Byron Dorgan

Mr. DORGAN

Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, I have been listening to the discussion this afternoon, which is a repeat of a discussion we have heard often in this Chamber: Who supports our troops; who waves the white flag of surrender. You know, in the discussion in this Chamber and out on the Presidential trail, we hear all of those terms, and who is willing to stick with it and defeat the terrorists with respect to the war on terror. Well, let me, if I might, suggest there is a smart way and a tough way to deal with terrorists, and we are not doing it very effectively, in my judgment. I want to review for a moment, because we have people coming to the floor who forget to review where we are, and where we have been, especially. In 2001, on September 11, terrorists attacked our country. Following the attack that killed thousands of innocent Americans--the World Trade Center, the Pentagon, and a farm field in Pennsylvania--following that attack, Osama bin Laden and the leadership of al-Qaida boasted that they engineered the attack against the American people. They boasted they engineered the attack against the American people. So the President says: We are going to have an effort to bring to justice the terrorists. Well, it is now 2008. That was 2001. In 2008, our National Intelligence Estimate, released about 4 months ago, said the greatest terrorist threat to our country, to our homeland, is the al-Qaida organization and its leadership, who are now plotting additional attacks against our country. Our National Intelligence Estimate says the greatest terrorist threat to our country, 7 years after 9/11, is the al-Qaida leadership, because they are planning new attacks. They have reconstituted in a safe and secure hideaway in northern Pakistan. Those are the words of our National Intelligence Estimate, not my words--safe, secure. Iraq leadership, Osama bin Laden, still alive 7 years later and creating new training camps, training new terrorists. So how effective has the war on terror been when the greatest terrorist threat to our country 7 years after the 9/11 attack, the greatest terrorist threat is now building and reconstituting in northern Pakistan? It is reasonable to ask the question: Who took their eye off the ball? Why has this country, why has our policy not been a policy to bring to justice Osama bin Laden and his al-Qaida leadership? Instead, 7 years later, we are mired down in a war in Iraq, we have spent nearly two-thirds of $1 trillion dollars, thousands of American soldiers have died, and we have people asking us about who waves the white flag of surrender and who supports our soldiers. That is unbelievable to me. Let me review a bit. Following 9/11, we had top secret briefings for Senators and Congressmen--top secret briefings conducted by the head of the CIA. The Vice President was involved, the head of the National Security Agency, Condoleezza Rice, was involved. We went to those top secret briefings. All of us did. We were told things in top secret, shown classified materials, about what was happening in Iraq. It turns out that was a foundation for the invasion of Iraq. In fact, it was presented at the United Nations by Secretary of State Colin Powell. It turns out most of it was false; wrong on its face. Let me review it for a moment--the issue of mobile chemical weapons laboratories in Iraq that threatens our country. Mobile chemical weapons laboratories in Iraq. You know where that came from? We now know it came from a single source, through our intelligence organizations to the American people, to Congress, in top secret briefings, to the world at the United Nations, a single source: A fellow who used to drive a taxicab in Baghdad nicknamed ``Curveball'' and widely considered by German authorities as a drunk and a fabricator. A single source named Curveball gave this administration the ability to, in top secret briefings, tell us that Iraq had mobile chemical weapons laboratories and gave then-Secretary of State Colin Powell the opportunity to tell the world that Iraq had mobile chemical weapons laboratories. Turns out it wasn't true. Will Rogers once said: It is not what he says he knows that bothers me, it's what he says he knows for sure that just ain't so. Curveball. One single source this administration used to tell us that mobile chemical weapons laboratories in Iraq threatened this country, and it turns out to have been false, and they should have known it. And some may have known it, as it was described to us. The aluminum tubes. The aluminum tubes for the reconstitution of a nuclear capability in Iraq. Now, Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice, then National Security Adviser, even used the term the specter or the threat of a nuclear--or I guess she said mushroom cloud on television. The mushroom cloud. Well, it turns out her office had the information that a substantial portion of the Government didn't believe the nuclear tubes that were ordered by the Iraqis were for the purpose of reconstituting a nuclear capability. Most of that was discredited. The information in the National Security Adviser's office existed to say that there were very qualified people in this Government who didn't believe that. It turns out none of that was true. The aluminum tube issue was not true. Those who were telling the world, and in top secret briefings telling Members of Congress about the threat of the nuclear tubes for the reconstitution of nuclear capability, had information in their possession and knew better. Yellowcake from Niger is another big deal that made it into the President's address to the Congress in the State of the Union. It turns out that was based on falsified documents. It is unbelievable. Maybe we should review the facts a bit. All of this information turns out to have been false--the information that represented the foundation on which the