in tracking individuals, including a DNA sample, current photograph, driver's license and vehicle information; and verification of address and employment information for all offenders every 90 days. Modifies penalties for non-compliance with registry requirements. It provides that State programs must designate non-compliance as a felony and permits the issuance of a warrant. This provision is intended to encourage compliance by offenders as well as provide a tool for law enforcement and prosecutors. Improves the chances for recovering missing children and aids law enforcement in solving cases by preventing the removal of missing children from the National Crime Information Center (NCIC) database. Improves the chances for recovery of missing children by requiring entry of child information into the NCIC database within 2 hours. We must make the tracking of convicted sex offenders and the post- release supervision of child sexual predators a higher priority. Since most sex offenders are in the community, we must ensure there is continuing contact and supervision of released sex offenders. Data management challenges are simply inexcusable reasons for not protecting our innocent children from crimes committed against them. We have an obligation to protect our children from the abductors, sex offenders and sexual predators who prey on our children. I urge my colleagues to join myself, Senator Collins and Senator Hatch in supporting and furthering this legislation.

Mr. DODD

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

Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I apologize to my colleagues. I know it is now after 1 in the morning. People are tired. It has been a long day. I have great respect for this institution and do not normally like to test the patience of my colleagues, but as tired as all of us are at this very hour, there are some 250,000 orphans right now, 80,000 of whom live in the Caribbean, who are orphaned because their families, their parents, contracted AIDS. There are half a million people in the 14 CARICOM countries who will not be included as a part of this bill, for reasons that have never been explained adequately to me, who are suffering a lot more than just fatigue tonight because they will not get the kinds of medicines and support they deserve. I apologize for raising an amendment that is brought up at a late hour. I am sorry we are not going to be here tomorrow to debate some of these issues. The decision to be here at this hour is certainly not that of those who are offering these amendments. This is a very important bill. I have great respect for the President, who has made this an important issue, who wants to bring it up and see to it that these issues can be debated when he goes to the G-8. My amendment simply says that for the countries that suffer the second largest incidents of AIDS in the world, the Caribbean countries where 10 million American tourists go every year, ought to be included as part of this package. I do not think our colleagues in the House of Representatives, Democrats or Republicans, would reject this legislation because we add 14 countries where 5 million people live, where half a million people are suffering from AIDS, second only to that of sub-Saharan Africa. If they would object to the bill on that grounds, I do not understand this. Yet we have excluded all but two countries from being recipients of this aid. So my amendment merely says we ought to include these countries as part of this package. The average age of death in the Caribbean countries is 45 years of age. Twenty-five percent of all hospital beds in these Caribbean countries are now filled with people infected by AIDS. Few of these patients receive any treatment at all. The mother-to-child transmissions are the highest in the Americas. The AIDS epidemic has already left 80,000 orphans in these Caribbean countries. Globally, half of all infected are in children between the ages of 15 and 24, except in the Caribbean. There it is, 10 years of age. I know it is late, but it is getting later for these kids. It is getting a lot later for them. So I am asking my colleagues in the Senate to ask our colleagues in the House to accept an amendment that would include people who live only a few minutes from our shores, who deserve a little more than they are getting tonight. If you are a 10- year-old child and you are suffering from AIDS, you are one of 80,000 orphans in the Caribbean and you deserve better than being told that this bill cannot be changed, not one dot, not one comma, not one word. I know in fact this bill will be changed before we leave tonight. So the argument somehow that we cannot do this is specious. We ought to be doing better than that. We are the Senate. We are dealing with a critically important global issue. It deserves more of our time, attention, and concern than the argument that we are fatigued and tired, that we do not have the patience to go back to our colleagues in the House and say we can do better. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment. It is not asking too much to say to half a million people who are a few miles from our shore that we want to include them as part of this effort to make this world a better and safer place. I urge its adoption.

Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. DODD. I will be happy to yield.

Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays on my amendment.

