Pete Domenici

Mr. DOMENICI

Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I understand I will get a part of that time, and I will yield part of that time to the Senator from Alaska when she arrives.

Mr. DOMENICI. Parliamentary inquiry: How much time do we have now?

Mr. DOMENICI

Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I submit the following notice in writing: In accordance with Rule V of the Standing Rules of the Senate, I hereby give notice in writing that it is my intention to move to suspend paragraph 4 of rule XVI for the purpose of proposing to the bill H.R. 4939 the attached amendment, as follows: On page 253, between lines 19 and 20, insert the following:

Mr. DOMENICI

Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I would like to announce for the information of the Senate and the public that a hearing has been scheduled before the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. The hearing will take place on Thursday, May 4, 2006 at 10 a.m. in room SD-366 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building in Washington, DC. The purpose of this hearing is to consider the nomination of: Dirk Kempthorne, of Idaho, to be Secretary of the Interior, vice Gale Norton, resigned. For further information, please contact Judy Pensabene of the Committee staff.

Mr. DOMENICI

Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I would like to announce for the information of the Senate and the public that a hearing has been scheduled before the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. The hearing will be held on Monday, May 1, 2006 at 2:30 p.m. in room SD-366 of the Dirksen Building. The purpose of the hearing is to receive testimony regarding the economic and environmental issues associated with coal gasification technology and on implementation of the provisions of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 addressing coal gasification. Because of the limited time available for the hearing, witnesses may testify by invitation only. However, those wishing to submit written testimony for the hearing record should send two copies of their testimony to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, United States Senate, Washington, DC 20510-6150. For further information, please contact John Peschke 202-224-4797 or Shannon Ewan at 202-224-7555.

Mr. DOMENICI

Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce, at the request of the Department of the Interior, legislation to extend the authorization for the National Park System Advisory Board. For the past 70 years, the National Park System Advisory Board has provided guidance and recommendations to the Director of the National Park Service and the Secretary of the Interior regarding management of America's national parks. The authorization for its existence will expire on January 1, 2007. The attached legislation will extend the authorization to 2016 and modify the composition of the board to include representation from a broader diversity of interests. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. DOMENICI

Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce, at the request of the Department of the Interior, legislation to extend the authorization for the National Park System Advisory Board. For the past 70 years, the National Park System Advisory Board has provided guidance and recommendations to the Director of the National Park Service and the Secretary of the Interior regarding management of America's national parks. The authorization for its existence will expire on January 1, 2007. The attached legislation will extend the authorization to 2016 and modify the composition of the board to include representation from a broader diversity of interests. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. DOMENICI

Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I would like to announce for the information of the Senate and the public that a hearing has been scheduled before the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. The hearing will be held on Monday, April 24, 2006 at 2:30 p.m. in room SD-366 of the Dirksen Building. The purpose of the hearing is to receive testimony regarding the economic and environmental issues associated with coal liquefaction technology and on implementation of the provisions of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 addressing coal gasification. Because of the limited time available for the hearing, witnesses may testify by invitation only. However, those wishing to submit written testimony for the hearing record should send two copies of their testimony to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, United States Senate, Washington, DC 20510-6150. For further information, please contact John Peschke 202-224-4797 or Shannon Ewan at 202-224-7555. committee on small business and entrepreneurship

