Byron Dorgan

Mr. DORGAN

Mr. DORGAN. Further inquiring, in circumstances where they might believe they have no choice, they don't have any money, and they have a desperately sick child, they are going to show up in an emergency room. If that emergency room doesn't turn them away--and some will--that child will get the most expensive or the costliest health care because that is where it costs the most to provide health care--in the hospital emergency room. That is why this approach is so important. I hear people say, what a radical thing to do, what an awful thing to do. This ought to be considered a baby step forward, but an important baby step, nonetheless, in doing what we are required to do in this country. Again, that is putting our children first, especially putting sick children first, sick children who come from families that do not have the money to find a way to get them to the doctor. That is what this is about. This ought to be a no brainer. One final question, if I might. We have been on this for a while, and it has been a wide open discussion, and there have been a lot of amendments. I believe we have four or five additional votes scheduled at 4:30 today. I would like to inquire, what next? What do we anticipate? How many additional amendments might exist? I hope we can work through this. It is a bipartisan bill. It makes so much sense. What does the Senator from Montana anticipate after the next batch of votes?

Mr. DORGAN. I don't know what is in second place with respect to what is important in people's lives, but if your children are not in the first place, something is wrong. Everybody who is a parent ought to understand the priority is your child--the children of this country. I ask the Senator from Montana, the circumstances are that we have a lot of people in this country who do not have health insurance coverage. We have substantial problems with respect to dramatically increasing costs of health care. The fact is, we have sick kids in this country who do not get health care. They ought to get health care, but they do not because their parents do not have enough money in their pocketbook or their checkbook, and they are worried what it is going to cost if they take their kid to the doctor. One of my colleagues and I held a hearing a couple of years ago, and a mother held up a poster with a colored picture of her son. He was dead. He died because he didn't get the health care he needed when he needed it. The fact is, that is happening in our country and, I say to my colleague from Montana, this is not a giant leap forward, but it is a significant step, to say we can do this. We can help children. We can provide health insurance for children who do not have it. We can fully pay for that bill, as the Senator from Montana has done, and his colleagues in the Finance Committee. I ask my colleague, this is not a health insurance bill that is going to cover all Americans, that is going to dramatically expand, is it? Isn't this just a piece of legislation that takes a step forward in saying to 3 million kids that the days they are sick, no longer will their parents have to make a decision about whether they can afford to take them to a doctor? Isn't that what this is about?

Mr. DORGAN. If I might further inquire, that answer means these are kids who come from families who do not have the resources?

Mr. DORGAN

Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, if one is going to boast on the Senate floor, I assume I can be forgiven for boasting about close relatives. My story is about my Uncle Harold--Harold Bach to be exact. I called Harold last week and asked him what he had been doing. He said he had just gotten back from Minnesota. I asked, ``What were you doing there?'' He said, ``Well I was running in the Senior Olympics events.'' I guess it is not too unusual to have someone tell you that they are engaged in some track and field events. But my uncle is 87 years old. I said, ``Harold, what events did you enter?'' He said, ``I ran in the 50 meter, the 100 meter and the 200 meter.'' I asked, ``How did you do?'' Harold said, ``I won three medals--a gold, a silver and a bronze.'' It wasn't news to me to hear that my uncle was running. At age 72 Harold went to the Prairie Rose Games in North Dakota and just as a lark he entered races for age 70 and above. He easily won all three races that he entered. Then he decided, you know--I must have a talent here. It appears I can run faster than people my age. So he started running in other States. He ran in the Minnesota Senior Olympics, he ran in the South Dakota Senior Olympics, and then he was in Arizona and California. He never stopped running. He has now won 100 medals in Senior Olympics events across the country. At age 87, I think he is still angling for more victories. So I am announcing today that I am going to award my Uncle Harold a certificate, designating him as the oldest, fastest runner in our State's history. No, I have not done any research to demonstrate that, but I am sure it must be true. And besides, he's my uncle. The message in having an 87-year-old uncle that runs the 100 meter dash in under 20 seconds is inspiring to me, and I hope, to everyone else. It is a message that if you don't know what you can't do, maybe you won't be surprised if you find out you can do it, even if others think it is improbable. None of us should be limited by our notions of what is impossible. My Uncle Harold has described what is possible for him by trying--and succeeding. It is a lesson that many of us should learn over and over again. Defeat is not about trying and failing. Defeat is failing to try. And when my uncle determined that he was faster than anybody his age, he got himself a pair of running shoes and filled his car with gas. Fifteen years later he has won 100 track and field medals. So, hats off to my Uncle Harold! His accomplishments in Senior Olympics events are impressive and inspiring.