Mr. DODD. Mr. President, no challenge is more daunting in scope or immediate in need than the Global AIDS crisis. I rise today with the utmost urgency to speak of this modern-day plague and to urge my colleagues to ensure that the legislation currently pending before the United States Senate is both swift in its passage and effective in its nature. The global AIDS pandemic threatens to undermine all of our other efforts to bring stability and prosperity to the world. AIDS is an unparelled crisis, and it threatens to have a potentially irreversible effect. Every country around the globe will, in one way or another, feel the devastating impact of this disease; no nation will be spared. Certainly, I applaud the administration for its initiative on this important issue. We all do. And, the bill currently before this chamber--which closely reflects the Administration's requests--provides a good framework for battling this crisis. However, it has some serious shortcomings--shortcomings that will greatly impact its chances of success. That is why this chamber must ensure that any AIDS legislation it passes will be effective on the ground. In order to do this, we must look carefully at the facts, and at the reality of the situation. This must be our first priority. Mr. President, there are well over 42 million people currently living with HIV/AIDS. In 2001 alone, there were approximately five million new infections. Even worse is that the number of infections continues to grow at an alarming rate. There are 15,000 new infections every day, and half of these infections--half--are in children between 15 and 24 years of age. Without a doubt, the region hardest hit by this pandemic is sub- Saharan Africa. Approximately 70 percent of the worldwide total of people with HIV/AIDS live in that part of the world, and well over 29 million people are currently infected. The overall rate of infection among adults in the region is close to nine percent, compared with 1.2 percent worldwide, and in seven countries, the infection rate is over 20 percent. Experts contend that the severity of the AIDS pandemic in that region is directly related to its wide-spread poverty, lack of education, ill- equipped and underfunded health systems, and local taboos that stigmatize and ostracize those who are infected. Even more devastating to the region is that the AIDS pandemic creates a vicious circle of events that, despite international aid, increasingly hinders the ability of affected societies to help themselves. This vicious circle is pervasive throughout all sectors of society. Skilled workers, teachers, farmers, management executives, and government officials alike are falling prey to AIDS. In fact, according to UNAIDS, by 2020, the most affected countries will experience a loss of more than 20 percent of their gross domestic product. AIDS is also having a debilitating effect on our hemisphere. In Guyana, almost 3 percent of the adult population is infected, and in Haiti, a nation long-suffering from substantial economic and political instability, more than 6 percent of its adult population are living with the virus. Indeed, throughout Latin America and the Caribbean, over 1.9 million people are infected, and in some Caribbean countries, the rates of prevalence are second only to sub-Saharan Africa. Throughout the world, AIDS is killing millions of parents, and often leaves young children in the precarious position of having to supply food, money, and medicine for their families. The World Bank estimates that there are currently 15.6 million AIDS orphans, and this number is expected to double by 2010. Many of these children, especially girls, quit school and become victims of sexual violence or commercial sex workers. And, due to lack of resources and education, only a fraction of these children know that they are infected. Most do not even believe that they are at risk or know how AIDS is spread. I urge my colleagues to carefully examine this situation. Many of these children are not promiscuous because of childish recklessness. Certainly, children do not desire to become commercial sex workers. They are children. Given the chance, they would play games and go to school, as do most children. However, in many cases, their reality, as well as the obligation to provide for their families, forces them into this lifestyle. I know that citing the successful efforts in the nation of Uganda, some of my colleagues argue that United States AIDS assistance should focus on the promotion of abstinence among children. Certainly, encouraging young, unmarried children to abstain is a worthy goal. We can teach them to abstain, we can urge them to abstain, and we should. However, we can not ignore the multitude of factors with which we are faced. We must remember that the Uganda plan worked because it encouraged abstinence, monogamy, and distributed condoms--the ``ABC'' model. Most of all, it worked because the President of that nation made it a national priority to educate his people about HIV/AIDS. In my view, the most important distinction among regions of the world has been the ability of affected nations to deal with the AIDS crisis and to educate their people about it, as well as the ability of infected people to pay for a variety of life-saving or life-prolonging treatments. I know we can all remember a time in the United States when in schools, television advertisements, and billboards, we strove to educate Americans about HIV/AIDS. In fact, this effort continues, and with much success. Coupled