Mr. DOMENICI

Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I wish to express my dismay regarding the collapse of the Senate's work on border security legislation. As a border State Senator, I know first-hand the need to secure our international borders because every day I hear from constituents who must deal with illegal entries into our country. We have a crisis on our borders and the status quo is not acceptable. We need to address this situation but are not being allowed to because of Democrats' refusal to allow votes on amendments to border security legislation on the Senate floor. Their refusal to allow votes means that my amendments, which are very important to New Mexico, the southwest border, and the Nation, cannot be considered. Those amendments would have provided for two more Federal judges in New Mexico to deal with immigration cases, provided 250 new deputy U.S. Marshals to transport and guard criminal illegal aliens, authorized $585 million for land port of entry infrastructure and technology, and called for Mexico's cooperation on border security. My amendments are based on needs that are imperative to border security. I have been told of the need for new Federal district judges in New Mexico by the Chief Judge for the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals, the Chief Judge of the New Mexico District, and several other Federal district judges in my home State. In fiscal year 2005, more than 1800 immigration cases were filed in the District of New Mexico. We must have more Federal judges to handle this caseload that the Judicial Conference has referred to this situation as a ``crisis.'' I have been told of the need for new deputy U.S. Marshals by the U.S. Marshal for New Mexico. His deputies are responsible for transporting illegal aliens to court and guarding them when they appear in Federal district court. I have seen firsthand the need for port of entry improvements in New Mexico, and since I worked with Senator DeConcini on the last major land port of entry overhaul in 1986, I know that the time has come to again address our land port needs. Lastly, I am convinced that we must have Mexico's cooperation to secure our porous southwest border, and my amendment would have provided a path to secure that cooperation. The refusal of Democrats to allow consideration of these amendments is nothing short of irresponsible behavior towards the security of America. The Democrats' refusal to limit debate on the majority leader's border security bill today confirms their lack of understanding regarding the need for border security. Senator Frist's Securing America's Borders Act includes 1,250 new customs and border protection officers, 1,000 new DHS investigative personnel, 1,250 new DHS port of entry inspectors, 1,000 new Immigration and customs enforcement inspectors, and 2,400 new border patrol agents. The bill authorizes funding for new border security technologies and assets, including new unmanned aerial vehicles, vehicle barriers, cameras, sensors, and all- weather roads. This bill would have addressed many of our border security needs, and I am frustrated that we were not allowed to vote on this bill. As it stands now, we will not see any of the comprehensive border security improvements that New Mexico and other States desperately need. I could not be more disappointed. On February 10, 2005, I introduced legislation to create additional Federal district judgeships in the State of New Mexico. On November 17, 2005, I introduced the Border Security and Modernization Act of 2005, S. 2049, with bipartisan support. That bill calls for improvements to our port of entry infrastructure, increased Department of Homeland Security, DHS, and Department of Justice personnel, new technologies and assets for border security, increased detention capacity, and additional Federal assistance for States. On February 17, 2006, I introduced the Welcoming Immigrants to a Secure Homeland Act. That bill calls for an increase in the number of DHS personnel who investigate human smuggling laws, employment of immigrants, and immigration fraud and increased penalties for violations of immigration laws. It also creates a new guest worker visa that lets individuals who want to, come to the United States to work. Lastly, it creates a way to account for the millions of undocumented aliens residing in the United States without creating an automatic path to citizenship. I supported the efforts to jointly address border security and immigration reform legislation, but I am convinced that if we cannot agree regarding immigration reform, we must still secure our borders. The President must budget for our border needs, and Congress must appropriate for those needs.

Mr. DOMENICI

Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I would like to announce for the information of the Senate and the public that a hearing has been scheduled before the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. The hearing will be held on Wednesday, April 19, 2006 at 10 a.m. in the Salon Ortega at the National Hispanic Cultural Center of New Mexico located at 1701 4th Street SW in Albuquerque, New Mexico. The purpose of the hearing is to receive testimony regarding the drought conditions facing the state of New Mexico and S. 2561, to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to make available cost-shared grants and enter into cooperative agreements to further the goals of the Water 2025 Program by improving water conservation, efficiency, and management in the Reclamation States, and for other purposes. Because of the limited time available for the hearing, witnesses may testify by invitation only. However, those wishing to submit written testimony for the hearing record should send two copies of their testimony to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, United States Senate, Washington, DC 20510-6150. For further information, please contact Nate Gentry at (202) 224-2179 or Steve Waskiewicz at (202) 228-6195.