Mr. DORGAN

Mr. DORGAN. Will the Senator yield for a question?

Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, that commitment of the majority leader is welcome. I observe this: There are few places in this country where someone having a heart attack would be wheeled into an emergency room with a piece of paper attached to their thigh by masking tape that says: To the hospital: By the way, if you admit this woman, understand you are on your own because contract health care from the Indian Health Service has run out. Very few places in this country will you see that. It describes how unbelievably urgent it is to pass this bill. The commitment from the majority leader is very welcome. It reflects his long-term commitment to deal with Indian issues. The commitment from Senator Baucus to mark up his portion of the bill on September 12 is welcome. Therefore, when we are back on the children's health bill, I will withdraw my amendment as a result of the commitment to move it separately. I yield the floor.

Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, I know others are waiting to begin morning business. Let me first add my hope with the majority leader that we will be able to move through these bills with some expeditious action this week. There has been so much delay in the Chamber. I know the majority leader wishes to move through and get these things done. I hope we can do that. I want to mention to the Senator from Nevada that I have offered to the children's health insurance bill the Indian Health Care Improvement Act. I did that yesterday as an amendment. There are 3 million children benefitted by the children's health insurance bill, but there are 2 million American Indians who are subject to full-scale health care rationing. It is unbelievable what is happening. We have had 11 separate bills introduced in the Congress since the authorization for the Indian Health Care Improvement Act expired some years ago, and none of them have moved. So I offered the amendment because I felt I had to do it to the Children's Health Insurance Program that is on the floor. I indicated yesterday, however, in response to Senator Baucus, who said that he would mark up on September 12 in the Finance Committee the portions of the bill relevant to them, I indicated I would withdraw my amendment from the children's health bill if I could get a commitment to get the Indian health care bill to the floor of the Senate. I have already marked up the Indian health bill in the Indian Affairs Committee, my committee. This is urgent. We have a problem with respect to rationing of health care with American Indians. I ask my colleague--and I know we have visited about it, and I know how strongly he supports American Indians and health care for them--can we have a commitment to get the Indian health bill to the floor of the Senate? If we can do that, I will withdraw my amendment here in anticipation of having that debate on Indian health in the next couple of months in the Senate.

Mr. DORGAN

Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, most of us look back on our high school years as a wonderful time of learning, growing and maturing. And also, most of us remember fondly one special teacher that gave us a nudge or an encouraging pat on the back or maybe even some discipline at the right moment. For me, that teacher was Delores Tollefson. She was a big presence in a small school. She was the English teacher who virtually did it all in my small school of 40 students in all four high school grades. She put on all the class plays; she helped run the school newspaper and spearheaded the school annual; and she taught speech and English, and much more. But most important to me was that she had the patience to see potential in her students. At just the right time she would offer either encouragement or disapproval and say, ``You can do that, you've got a lot of talent,'' or ``You're better than that. Come on--get busy and work up to your potential,'' or ``Great job!'' Most of us who were fortunate enough to have a teacher that saw potential and pushed us to reach it seldom took the time to say thank you. This year marks the 90th birthday of Delores Tollefson and I want to pay tribute to a wonderful teacher who affected my life in a very positive way. It is time to say a very special ``Thank you.'' Happy Birthday, Delores Tollefson! And thank you for dedicating your life to teaching young people. It made a big difference in the life of this former student.