with access to state-of-the-art treatments, Americans with HIV are able to live longer and healthier lives than ever before. But it is important to realize that the methods used to progress in one area of the world will not necessarily be effective in another. In many regions, AIDS infection stems from an intricate social reality--one with many contributing factors. In most of these countries, poverty deprives the people of effective systems of health information, health education, and health care. AIDS counseling is often unavailable, and HIV testing is difficult for many to obtain. Lack of resources to buy and distribute the expensive drugs that prolong life for those infected with HIV, as well as the rarity of sex education and prevention methods, have compounded these problems. Therefore, we must not ignore the widespread destitution caused by this disease, which forces many people--children and adults--into a lifestyle that dramatically increases their risk of infection. Any effort to fight AIDS must be accompanied by an effort to fight poverty and build infrastructure; it must be focused on helping people to help themselves. It is my hope that as the Senate addresses the issue of foreign aid in the coming year, it pays particular attention to the other myriad needs on the continent of Africa, as well as in other poverty-stricken regions throughout the world. In addition, we must not ignore existing institutions, such as the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria. While I strongly support the provision in this bill authorizing up to $1 billion for the Global Fund in fiscal year 2004, I am concerned that the Bush Administration will instead choose to follow its fiscal year 2004 budget request, and only allocate $200 million for this important institution. Indeed, such a decision would threaten the ability of the Global Fund to continue its important work; it would be a step backwards in our fight against AIDS. And lastly, although this bill will serve to combat HIV/AIDS in twelve African countries, as well as Haiti and Guyana, it is absolutely essential that we focus our efforts not only on these countries, but on the world at large. HIV/AIDS is a global problem and it needs a global response. My amendment designating Caribbean countries as priority countries for United States support was an attempt to give additional attention where it is most needed. To highlight the necessity of this global approach, I would like to bring to the attention of my colleagues a report on AIDS, which was published in January 2000 by the Central Intelligence Agency, CIA. This report states that by 2010, the focal point of infections will most likely shift from sub-Saharan Africa to Nigeria, Ethiopia, India, Russia, and China. There will be approximately 50 to 75 million infected people in these countries alone, and according to the CIA, the AIDS crisis will contribute to political instability and slow democratic development. These are dire predictions, and we have an obligation to address them. Our intentions are noble and our conviction is real. But in order to achieve all of these vital goals, we must fully and sensibly commit ourselves to the fight against AIDS. That means providing the necessary resources to prevent and treat this illness, sufficiently funding important organizations and vaccine research, educating people about AIDS, providing a truly global response, and ensuring that our efforts are effective and grounded on the realities of those in need. And, as we consider this bill, it is crucial to remember that it is only a first step. In order to succeed, we must also change the reality in which this disease thrives. If we don't act with urgency, sensibility, clarity, and deliberation, we will be condemning to death countless men, women, and children throughout the world. We must act now. We can not afford to fail.

Mr. DODD

Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. DODD. Mr. President, the purpose of this amendment is to improve access to higher education for middle- and low-income families by expanding the HOPE and lifetime learning tax credits and Pell grants, as well as deficit reduction. This is done by eliminating the 10 percent dividend exclusion for amounts greater than $500 and eliminating acceleration of the top tax rate reduction. I have outlined in the amendment the purpose of this proposal. I do not think any of us would disagree that the long-term economic strength of our Nation will depend upon whether or not the next generation receives the higher education necessary to provide our Nation with the benefits of learning so the country can grow. I am simply asking the question, as many Americans are, as we are talking about reducing Pell grants and doing nothing to expand the HOPE and lifetime learning proposals which are directly designed to assist middle-income families, can we not, on an evening when we are about to adopt a massive tax cut for the wealthiest Americans, set aside some of these funds to adequately provide for educational opportunities for people who would not otherwise be able to afford them? That is the purpose of the amendment.

Mr. DODD. Mr. President, it is amendment No. 572. It is at the desk.

Mr. DODD. Mr. President, if I may, the purpose I have outlined in the amendment says what it is for. Some may want to interpret it otherwise, but this is a vote on whether we value higher education enough to ensure that all Americans have access to it.

Mr. DODD. The purpose states it clearly.