administration made the case about the need to invade Iraq. Well, this country invaded Iraq and had no plans, once the invasion was complete and the military takeover was complete, on how to deal with Iraq at that point, and it turned into a civil war. Saddam Hussein, following that invasion, was captured and executed. He was hung by his neck until dead. He doesn't exist anymore. The Iraqi people then voted for a new constitution, and then the Iraqi people voted to constitute a new government. So Saddam Hussein was killed, executed, a brutal dictator was executed by the Iraqi people. They got a new Constitution, they got a new Government, and then this country, in the context of spending almost two-thirds of a trillion dollars, this country spent $16 billion training 350,000 able-bodied Iraqis to be policemen and firefighters and safety personnel and soldiers. We trained an array of people in Iraq for security; $16 billion training 350,000 Iraqis, principally for security, police, and soldier duty. Now, if the able-bodied people in Iraq who have been trained by this country are not willing and cannot and will not provide security in their country, our soldiers cannot stay there forever and do it. We cannot. It is interesting to me, and very disappointing to me, that the President decided: we are going to invade Iraq, but we are not going to pay for it. Every single penny we are going to borrow. So we are going to send soldiers to Iraq and send the bill to the debt. When the soldiers come back, they can pay the debt. As I said earlier, it is two-thirds of a trillion dollars now in Iraq and Afghanistan, all of it emergency, none of it paid for. In my judgment, that is exactly the wrong thing to have done. We should have been saying: Yes, we will ask soldiers to sacrifice. If that is what we ask our soldiers to do, we will ask the American people to reach a similar sacrifice. But this President would not do that. So we come now to a position where we have been in Iraq longer than we were engaged in the Second World War and we have folks who come to the Senate Chamber and we have folks out on the campaign trail saying: Who is going to wave the white flag of surrender? Some say we are going to stay in Iraq forever, 100 years. Others look at a Taj Mahal that has been built in Iraq, nearly $800 million for an embassy in Iraq, the largest embassy in the world by far, and they think they know, as a result of that, how long some intend for us to stay in Iraq. But we cannot do that. Let me mention one other addition. On top of all the things I have described--basically the false foundation of information on which this country made a decision to go to war--on top of all that, with this money we have spent, there has been the greatest amount of waste, fraud, and abuse in the history of this country and nobody seems to care very much. Let me tell a couple stories: $85,000 trucks on the side of the road in Iraq, because they had a flat tire and no wrench to fix it, so they torched it, burned it. It does not matter, the American taxpayer is paying for it because big companies got sweetheart, no-bid, cost-plus contracts. Got a flat tire, torch the truck. Got a plugged fuel pump, it does not matter, torch the truck. I mean, the stories are unbelievable. You got two builders to provide ice. The Haliburton Company is going to select between two bidders to provide ice. One is seven times more than the other bid. Well, pick the contract that costs seven times more than the other because the taxpayer is picking up the tab. They buy little hand towels for the troops, because Haliburton has to do that. Well, they do not want to buy ordinary hand towels for the troops, they want their logo embroidered on the hand towels, KBR, the subsidiary, Kellogg Brown and Root. Well, that is going to increase the cost of the hand towels triple, quadruple. It does not matter; the taxpayer is going to pay the bill. Do you want to know where there are 50,000 pounds of nails, 25 tons of nails? They are on the sands in Iraq. They ordered them. They were too short. What do you do with 50,000 pounds of nails that are too short? You throw them away because the taxpayer is going to pick it up. You just order the right size. This is the most unbelievable story that is yet to be told about the greatest waste, fraud, and abuse in the history of this country. There is a lot to talk about. We are going to have a hearing in the Senate Appropriations Committee. I have held 12 hearings in the policy committee on these issues. We are going to hold more. I have to run to a meeting. But I did want to come and talk a bit. I did not have the opportunity to describe who is it that is supporting America's soldiers and what is it that does support our fighting men and women? We send them off to war. There is going to be a Medal of Honor, by the way, awarded next Monday at 2:30 in the White House to a man who died 26 years ago, a Sioux Indian named Woody Keeble. I hope perhaps to come over tomorrow and tell the story of Woody Keeble. There are soldiers who have given so much for this country. Woody Keeble had 85 pieces of lead in his body when he finished what he did. He was still alive. But these folks then go to war and do what they do and come back home. And then the question is: Who stands up for our soldiers? Who stands up for our veterans? Who is willing to stand here and say we will keep our promise for veterans health care? Who does that? There is a lot to say. I regret I have a commitment that I have to be at in the majority leader's office, but I would like tomorrow to come back and speak at greater length about a remarkable American who on Monday will be recognized by President Bush, a North Dakotan from Wahpeton, ND, Standing Rock, the Wahpeton-Sisseton Sioux Tribe. He will be recognized as the first Sioux Indian in this country's history to receive the Medal of Honor. I yield the floor.

Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, would the Senator yield for a unanimous consent request?

Mr. DORGAN

Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, I believe by previous unanimous consent the Senate will now consider the Vitter amendment.

Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, this is not a debate about whether Federal dollars should be used for abortion services. Current law already prohibits that. I oppose Federal funding for abortions, and I have supported the Hyde provision. But the Vitter amendment is completely unnecessary. First of all, we have a provision in the underlying bill that relates to the Hyde provision that applies to all other appropriations bills. But I do want to say this: This is not a mainstream amendment that everybody is clear about. In fact, there is a provision in this amendment on page 2, section B. I don't know what it means, and I don't think Senator Vitter knows what it means. There have been no hearings, no discussion, yet onward through the fog on amendments like this. The fact is, we ought to have a hearing, but there has been no hearing. I don't understand what section B means, nor does the author, I believe. Having said all that, again, this is not a debate about whether Federal dollars should be used for abortion services. Current law already prohibits the use of Federal funds for abortion services, and the underlying bill contains a provision that relates to current law and continues the same policy.

Mr. DORGAN. I will agree, provided I am allowed 30 additional seconds following Senator Vitter.

Mr. DORGAN. Well, Mr. President, the appropriate place for that kind of discussion would have been a congressional hearing. That is where you discuss what provisions mean and how they are written. The provision reads: As to provide or pay any administrative cost of any health benefits coverage that includes coverage of an abortion. I don't understand what that means with respect to facilities or other issues. There are a series of issues that relate to that. And that is not, incidentally, just codifying the Hyde amendment, as the Senator alleges. This provision doesn't exist with the Hyde amendment. This is something the Senator conceived of and added. My point is, it ought to be the subject of a hearing. We don't disagree on the issue of Federal funding for abortion. We agree on that. But the Senator has mischaracterized his amendment.

Mr. DORGAN. And, Mr. President, he indicated when he pointed it out to me that this is why it was different than the Hyde amendment, which doesn't point to what he claims today.

Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, I share the frustration of the Senator from Oregon, but I must oppose the amendment. We have a backlog of $3 billion in facilities. If the Secretary chooses to establish what is an area distribution fund, moneys would be taken from the priority list. Many of the tribes on that list have waited a long time for funding for facilities. If the Secretary begins to take money from that priority list and does an area-wide distribution, it would be a serious problem. I want to work with the Senator from Oregon. We desperately need new and improved facilities. We need more money addressed to that. He is raising the right question. I happen to believe it is the wrong answer. I regretfully will vote against it.

Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, I wish to take a few minutes to talk about the vote we had earlier today on an amendment offered by Senator Vitter to the Indian Health Care Improvement Act. Senator Vitter described his amendment, which was adopted by the Senate, as codifying a longstanding policy that prohibits Federal funds from being used to pay for abortions. I agree that Federal funding should not be used to pay for abortions. I have always supported the existing funding prohibition known as the Hyde amendment that has been added in the appropriations process every year since 1976. That being said, I opposed Senator Vitter's amendment because the amendment would only codify the Hyde amendment with respect to the Indian Health Service. I think we should apply the same standard to all Federal health programs and not set up a separate standard that only applies in Indian Country.

Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, the next vote will be a vote on final passage. I will take just 30 seconds. I do want to say that Senator Murkowski has helped get us to this point in a very significant way. As to Senators Baucus, Grassley, Kennedy, Enzi, Kyl--and especially Senator Reid, who allowed us to spend time on the floor on this bill--and the 31 cosponsors of the legislation, I thank all of them. I thank Allison Binney, the majority staff director, and David Mullon, the minority staff director, and the really talented group of staff members who worked very hard on this legislation. I say a hearty thank-you to them. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that a list of all their names be printed in the Record.

Mr. DORGAN. It has been 8 years now that we should have advanced this legislation to improve Indian health care, and after 8 long years we finally have it done--at least through the Senate after this final passage vote. I say thanks to all of my colleagues for their patience and also their help. I yield the floor to Senator Murkowski.

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

Mr. DORGAN. I move to reconsider the vote, and I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, I wish to say a few words about this vote, and then I am going to ask unanimous consent that Senator Murkowski be recognized, then Senator Enzi, Senator Feingold, and Senator Boxer. I believe Senator Enzi is going to ask for 10 minutes, Senator Feingold 20 minutes, and Senator Boxer 15 minutes. I ask by unanimous consent that be the order.

Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, I will take a couple of additional minutes to say how pleased and proud I am that we have passed by a very wide margin the first improvement in Indian health care since 1992. These, after all, are the first Americans. They were here first. We signed treaties with them, we took their land, we put them on reservations, made promises, and we have a trust responsibility. We said ``we promise.'' The fact is, we have not kept those promises for a long time, especially with respect to Indian health care. Finally, at long last, this Congress--and thanks to Senator Reid and all the folks who allowed this to be on the floor of the Senate for the time that it was--we finally have made some progress, the first time since 1992 that we have reauthorized the Indian Health Care Improvement Act. This is a big deal. This will save lives. We have more steps to take. The House has a bill with which it has to deal. It will, and we will be in conference, and finally we will be able to have a bill before the President of the United States for his signature in this year. I have spoken at length. I know people are tired of hearing me. The Presiding Officer is from Montana. He and I held a hearing on the Crow Indian Reservation in Montana. We heard an earful about Indian health. I have held listening sessions around the country in different States with Indian tribes. I cannot tell you the number of stories I have heard that had me going away from these meetings shaking my head wondering: What on Earth can we do to fix this situation? How much will it take for us to fix this situation? I recall a grandmother on the Crow Reservation, MT, standing up with a beautiful picture of her 5-year-old granddaughter who had died. After essentially a rather lengthy story, she asked: How do you justify this, a young girl spending the last 3 months of her life in unmedicated pain because the health care system does not work for that young girl? The stories go on and on. I am convinced we must do better, and I am determined and it was my priority when I became chairman of this committee to finish this job. I know Ben Nighthorse Campbell worked hard on it, and Senator McCain, when he was chairman of the committee, worked hard on it. Finally, Senator Murkowski and I made it a priority for this committee to say: We have to fix this situation. This is not some option. The promise of health care means if we do not keep this promise, people will die. I have named some of those people, some of them children. We have to do better. And this vote today, a very significant vote in the Senate, an overwhelming vote, 90 percent of the Senate saying we agree, let's fix it, that is something I think is going to be unbelievably welcome news to American Indians all across this country today. It has been a long time coming, 16 years, but finally--finally-- we made progress, and I believe this progress will save lives. Mr. President, I thank Senator Murkowski who has been an enormous partner in trying to get this bill completed. As I close, I will mention our staff director, Allison Binney, also Ted Charlton, Cindy Darcy, Heidi Frechette, John Harte, Tracy Hartzler-Toon, David Holland, Jerci Powell, Eamon Walsh, and Rollie Wilson on our side; and David Mullon, staff director on the minority side, Megan Alvanna-Stimpfle, Jim Hall, Rhonda Harjo, Gerald Moses, Jonathan Murphy, and so many others. Those people I have named have worked a lot. They worked behind the scenes, long hours, late at night, and on weekends to help make this possible. I say a heartfelt thanks to them for their wonderful work. I yield the floor.