Mr. DORGAN

Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, first of all, let me thank my colleagues, Senator Baucus and Senator Grassley, the chairman and ranking member of the Finance Committee, for bringing to the floor the piece of legislation called the Children's Health Insurance Program. It is a very important bill. It will add several million more children to the health insurance rolls and provide important health insurance for kids who otherwise would not have it. I believe all of us in this Chamber would believe that children's health care should not be a function of how much money their parents may have in their pocketbook or their checkbook. A sick child needs health care. This legislation moves in that direction. I am pleased to support it. I thank my colleagues for the work they have done on it. I do wish to offer an amendment at this point, and I wish to talk a bit about a very important issue that also relates to health care. My amendment deals with the Indian Health Care Improvement Act. It is true that we will now improve the lives of 3 million children with the underlying bill. I fully support that and compliment my colleagues for doing that. It is also true that there are at least 2 million American Indians in this country living on Indian reservations who are seeing health rationing virtually every day of their lives. It is unbelievable that that condition continues to exist. We have a trust responsibility for those people. The American Indians are a group of people in our midst with whom we made treaties, we made agreements, and we have the trust responsibility for Indian health care. We have not nearly met those responsibilities. I would observe that we have a responsibility for the health care of those who are incarcerated in Federal prisons. Guess what. We spend twice as much per person on health care for Federal prisoners as we do in meeting our health care responsibility for American Indians on a per capita basis. Amendment No. 2534 (Purpose: To revise and extend the Indian Health Care Improvement Act) Let me say that I have filed amendment No. 2534. Let me call up that amendment, which is at the desk. I offer this on behalf of myself, Senator Johnson, Senator Murkowski, Senator Bingaman, and Senator Stevens.

Mr. DORGAN. I intend to speak about 25 minutes.