Mr. DOMENICI

Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, an excerpt from John Steinbeck's classic The Grapes of Wrath recounting the conditions preceding the great Dust Bowl is eerily similar to the conditions currently faced by the Southwestern United States. ``The sky grew pale and the clouds that had hung in high puffs for so long in the spring were dissipated. The sun flared down on the growing corn each day until a line of brown spread along the edge of each green bayonet. The clouds appeared, and went away, and in a while they did not try any more. The weeds grew darker green to protect themselves, and they did not spread any more. The surface of the earth crusted, a thin hard crust, and as the sky became pale, so the earth became pale, pink in the red country and white in the gray country . . . Every moving thing lifted the dust into the air. . . . The dust was long in settling back again.'' As of April 5, 2006, statistics provided by the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) of the United States Department of Agriculture indicate that my home State of New Mexico is facing one of the worst droughts in the past 100 years. Historic snow pack data indicates the 2005-2006 snow season is the worst in more than 50 years. Several river basins in New Mexico, including the Rio Hondo and Mimbres river basins currently have no snow pack. This fact is particularly troubling when one considers that we rely on spring run-off for our surface water. Moreover, lack of snow pack indicates that our reservoirs, already depleted after years of drought, will remain at alarmingly low levels. According to the NRCS, ``Record low snow packs in several of the major basins have water managers scratching their heads, wondering how best to manage the water resource, with no real hopes of realizing any significant runoff to refill the reservoirs.'' These facts, taken together, are particularly ominous. Unseasonably warm temperatures in New Mexico have resulted in the start of the runoff season in early March, something that usually starts in middle to late April. The early beginning of the run-off season will be particularly damaging to the agriculture industry which relies on spring run-off for irrigation during the early growing season. The lack of precipitation will also be devastating to our ranchers and dairymen. Because drought has hindered local production of hay, it has to be hauled from great distances. As a result, hay is approximately twice as expensive as usual, placing a great economic strain on the ranching and dairy industries. I fully anticipate that the drought will interrupt municipal water service. Although early in the year, the Village of Ruidoso, New Mexico has contacted my office seeking emergency Federal assistance to address looming water shortages. In addition, numerous New Mexico communities are under severe water restrictions. The current drought illustrates how perilously close we are coming to having serious and widespread water shortages and the need to make more efficient use of the water we do have. The competing demands of agriculture, industry, municipalities and environmental needs have placed an enormous strain on available supplies of water. This is particularly true with respect to our interstate rivers that are governed by compacts. These interstate agreements require that a certain amount of water be delivered to downstream States. Meanwhile, enormous amounts of water are lost because of antiquated water infrastructure. In many instances, relatively cheap water infrastructure upgrades can minimize water losses. For example, by lining dirt canals, large amount of water can be saved that otherwise would have been lost to seepage. For the past 3 years, Congress has made available efficiency and conservation grants through the Administration's Water 2025 program. The goal of this program is to make more water available in water-short river systems through infrastructure conservation and efficiency upgrades. The bill I introduce today would authorize the Water 2025 program. While not a panacea to our water woes, I believe that this legislation will help us maximize the water available to us during times of drought. I would like to thank Representative Heather Wilson, our Congresswoman from the First Congressional District of New Mexico for introducing the House companion to this measure. She fully appreciates the breadth of this problem and I look forward to working with her on this critically important issue. Ensuring adequate water supplies for the Southwestern United States is as important a matter as any I can contemplate. As Chairman of the Energy and Natural Resources Committee, which has jurisdiction over this legislation, I assure it will receive prompt Committee consideration. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. DOMENICI

Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, an excerpt from John Steinbeck's classic The Grapes of Wrath recounting the conditions preceding the great Dust Bowl is eerily similar to the conditions currently faced by the Southwestern United States. ``The sky grew pale and the clouds that had hung in high puffs for so long in the spring were dissipated. The sun flared down on the growing corn each day until a line of brown spread along the edge of each green bayonet. The clouds appeared, and went away, and in a while they did not try any more. The weeds grew darker green to protect themselves, and they did not spread any more. The surface of the earth crusted, a thin hard crust, and as the sky became pale, so the earth became pale, pink in the red country and white in the gray country . . . Every moving thing lifted the dust into the air. . . . The dust was long in settling back again.'' As of April 5, 2006, statistics provided by the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) of the United States Department of Agriculture indicate that my home State of New Mexico is facing one of the worst droughts in the past 100 years. Historic snow pack data indicates the 2005-2006 snow season is the worst in more than 50 years. Several river basins in New Mexico, including the Rio Hondo and Mimbres river basins currently have no snow pack. This fact is particularly troubling when one considers that we rely on spring run-off for our surface water. Moreover, lack of snow pack indicates that our reservoirs, already depleted after years of drought, will remain at alarmingly low levels. According to the NRCS, ``Record low snow packs in several of the major basins have water managers scratching their heads, wondering how best to manage the water resource, with no real hopes of realizing any significant runoff to refill the reservoirs.'' These facts, taken together, are particularly ominous. Unseasonably warm temperatures in New Mexico have resulted in the start of the runoff season in early March, something that usually starts in middle to late April. The early beginning of the run-off season will be particularly damaging to the agriculture industry which relies on spring run-off for irrigation during the early growing season. The lack of precipitation will also be devastating to our ranchers and dairymen. Because drought has hindered local production of hay, it has to be hauled from great distances. As a result, hay is approximately twice as expensive as usual, placing a great economic strain on the ranching and dairy industries. I fully anticipate that the drought will interrupt municipal water service. Although early in the year, the Village of Ruidoso, New Mexico has contacted my office seeking emergency Federal assistance to address looming water shortages. In addition, numerous New Mexico communities are under severe water restrictions. The current drought illustrates how perilously close we are coming to having serious and widespread water shortages and the need to make more efficient use of the water we do have. The competing demands of agriculture, industry, municipalities and environmental needs have placed an enormous strain on available supplies of water. This is particularly true with respect to our interstate rivers that are governed by compacts. These interstate agreements require that a certain amount of water be delivered to downstream States. Meanwhile, enormous amounts of water are lost because of antiquated water infrastructure. In many instances, relatively cheap water infrastructure upgrades can minimize water losses. For example, by lining dirt canals, large amount of water can be saved that otherwise would have been lost to seepage. For the past 3 years, Congress has made available efficiency and conservation grants through the Administration's Water 2025 program. The goal of this program is to make more water available in water-short river systems through infrastructure conservation and efficiency upgrades. The bill I introduce today would authorize the Water 2025 program. While not a panacea to our water woes, I believe that this legislation will help us maximize the water available to us during times of drought. I would like to thank Representative Heather Wilson, our Congresswoman from the First Congressional District of New Mexico for introducing the House companion to this measure. She fully appreciates the breadth of this problem and I look forward to working with her on this critically important issue. Ensuring adequate water supplies for the Southwestern United States is as important a matter as any I can contemplate. As Chairman of the Energy and Natural Resources Committee, which has jurisdiction over this legislation, I assure it will receive prompt Committee consideration. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I am pleased to rise today, on behalf of myself and Senator Inhofe, to introduce, at the request of the administration, legislation to further the development at Yucca Mountain of the national repository for nuclear spent fuel and defense nuclear waste. This bill is a good start on the road to enactment of legislation that will resolve issues critical to the construction, licensing and operation of the facility. I hope to begin hearings on this issue in the Energy and Natural Resources Committee shortly after the conclusion of the upcoming recess. I look forward to working with the administration, Senator Inhofe, and other interested Senators to facilitate the construction and operation of the repository, a project so important to the continued development of safe, clean, and efficient nuclear power in this country. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. DOMENICI

Mr. DOMENICI. Senator Specter, would you yield for 1 minute?

Mr. DOMENICI. I didn't want to ask you because what I was going to say you wouldn't like.

Mr. DOMENICI. Thank you very much. I tell you, I really cannot believe what I heard here today. I have been here 34 years, and I cannot believe what I have heard today. I have heard a minority leader say we are peeved because we have not had what we think is a fair shake over the last couple of years since you have been running this place, so we are going to manage this bill from the minority leader chair, and there are going to be no amendments considered unless the minority, the ranking minority Member of the Senate puts his imprimatur on them.

Mr. DOMENICI. No matter how important the bill is--imprimatur, no matter what it is. I said it the Italian way. You said it the French way. You all know what it meant: stamp of approval. Stamp of approval. I have never heard of such a thing, never saw Senators standing around--they were in awe. What is he talking about? The bill that is before us, he likes. He has had a caucus, and those Senators on the other side said this is a neat bill, this is what we want to pass, and we sure don't want any amendments offered and voted on that stir up that thing we like so much to any extent because we don't want to get our Senators in any trouble. We don't want them voting on any of these kinds of things that muddle up this bill. So our leader is going to stand up here and say we have just changed the Senate, and we are going to do it this way. There will be no amendments unless Harry Reid, elected as the minority leader of the Senate, says, ``OK.'' Fellow Senators, I don't believe it. As a matter of fact, I thought when the distinguished leader of the other side, who is my dear friend--dear friend, he knows that--when he got up and answered our leader and started with this business about minimum wage and these other things--I thought he had a nothing case. I thought, my God, he's dreaming them up. He has nothing to say. What does that have to do with this bill, the minimum wage, the way we didn't let amendments come up on that? It has nothing to do with this bill, one of the most important bills confronting America. It has been said that it is at the turning point of relationships between Mexico and America. And we have one Senator who has looked at the bill and said: It is good for our side of the aisle. We like it just like it is, and we don't care what the rules of the Senate are, there will be no amendments. We are in charge. I am sorry, Mr. Leader. You were right. You said it too mildly. I goofed up some words, but I said it right, and Senator Reid is not right on this one. He is right many times. This is not right. He is not right. He should not do this. The Senate should not let him do it. If there is some way to not let him do it, he should not be permitted to do it. He knows we can't do that. He knows we cannot do that. He is too smart about the rules of the Senate. He knows we cannot say he cannot do it. But the Senate should say he cannot do it. I am telling you Senators, Democrats and Republicans, you should say he cannot do that. I yield the floor.