Mr. DORGAN

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

Mr. DORGAN. I ask unanimous consent that the vote sequence beginning at 5:30 today be as follows: Cloture on the Dorgan-Murkowski substitute amendment; DeMint amendment No. 4070; and DeMint amendment No. 4073.

Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the votes following the first vote be 10-minute votes, with 2 minutes equally divided for debate.

Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, with the withdrawal of the last amendment, there will be no further votes tonight. My understanding is the next vote starts at 10 tomorrow morning. The withdrawal of the second amendment on which we were going to have a recorded vote means there will be no further recorded votes necessary this evening.

Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, let me do one small piece of business with the bill before the Senator from Kansas proceeds. Amendments Nos. 4019, as Modified, and 4021 to Amendment No. 3899 Senator Murkowski and I wish to have considered two unanimous consent requests that were originally to have been included in the previous unanimous consent by which we conducted business today. One is amendment No. 4021, and one is amendment No. 4019, as modified. I send both amendments to the desk and ask that they be considered en bloc and agreed to.

Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, my understanding is that we have a cloture vote that will begin at 5:30 this evening. I know Senator DeMint has two amendments he intends to offer this evening. We expect to have votes on those amendments. I have an opening statement I wish to give for a short period, and I will defer on that. Senator Kyl wishes 10 minutes to speak, with 5 minutes on the bill and 5 minutes, I believe, in morning business. I don't want to disadvantage either of my colleagues. I want to comment about the legislation. We are finally, at long last, going to pass an Indian Health Care Improvement Act. It has been 8 long years. It is long past due. By tomorrow midday, we will have disposed of all of the amendments, and having succeeded in invoking cloture, we will have finally done something that will give cause for millions of Americans to celebrate in this country for the first time in a long time--an improvement in Indian health and Indian health care. Mr. President, Senator Kyl has asked that he be allowed to speak for 5 minutes at this point. I ask unanimous consent that Senator Kyl be recognized, following which I would like to speak--and I will make it short--and then Senator DeMint will be recognized. I notice that the ranking member, Senator Murkowski, is on the floor as well. I yield the floor.

Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, I will make a few comments, and then Senator DeMint, by unanimous consent, will be recognized. He will have the time that he desires to speak about his two amendments that we will vote on this evening. I begin quickly by saying that we have had a lot of help to get this bill this far: Senator Reid, first of all, for allowing us and being persistent in getting this bill to the floor and to keep it here. Senator Kyl has worked closely with us. Senator Murkowski, the ranking member, has worked very hard to help me get this bill from our committee to the floor. Senator Kennedy and Senator Enzi and so many others have worked with us to try to make a difference on this legislation. Let me describe why there is an urgency. We have a trust responsibility for Indian health care. That is different from other responsibilities. A trust responsibility means we took the land from the indigenous Americans, from the first Americans. We took their land but signed treaties and said: Tell you what, we will give you a deal. Here is our responsibility: We will provide health care for you. That was interpreted much later as a trust responsibility. Let me show what we do on Indian health care compared to other responsibilities we have. This describes how much we spend per person on Medicare, veterans, Medicaid, and so on. We actually spend twice as much money to provide health care for Federal prisoners, those incarcerated in Federal prisons, as we do to meet our responsibility for health care for American Indians. We have a responsibility for both, but we spend twice as much for Federal prisoners' health care as we do for American Indians. It is not as if there is not a need. American Indians have a 600 percent higher rate of tuberculosis, a 510 percent rate of alcoholism, and diabetes is off the charts. There are about one-third of doctors for Indians versus other populations, and one-fourth of nurses for Indians as other populations. There is a much higher rate of sudden infant death syndrome. Cervical cancer is four times higher. The suicide rate among Indian teens is 10 times higher in the northern Great Plains, and it is triple in the rest of the country. The statistics are endless. We have a full-scale health care crisis. This bill in itself will not fix all that is wrong, but it is the first time in 8 years we are finally getting this bill reauthorized. It should have been done 8 years ago. It is now being done, and it is important. I have described this bill through the eyes of two girls--one age 5, the other age 14, both dead. Let me describe them. Their relatives and parents have allowed me to use their names so that we understand what this is about and what this urgency is. First, I will explain Ta'Shon Rain Littlelight, a beautiful 5-year- old Indian girl from the Crow Reservation in Montana. Ta'Shon Rain Littlelight died, and the last 3 months of her life was in unmedicated pain. This little girl went to an Indian health clinic again and again to be diagnosed as having a condition of depression, and she was treated for depression. It turns out she had terminal cancer. She was finally rushed to Billings, MT, then rushed to Denver, CO, and diagnosed as having terminal cancer when it was undiagnosed many months before, and it may well have been able to be treated. When they finally diagnosed this 5-year-old girl, who loved to dance the Indian dances, as having terminal cancer, she asked her mom if she could go to Disney World and see Cinderella's castle and the Make-a- Wish Foundation allowed her to go to Orlando, FL, to see Cinderella's castle. They got there and checked into a motel, and that evening, in her mother's arms, Ta'Shon Rain Littlelight said: Mommy, I'm sorry I'm sick. I will try to be better. She died that night in her mother's arms. She never got to see Cinderella's castle. This little girl deserved health treatment, deserved a health system that we would expect for our children, a good diagnosis, first-class health treatment. She did not get it, and she is dead. So is Avis Littlewind. Avis was 14. Avis Littlewind committed suicide. She lay in her bed for 90 days in a fetal position, missing school, missing everything. Her sister had committed suicide. Her dad took his own life. This young girl age 14 was lying in a fetal position for 3 months and somehow nobody missed her. No mental health treatment was available. Nobody seemed to identify this little girl was in trouble. And then she hung herself. She felt hopeless and helpless and took her life. A 14-year-old girl is gone. A 5-year-old girl is gone. But it is thousands, thousands of people suffering with a health care system that is not working. It is not working the way we would expect it to work for us and for our families, and it does not work for Native Americans, the first Americans, for whom we have a trust responsibility and to whom we made a promise. That is why we must get this bill done. We will have a cloture vote at 5:30 p.m. We will have two amendments this evening by Senator DeMint, a couple of amendments tomorrow morning, and final passage, and there will be a celebration by people who have waited a long time for this legislation to move through the Senate. Mr. President, I know my colleague, Senator DeMint, has been waiting patiently. I yield the floor, and my guess is that Senator Murkowski, the ranking member, will wish to be recognized following Senator DeMint.

Mr. DORGAN. Let me explain that the legislation, the Indian Health Care Improvement Act, does a number of things. We have talked about the urgency for it, but it expands cancer screenings, for example; it expands monitoring and prevention programs for communicable and infectious diseases; it expands recruitment and scholarship programs for those nurses and doctors who serve American Indians; it seeks to address the epidemic of teenage suicides on some Indian reservations; it enhances and expands the current diabetes screening efforts; it tries to address the shortage of health care professionals; provides for home- and community-based services and hospice care; also authorizes convenient care services; and authorizes programs to address domestic violence and sexual abuse. In short, it is a piece of legislation that attempts to modernize the Indian health care system that has been waiting to be reauthorized now for 8 years. So this is a piece of legislation that I think is going to make a difference in the lives of Americans who have expected and have been promised good health care and have, for a long time, not received it. While we are waiting for colleagues who may wish to speak prior to 5:30, I ask unanimous consent to speak for 3 minutes in morning business.

Mr. DORGAN

Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, I would like to announce that the Committee on Indian Affairs will meet on Wednesday, February 27, at 9:30 a.m., in room 485 of the Russell Senate Office Building in order to conduct a hearing on S. 2232, the Foreign Aid Lessons for Domestic Economic Assistance Act of 2007. Those wishing additional information may contact the Indian Affairs Committee at 224-2251.