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

Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, let me describe now, if I might, the issue of health care for American Indians, which I believe is an urgent national need. We have a trust responsibility for their health care. We have a piece of legislation that exists in law called the Indian Health Care Improvement Act, but it needs to be reauthorized. It has not been reauthorized for 15 years. It expired 7 years ago. We need to do this. Year after year after year, this Congress postpones it. We have passed legislation out of the committee; it does not get to the floor; it does not get done. Let me show my colleagues a picture of a young 14-year-old girl. This precious child--her name is Avis Littlewind. Her relatives gave me permission to use her picture. Avis is dead. Avis committed suicide. I want to tell you the story about Avis because I went to talk to the school officials, the tribal officials, the mental health officials, and those who were in the extended family. This 14-year-old girl took her own life. It probably should not have been a surprise to anyone because for 90 days this little girl lay in bed in a fetal position, missed school. Something was very wrong. This little girl had a sister who, 2 years previous, had committed suicide. This little girl had a father who took his own life. This little girl had another parent who was a very serious drug abuser. She laid in bed 90 days before she took her life. Now, one might ask the question: Why does this 14-year-old girl just fall through the cracks? She thinks she is in a situation that is hopeless. She feels helpless and she takes her own life. But this little girl had a full life in front of her. You know something? On that Indian reservation where Avis Littlewind lived, there were no mental health treatment facilities for someone to take this young lady, this young girl. One might ask and certainly should ask: Why is it in this country that mental health treatment is not available to a young child like this? Why is it that the person responsible for trying to give this young lady some help did not even have a car or any transportation? Even if you could find a mental health professional to treat this person, there is no transportation to get the person to treatment. Why is it that for 90 days this young lady lay in bed, and nobody from the school, nobody from the area, said: All right, there must be a big problem here; let's find out what is going on. The fact is, this is one precious child who took her life. We have had clusters of teen suicides on Indian reservations. This is but one aspect of the Indian Health Care Improvement Act, but it is not just mental health. The bill covers virtually every aspect of Indian health. We are told that about 60 percent of Indian health care needs are met. That means 40 percent of the health care needs are unmet. There is full-scale health care rationing on Indian reservations. If we were to debate that on the floor of the Senate, people would be appalled. You can't ration health care. Yet, that is what is happening. We have a trust responsibility, and yet health care is being rationed with respect to Native Americans. American Indians die at higher rates with respect to tuberculosis, 6 times the national average; alcoholism, 5 times the national average; diabetes, 180 percent higher than the national average. In Alaska, Native communities in Alaska have fewer than 90 doctors for every 100,000 Alaska Natives. That compares to 229 doctors for every 100,000 Americans. Heart disease, diabetes, blood pressure, stroke--you name it. The incidence of most diseases affecting our Native Americans are at much higher rates than for non-Indians. Cervical cancer for American Indians and Alaska Natives is nearly four times higher than cervical cancer for other women in this country. I mentioned before that Federal prisoners, for whom we have a responsibility for health care, receive twice as much funding per person on their health care needs than do American Indians for whom we have a trust responsibility. Stated another way, we spend twice as much per person on Federal prisoners than we do with respect to American Indians, and we have a trust responsibility in law to deal with American Indian health issues. I want to show a photograph to describe health care rationing. This is a photograph of Ardel Hill Baker. She has also allowed me to use her photograph. Ardel Hill Baker was having a heart attack. As she was having a heart attack, she was taken from the Indian reservation by ambulance to a hospital. When they offloaded her from the ambulance onto a gurney to take her in the hospital, this woman, at the emergency room entrance, having a heart attack, had a piece of paper taped to her thigh. The hospital dutifully looked at that piece of paper. The piece of paper that was taped to her thigh said that the Indian Health Service contract health care is not an entitlement program, meaning there are no funds to pay for this service because it is not a life-or- limb medical condition. Let me say that again. Someone is having a heart attack. When they are brought to the hospital, they have a big piece of paper taped to their leg. It says to the hospital: By the way, if you admit this person, you are on your own because our contract health care money is gone. In fact, this is the piece of paper which was taped to the leg of an Indian patient coming into a hospital, having a heart attack. What would anybody in this Chamber think if this were taped to the leg of their spouse or their son or their daughter? They are having a heart attack, but the hospital is told: You know what, we do not have any money for this person; if you admit this person, you are on your own. Contract health care. It is called health care rationing. Tribal chairmen tell me that the refrain on their reservation is: Don't get sick after June because if you get sick after June, there is no money in contract health care. By the way, you can get a little help still, but it has to be life or limb. You must be threatened with the loss of a limb or the loss of your life; if not, tough luck. We would be outraged, outraged, every single one of us, if this were our relative. But it was not. It was Ardel Hill Baker. She survived, but there are plenty who do not. This is Lida Bearstail. Lida Bearstail had a serious problem with her leg. The bones in her knee were rubbing against each other; cartilage was worn away. She was in great pain, in great discomfort. The normal treatment for perhaps someone in this Chamber or perhaps for a relative of someone in this Chamber would be to get a knee replacement, but in Lida Bearstail's case, Lida Bearstail was not given the option of getting a knee replacement. Despite the great pain, it was not determined to be priority one, life or limb. She wasn't going to lose her limb or her life. She could just live with the pain. So because it wasn't priority one, life or limb, this woman whose bones were rubbing together in the knee in unbelievable pain was told: There is no health care available for you. We have hearings to talk about all these issues. A doctor comes to our hearing and says: I had a patient come to me with a very serious problem with a knee. It was a ligament problem, very serious, very painful. That patient