Mr. DOMENICI

Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I would like to announce for the information of the Senate and the public that a hearing has been scheduled before the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. The hearing will be held on Wednesday, April 12, 2006 at 1:30 p.m. in the hearing room of the Wyoming Oil & Gas Conservation Commission building located at 2211 King Boulevard in Casper, WY. The purpose of the hearing is to receive testimony regarding the legislative, economic, and environmental issues associated with the growth and development of the Wyoming coal industry. Because of the limited time available for the hearing, witnesses may testify by invitation only. However, those wishing to submit written testimony for the hearing record should send two copies of their testimony to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, United States Senate, Washington, DC 20510-6150. For further information, please contact John Peschke or Shannon Ewan.

Mr. DOMENICI

Mr. DOMENICI. Before the distinguished Senator leaves the Senate floor, Mr. Leahy, might I say that I was present while you spoke this afternoon. I was here when the distinguished chairman of the committee spoke. I commend both of you for the diligent and obviously hard work you put in on a very hard subject for the American people. I think we got off to a good start today. Your hearings set the right pace for Americans to begin to understand that immigration is a complicated issue but that it can be solved. I am much more optimistic than I was a couple of months ago that even with these timeframes which have been tough on you all, these mandates by our leader that you get things done by a time-certain, we have both been here long enough to know that maybe that is how you get it done.

Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I am going to speak today very personally because I don't think very many people know, certainly looking here at my good, new friend occupying the chair from the State of Oklahoma, I am quite certain he doesn't know that this Senator was born by a mother who unknowingly was an illegal alien. She happened to be Italian. We are now talking more about Hispanics, although not exclusively. But today in the Senate Hart Building, the Senator from New Mexico had before him on the floor of his office, and in the chairs that we had, about 30 Navajo young men and women--10th, 11th and 12th graders--with a few adults, and about 5 or 6 students from a completely different part of the State of New Mexico. They were sitting on the floor asking me if I would talk to them about myself. ``Who are you?'' they asked. I started off by telling them who I was. I gave a little bit of a lesson on the Constitution, and about there being only two Senators from each State, and how lucky we are, because we have just as many Senators as New York has. Of course, they knew that. I told them that might not seem fair, but the Constitution makes it fair because it is the document of fairness. Then we proceeded to talk about how I got here. I told them the story of how I ran for office on a dare and got elected. Then I talked about some dates in our State's history. I said, in 1912, New Mexico became a State. Before that, in 1906, 2 boys arrived at Ellis Island with an uncle. One of these boys with the last name Domenici had a strange first name, Cherubino. People wondered what that was. In Italy, that was a nice name that meant ``little angel.'' He was born the last child of that Domenici family because his mother died in childbirth, so they named him ``little angel.'' In 1906, Cherubino, who was my father, arrived at Ellis Island, having left a little town called Lucca, Italy. He arrives in Albuquerque, NM, I told these young Indian students. He went to work in a grocery store that, believe it or not, was named the Montezuma Mercantile Company, and it was owned by Italian immigrants. These Navajo young people were wondering in awe, what are you talking about? I said, well, that is the way America was then. They welcomed aliens. There were no illegal aliens. If you came from Europe during those times, they said, come, we want you. They didn't say you are automatically a citizen, but they said come. These two boys were brothers; my dad came with his brother. The reason why is something that should not take the Senate's time tonight, other than to say they planned to bring my father only, but he got scared to come without his brother, so he cried and his brother said I will go, and then my dad said I will go, too. He said if you go, I will go. So his father played Solomon and sent them both. They went to France and got on a boat and arrived in Albuquerque in 1906. We became a State in 1912. If my math is right, that is 6 years later. Guess what. By then, my father had bought the grocery store. He never went to school, but you see, he was still able to buy the grocery store. He was an alien. He worked hard and guess what happened. The war came along. Don't get too far ahead of yourself. It was the First World War. He got drafted as an alien. They put him in the Corps of Engineers. He told me one day: They wanted to promote me, but I told them I didn't want another bar because I spoke English too poorly and I was embarrassed to drill the boys. He was a little older than some of them, but he turned down the little button, or whatever you get, because he didn't want to sound like an Italian instead of an American, so he did not take the promotion. But he still came home from the war a hero. And because of his service, he was made a U.S. citizen. Guess what. He went to see the best lawyer in Albuquerque, NM, before he married my wonderful mother. He said: If I marry her, because she has not finished her paperwork for citizenship, will she be a citizen? The lawyer said: Oh, yes, sure, she will be a citizen. Now, you see, that was wrong legal advice. So here my mother bears four children to a wonderful citizen whose grocery store is growing. She becomes kind of everybody's leader, the Parent- Teacher Association president, raising all the money for the Catholic school, and guess what. She is an illegal alien. My mother hadn't been back to Italy since she was 3 years old. Remember, that is like some of our aliens in America. You know them, Senator Martinez. They have been here 30 years, they have never been back to their home countries, they live in the same neighborhood, they have children and they marry Americans, just like my mother. One afternoon when I am about 9 or 10 years old, sitting in the backyard, guess who arrived? It was during the Second World War, 2 years before the end, or a year and a half. Who were we at war with? Italy. The immigration officers arrived in their big black cars. They pulled up to the house, and there was the Senator-to-be 45 years later--little Pete--with his sisters, and here they come. Of course, we think what happened was there was a flamboyant Italian man nearby that used to--excuse me--imbibe on weekends. They think he had a little too much imbibing and he was singing a song out the window of the third floor of a hotel, right on top of the grocery store, the Montezuma Grocery Store. Of course, singing Italian, he probably excited some American who was a supercitizen, right? He was worried about these illegal aliens. So the immigration officers set about to see who among us were illegal aliens, and there she was, my mother, Alda Domenici. They decided she had to be arrested because she was an illegal alien. So, sure enough, they came to do that and a neighbor had to come over to take care of us kids. I was about 9 or 10. I was pretty frightened. I remember that we had a nice Zenith radio, a standup, and it had an aerial in it that would permit you to get music and pick up noise from overseas. The agents disconnected the radio so we could not communicate with the enemy. Then my father arrived at home. But guess who else arrived. That lawyer who advised my parents on my mother's immigration status came because my father called him up. That great lawyer, whose son was later Governor of New Mexico, got there to the house and said: What is the matter with you guys? This is no lady to be arrested. She has been living here since she was 3. Look at all her kids, and her husband has been running this business. And the agents said: We have these orders that she has to be arrested. To make it short, the lawyer answered: Why don't you arrest me, too. So they had to arrest the lawyer, too. They took him to wherever they were going--to Federal court, I suppose, and they took my dad's gun. A couple hours later they put up the bond and she came home. I don't know when--probably about 6 months later--she filled out all the forms to become a U.S. citizen. Why do I tell you this story? I want everybody to know that I am a Republican. I don't want anybody to think that in order to understand what it is like to have things happen to you like what happened to me, you have to be a Democrat or a Republican; you just have to live in this country during these times, when things like this happen. They happen and you know exactly how people feel. They are like everybody else. We talk about this whole issue of illegal aliens as if we are talking about hooligans and people who are drug addicts. Of course, when you have something as intricate as the border, which is where economics come into confrontation--the economics of poverty come into confrontation with the desire of adults to get ahead; that comes into confrontation with those who want to make money by taking advantage of that desire and charging people and becoming human smugglers--the thieves of human bodies; and that comes into confrontation with lying to and cheating Federal agents. You have this whole panorama of what is going on along our borders. Then we keep waiting for it to get solved, while all the time, day by day, thousands upon thousand of stories such as I have described are occurring. There is no way to sit back, whether you are a competent, powerful radio announcer, newspaper article writer, editorial page writer, or local neighborhood noisemaker--there is no way you can properly capture the reality of what we have let happen to this country. I, for one, want it to be known that I think this problem is solvable. I believe we can tighten up our borders. I believe it will take time--I believe it is impossible to pass a law and 6 months later have a border that is as tight as a belt, as some people say. It is going to take a lot of equipment and manpower and a lot of machinery and technology to do that. It is also going to take the next 2 or 3 weeks in the Senate of human willpower built around a spirit that is American, that recognizes our country was built by people such as those I have described. And there happen to be not as many named Domenici as there were back then; more are named Martinez than Domenici today, and Salazar, and Chavez; and many of their first names are not like mine, which was Pietro, but they are Enrique and Carlos. I think there is a willingness to work these issues of border security and immigration reform out. I want to suggest a couple of items. I believe the American people are going to understand before we are finished that we are going to do our very best to make the border such that it will not be penetrated every day by thousands of people who will be violating this new law we pass. I believe that is going to happen. I do believe, however, one thing that has not been discussed enough is that we are going to have to get much more cooperation from Mexico to get that done, and I would like my friend Senator Martinez, who is here, to talk about that when he makes his comments. The Mexican government and our Government must enter into an agreement, an accord, when this bill is finished that they are going to jointly see that our border security provisions get enforced. I have a provision requiring that in a bill that I introduced called the WISH Act. It has provisions saying that before the bill comes into force as far as benefits to Mexico, the Presidents of the two countries must enter into an agreement regarding enforcing our drug laws, human smuggling laws, and immigration laws; and also where Mexico will encourage their residents who live here to come forward and be recognized under the law. And, fellow Americans, what we put on paper and make our law is going to have to be significantly enticing enough for these millions of undocumented workers, some of whom have been living here a long time, to risk putting up their hands and saying: I will exchange the way I am living now for this new promise, this new proposal. It better be good enough or they will continue living the way they are. So it has to have something in it that they want. But it also has to say to the American people: We have this situation under control; it is not going to continue on after we pass this bill. And that gets back to the 10 million to 15 million undocumented workers who live here. We have called them all kinds of things. Let's just say the 10 million to 15 million aliens who live in the United States who are not citizens of the United States, some of whom came here totally illegally, some of whom came here under temporary permits--that group of human beings has to be addressed by this legislation in a humane way. They must be addressed in a way that recognizes that they are currently contributing significantly to the United States, that they probably are going to continue to contribute to our country, and that what we have in our minds about who they are and what they are is probably not what they really are. In our minds, we have pictures of them being leeches, people who are living off us instead of producing something we want or need. I hope I get a chance to give another few comments later. I have some very valuable information about the economic contribution of these people. It is a very big contribution, in the billions of dollars in commerce coming from these people living in our country. There are billions of dollars in GDP contributions. What kind of jobs are these people we are talking about currently doing? Some of us speak about them as if the only jobs they have are kind of trashy old jobs that nobody else wants. That is some misinformation, too. They are taking some menial jobs. We constantly say: Why don't we let them come here because they will take those jobs that nobody else wants? But they are also engaged in some very good jobs. There are carpenters and automobile mechanics in certain cities. They have moved their skills upward beyond that temporary permit they have, and they are in another category, but they can't move up into that new category under current law, to represent the new kind of lifestyle they live. Also, about half of them have lived here a short period of time, and about half of them have lived here a long time. So I am just going to describe what maybe is the way we get the issue of undocumented workers solved. Let's consider drawing a line at those who have lived here longer than 5 years. It seems to me that this is an important consideration, an important issue to look at because if one lives here for several years, that person certainly has a different relationship with the community and probably a different relationship all the way around than somebody who just arrived last week or even somebody who works 3 months and goes home. If someone has lived here for 5 years and has been working and maybe is just like that lady I described, my mother, who is living with an American and has children and has been here 10 years but is not a citizen, we have to figure out how we are going to handle that. I believe the President of the United States deserves enormous credit for sticking with this issue for a long time. People have said: Where is the plan? He was the only big voice in America for the last 3 or 4 years that has constantly said we have to do something about this problem, and it is not just buttoning up the border. He said we have to go beyond that and provide something for those who want to live and work here--we must give them a chance to live here under humane circumstances with the kind of grace and opportunity that is a privilege of living in America. I think he is still saying that. I am hopeful that before we finish this debate, the solution is going to come from a White House-Senate-House melding of ideas along the lines of giving some special treatment to those who have lived here for a longer period of time--different and better treatment, easier access to the U.S., perhaps easier access to a higher level of status than what they had when they came here. That is the essence of a proposal that I put in what I call the WISH bill. Workers who are here less than 5 years under my proposal can apply for and get a visa without leaving the United States. If they are unemployed for no more than 30 consecutive days, they get a renewal of that 3 year visa two more times. Then they have to leave America for at least three years. That proposal is for people who have been here less than 5 years. One would say that is not so good. But what we are talking about is giving these people 9 full years to do their best to arrange things and have whatever successes they can make. So that is one approach to one portion of these people who are undocumented workers. I suggest we split this group of people so that those who have been here for longer than 5 years--which they can prove that with workers' affidavits and the like--start by obtaining the same visa I just discussed, but after 5 years, they can apply for another visa or a change of status, except permanent residency, without leaving the United States. We would have no caps on the number of visas for these change-of-status grants. It would appear to this Senator that this could be the beginnings of a compromise built around something that is understandable, realistic, and should be given due consideration by this body. Not having had the burden--or the luxury--of serving on the Judiciary Committee, I have told Senator Kyl, who has worked very hard on this issue, that I am willing to work with him, and to the best of my staff's ability they will work with him, to see if we can't come up with some kind of a better approach than has been forthcoming heretofore. I notice Senator Kennedy is present. Senator Martinez has asked if he could speak next, and he has been waiting for quite a while. I assume that is satisfactory. In the absence of the Senator from Massachusetts, I spoke about the fact that frequently we get legislation done when we are told we must do it under a deadline. There is still a lot to do on this bill, but I can tell the Senator, there are a lot of people pulling for a solution and who want to be helpful. This is, indeed, a true turning point in modern American domestic policy history. It is a big opportunity. We solve it or we have some of the worst problems confronting the American people that we can imagine. It has almost gone beyond the solvable, but not quite because we are pretty sanguine and willing to work. Just as Senator Kennedy and his family have their roots in Ireland, I had an opportunity to speak this afternoon about a very strange incident of how this Senator happened to be born to a woman who thought she was American but was not. So I lived in a family for quite a while with a father who became a citizen only because he served in the First World War. He married a woman who he was told would be an American if he married her. He was told that erroneously by a lawyer, and she was arrested during the Second World War--taken right out of our household. So I understand this whole idea of a household with a father who is American and a mother who is not, but they are living, working, and getting ahead and driving their business. I understand that they are just like every other family in America. There is nothing different. They have the same love, same hope, same will, and same aspirations as those of us who were born here have. I am here to be helpful. I thank the Senate for listening, and I thank the Senator from Massachusetts for listening to me again the last 5 minutes. My wife is going to give me a note saying that my face is getting red, and it is time to sit down. I yield the floor.