went to the Indian Health Service and they said: Wrap that knee in cabbage leaves for 4 days and you will be OK. It is pretty unbelievable. Yet we can't get a bill on the floor of the Senate to deal with Indian health care. That is unbelievable. We have a responsibility to pass this legislation. I passed it out of the Indian Affairs Committee. Now we need to move it through the Senate and then the House so we can say to these people who need health care--the first Americans, Native Americans that this country understands its obligation, understands its trust responsibility, and we are going to do what we need to do to pass the legislation. It is almost unbelievable that with all the priorities we discuss, we can't somehow make this a priority. In my State, we have some wonderful Indian tribes. The Three Affiliated Tribes is a wonderful tribe. It includes the Mandan, the Hidatsa, and the Arikara Nations. If you get sick on that reservation in Twin Buttes, ND, your nearest health facility is a little old building with a couple of tiny examination rooms. If you are lucky enough to get sick on one of the right days when a nurse is there and one of the few days when a doctor might be there, you might do OK. But this is a 1-million acre reservation. It is a big place. We had testimony from law enforcement the other day on that reservation. The first you would expect to be able to get someone to come to deal with a law enforcement call, no matter how serious, would be about an hour and a quarter to an hour and a half. So call while a crime is being committed and, perhaps an hour and a quarter later, if you are lucky, someone from law enforcement will show up. You might understand then that if you need a prescription or if you have a health care emergency, the dilemma Indians face on reservations. A mother who has a feverish child who needs an antibiotic, or a diabetic who needs insulin--who don't have ready access to health care facilities, in circumstances such as that, we must find ways to meet these health care needs. There are some who say--and I agree--we need substantial change. My colleague from Oklahoma is here. He talked about the prospect of saying: All right, let's have dramatic change. I am perfectly willing to work on dramatic change, to say that if we have a trust responsibility for someone for health care, let's let them show up at a hospital someplace and let's pay the bill so they can go to the providers who have the capability. We have the responsibility to do that. The problem is, we can't get a bill such as that through this Senate. I have offered time and again on the floor to add funding. The last time I tried to add $1 billion. It went down on a partisan vote. You can't get money added in this Senate to meet the responsibility we ought to meet with respect to Indian health care. We have worked in a bipartisan way on this legislation in the Indian Affairs Committee. The vice chairman of the committee, Senator Murkowski of Alaska, is a cosponsor as well. The Indian Health Care Improvement Act is legislation that begins to answer and advance the interests of providing health care to American Indians and meeting our trust responsibility to do so. We would authorize additional tools to deal with the issue of teen suicide on Indian reservations. I began by talking about Avis Littlewind, but I could have talked about many others. I have had several hearings on this subject. The bill also includes new provisions to address lack of health care services. We have begun trying to find a different construct of convenient care for American Indians on reservations. It includes several Medicaid provisions that are in the jurisdiction of the Finance Committee. The Finance Committee is going to be holding a markup. We will talk with the chairman and ranking member about including this bill in that markup. My point today is very simple. I understand the need to provide additional health care opportunities for 3 million American children is very important. It is no more important than providing the health care we promised we would provide to 2 million American Indians who live on reservations for whom we have trust responsibilities. We have broken far too many promises to American Indians. We have done it for far too many decades. It is time for this Congress and the country to keep its word and meet its promise. We don't have a choice, and it is not going to break the bank to do that. I encourage all my colleagues, go to the Indian reservations. See for yourself. See a dentist practicing in an old trailer house for 5,000 patients, operating out of an old trailer. Go see that. Then ask yourself: Is this the kind of health care we promised? Are we delivering what we promised? The answer is a resounding no. I understand in this Chamber there are priorities. With respect to the priorities all of us have, we all have different things we are passionate about. We have now on the floor a health care bill. This legislation is important. The reason I offer this amendment is, when we talk about health care, I think we have a responsibility to address Indian health as well. If we can, we need to, either tonight or tomorrow, get a commitment on dates to mark up and bring to the floor of the Senate the Indian Health Care Improvement Act, which is 7 years overdue and 15 years since it was last reauthorized. If we can get that commitment, I will know we are going to get this through the Senate. That is the goal. I am going to visit with Senator Baucus. Let me also make the point, Senator Baucus has been a very strong supporter of Indian issues. I have been happy to work with him. The Indian Health Care Improvement Act was sent to the Indian Affairs Committee. We have moved this out of committee. I think we have written it in a way that substantially improves Indian health care. Now it waits, as it waited last year, the year before and the year before that and the year before that. Every single year it is the same thing. I am flat out tired of it. I will not let it happen this time. One way or another, this needs to get done by this Senate because this Senate has a responsibility to do it. We have not met this responsibility for too many years. This year I insist we do so. The fact is, kids are dying. Elders are dying because the health care doesn't exist that we had previously promised. We have a responsibility to do something about it. I say to the chairman of the committee, I will visit with Senator Reid, and I know Senator Baucus is a strong supporter of Indian issues. I hope if I can get a commitment that we can get from the Finance Committee a markup--and I know the Senator wants to do that--if I can then get a commitment from Senator Reid to bring this to the floor, I don't intend to interrupt the children's health insurance bill, but if I can't get that commitment, I fully intend to interrupt this bill as long as I can interrupt it because it is that important. To my colleague from Montana, let me say thank you for allowing me to at least at this moment offer this amendment, and let me ask my colleague if I can get some hope that the two of us, working with others, can move together to get this through the Senate in a reasonable time. I am going to ask the same of the majority leader, who I know also is very supportive of Indian issues and very much wants to get this done.

Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, let me say thank you. If we can get a markup in the Senate Finance Committee on September 12, that allows the bill to move to the floor of the Senate. I am going to talk to Senator Reid, who I know is a strong supporter of Indian issues and feels very strongly about this. If I can get a commitment, I know he wants to provide that commitment to get to the floor of the Senate, then I will seek to withdraw the amendment from this bill. But I do want to visit, and perhaps in the morning on the floor, with Senator Reid on that subject. I wished to make two more points, and then I know my colleague from North Carolina seeks recognition. This chart shows the expenditures per capita relative to other Federal health expenditure benchmarks. This deals with Indians versus all others--Indians get far less. Here is the expenditure per capita for Medicare, the Veterans' Administration, Medicaid, Federal prisoners, the Federal Employees Health benefits. Here is Indian Health Service. It is unbelievable to me how much less it is. In many ways, all of this is intertwined--social services, health care, law enforcement, housing, education, it is all intertwined. What got me interested and involved in Indian issues--and I am privileged to serve as chairman of the Indian Affairs Committee and feel a deep responsibility to force us to do the right thing--what got me involved one day was a young girl named Tamara. Tamara was a young 3-year-old American Indian girl who was put in a foster home. But the person who was handling the social services cases was handling 150 cases, so they did not bother to check the home this little girl was going to be put into. It was not long before, at a drunken party, that little girl had her nose broken, her arm broken, and her hair pulled out at the roots. It will scar that little girl for life. I met her. I met her granddad. I talked to the social worker. I fixed that social worker problem by getting additional workers in, so that it does not happen again. The fact is that should never happen. These incidences should not happen. We do not have the resources to do what is necessary, to do what needs to be done. Nowhere is that more true than in health care. Health care is not a luxury. When there is a sick kid someplace, or a sick elder, when somebody has a health problem, we have a responsibility to find a way to help. For those who might listen to this and say that Indian health care is not our responsibility, oh, yes, it is. We signed treaties. We made promises, and we broke them every chance we got. Maybe in the year 2007 we can begin keeping a promise or two. These are promises we have a responsibility to keep. It is our trust responsibility. There is a lot to do in health care, but there is nothing more important than meeting our obligation to provide health care for Native Americans because we made that agreement with them, and we need to keep that agreement. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. DORGAN

Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that we consider the amendment I have offered, notwithstanding rule XVI.

Mr. DORGAN. Will the Senator yield for a question?

Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, the Senator from Nevada and others were in the well a moment ago when Senator DeMint indicated what he wanted was a vote on my amendment. I said that is fine, withdraw your objection and we will have a vote on my amendment. Apparently, that is not what he wanted because the Senator offered an objection relative to rule XVI. The Chair sustained the Senator's objection, and because the Senator won, he was not satisfied and wanted to do something further. I don't have the foggiest idea what might be the motivations here. If the Senator from South Carolina wants a vote on my amendment, all he has to do is withdraw his objection, and we can have a vote in 30 seconds. If there is some other nefarious purpose here, then maybe the Senator might explain it to us.

Mr. DORGAN. Madam President, on rollcall 279, I voted ``nay.'' It was my intention to vote ``yea.'' I ask unanimous consent that I be permitted to change my vote. It will not affect the outcome of the vote.

Mr. DORGAN. Madam President, I came in at the end of the vote intending to vote against Senator Alexander's amendment and did not look close enough. It was actually a tabling motion. So I would not want to vote to table Senator Alexander's amendment. I thank the Presiding Officer.

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

Mr. DORGAN. Madam President, let me make one additional point I did not make earlier in the discussion in the Senate, and I think it is an important point to make. There was a suggestion on the floor of the Senate by a Senator earlier that rule XVI has been applied in this Senate in a manner that was unfair. That is simply not the case. Every Senator has the right to raise the issue of rule XVI if someone is trying to legislate on an appropriations bill. It was done, as another Senator suggested, with respect to Senator Graham; it was done with respect to something they offered on the floor. Everyone has that right. But let me make this point: It is not unusual to legislate on an appropriations bill in circumstances where what is being done is something that is done almost by unanimous consent, a provision that everyone agrees with, a provision that is noncontroversial. That is not unusual at all. That happens all the time. Now, I am frankly surprised there is anyone in this Chamber who would disagree with the proposition that we ought to get quarterly classified, top-secret reports on what is happening to try to eliminate the al-Qaida leadership that apparently is now in a safe haven in the tribal area of Pakistan. I didn't expect that to be controversial. I didn't expect there would be one person in this Senate who would disagree with that. But, apparently, there is. He has that right. But it is an unfortunate circumstance that we had a situation that allows, or a situation that persuades someone to stand up on the floor and say there is a double standard on rule XVI. There is no double standard. There is not one person in the Senate who believes that, outside of the person who said that. There is no double standard. The standard is applied in exactly the same way to every Senator. What is unusual to me is objecting to the standard of allowing what normally would be uncontroversial, or noncontroversial provisions-- including this one, saying it ought to be our top priority to eliminate the leaders of al-Qaida, and that the Administration should give Congress quarterly reports on what is being done to address the greatest terrorist threat to our country. I am flabbergasted. I am enormously surprised that would be controversial with anyone in the Senate. I would expect 100 Senators would agree with that proposition, but one, apparently, does not. So we will have that debate again. We will have the debate at another time. As I said earlier, we have already added the same amendment to the Defense authorization bill. That was an amendable bill. That bill has been taken from the floor at this point, but I assume it will come back. I did wish to make the point on behalf of every Senator, except the person who said this, that there is no double standard on rule XVI. Those who suggest that, profoundly misunderstand, apparently, the rules of the Senate. But there should not be a misunderstanding in this Senate about the urgency of at least 99 Members of the Senate wanting to go after and eliminate the leadership of al-Qaida. I would hope that would represent everyone's determination. Al-Qaida is the terrorist organization that represents the greatest terrorist threat to this country, right now, according to the National Intelligence Estimate; and al-Qaida and its leaders are the ones who boasted about murdering 3,000 or more innocent Americans on 9/11/2001. Madam President, I yield the floor, and I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, I ask for the regular order. I send an amendment to the desk.

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

Mr. DORGAN. Let me say that on the amendment I just offered, I would be glad to a 10-minute time agreement when we get ready. I expect we will not need a recorded vote on that. But I know, as the Senator from Nevada is pointing out, we had an objection to even the motion to proceed on this bill, which was strange to me. Why would anybody have objected to proceeding? Now we get a bill on the floor, and Senator Byrd, Senator Cochran, the chairman and ranking member, I know they want to get this done. I believe we ought to get these appropriations bills through and out of here. This is a good bill. I hope this afternoon Senators can come and offer the amendments. I hope we can get this bill done today. It is not just this bill, we have got a lot of appropriations bills we have to do. So the Senator from Nevada, the majority leader, has an important message: We need to get this appropriations bill done. It deals with homeland security after all.

Mr. DORGAN. Well, the intelligence reports indicate that somewhere between Pakistan and Afghanistan, in the tribal-controlled mountainous regions, there is some sort of safe hideaway or secure hideaway or safe haven, as they call it. I have flown over this region. I have looked down, and I know there is no border. You cannot tell what country you are in. I have flown over the region that they call tribal-controlled between Afghanistan and Pakistan. There is no evidence of a country boundary. It is a tough country, tough region, I understand that. But if we now have al-Qaida reconstituting and rebuilding training camps, which they are doing--they are recruiting new recruits, they are building training camps, they are planning attacks against the West, planning attacks against the United States of America, and doing so in a secure hideaway or safe haven--then I say that is wrong. It ought to be job No. 1 for this country to eliminate the leadership of al-Qaida that represents the greatest threat to our country. That is the purpose of this amendment, to say we want that to be the overriding and overarching goal, and we want reports, classified reports every single quarter of what has been done or what has not been done because I do not believe, frankly, this has been a significant priority. It certainly should have been. If it has not been in the past, at least let's make it so in the future.

Mr. DORGAN. I want to say that Senator Conrad joins me in this amendment. I ask unanimous consent that Senator Byrd be added as a cosponsor as well.