Mr. DOMENICI

Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, last year the Senate by an overwhelming majority--74 Senators voted to support the Energy Policy Act. A number of programs, projects, and activities within that act were not contained in the President's budget. What this does, it supports an energy reserve fund paid for by ANWR receipts. In other words, ANWR is in the bill, and we allocate part of the receipts in a reserve fund to the Secretary of Energy to pay for various projects that were already voted on by the Congress that we thought were good projects. Therefore, this would fund $150 million a year for 5 years from the ANWR receipts. I think we should do it. I urge the Senate to adopt this. It is a good way to use the funds, an appropriate way, and I believe it would add to the validity of our Energy Policy Act and make those things happen more quickly. I yield the floor.

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

Mr. DOMENICI

Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I want to begin by complimenting my friend from New Hampshire and the chairman of the Senate Budget Committee on a job well done. He has taken a difficult situation and produced the budget resolution before us today. Congratulations. I would like to raise the issue of mental health parity as the Senate debates the fiscal year 2007 Senate budget resolution. It is my understanding the resolution before us assumes the revenue impact of enacting a mental health parity law at a cost of $1.5 billion over 5 years. I want to make sure that it is indeed the case that the overall revenue number is such that it assumes Congress will pass a mental health parity bill.

Mr. DOMENICI. I thank the distinguished chairman for his consideration and explanation of this important matter. border patrol challenges

Mr. DOMENICI

Mr. DOMENICI. Are we there now?