Mark Dayton

Mr. DAYTON

Mr. DAYTON. Thank you, Mr. President. Mr. President, I rise today in support of S. 1052, the McCain- Kennedy-Edwards Patients' Bill of Rights legislation. Minnesota, my home State, has one of the largest concentrations of HMO providers in the country. In fact, 90 percent of Minnesotans who are covered by their employers also receive their health care services through HMOs. Also, historically, the HMO concept originated in Minnesota by a Minnesota physician who has now renounced what HMOs have become. Originally, HMOs were going to herald in a new age of health care, with greater emphasis on prevention, on primary care, more efficient referrals, coordinated and integrated medical care, all leading to a better quality of medical services for patients at lower overall costs to our health care system. Integral also to their arguments was their conceit that the private sector always does it better than the public sector, that the large public health systems of Medicare and Medicaid, and other public reimbursement programs, were largely the ones to blame for these skyrocketing health costs, and that private-sector HMOs and insurance companies could manage health care dollars so much better than Government and provide better quality for less quantity of dollars. However, once they got into the profession, they found that it was not quite that easy, that quality care costs money. There is always some con artist in this country who claims we can have something for nothing, or at least more for less. But the reality is, quality health care costs money. Well-qualified, highly trained, life-saving doctors, nurses, and attendants deserve to be well paid; and that costs money. Advanced lifesaving diagnostic equipment costs money. State-of-the-art, well-staffed hospitals and clinics cost money. And providing enough of all of the above, to take care of all the patients across this Nation, costs money, more money than most of these health care delivery or insurance systems wanted to spend. So HMOs became what I call them ``HNOs'': The way to save money became to say no; deny care; deny treatments; deny claims. Health care providers became health care deniers. As these HMOs became larger and larger, business operations--whether for-profit or nonprofit--their ``no'' bureaucracies became bigger and more important. Stock prices, executive compensations, retained earnings all became dependent on their ability to grow and to say no, deny patient care to produce profits at cost savings, to grow to produce ever more profits.

Mr. DAYTON. I say to the Senator from New Hampshire, another 10 minutes. But I will return to speak another time.

Mr. DAYTON. I would be happy to yield the floor to the Senator from West Virginia.

Mr. DAYTON. I yield to the Senator from West Virginia.

Mr. DAYTON. Mr. President, I thank the great Senator from West Virginia for his erudite discourse on the trade agreement which gives me remarks as I shall present them to my constituents in Minnesota. I thank the distinguished Senator.

Mr. DAYTON. Mr. President, to continue where I left off, a great American once said that a house divided against itself cannot stand. Our Nation's health care providers unfortunately are fundamentally divided against themselves. Their avowed purposes are to provide health care to their members, their clients, and their patients. Yet their financial success depends increasingly on not providing health care to their members, their clients, and their patients, and their members, clients, and patients are increasingly the victims of their own health care providers. Why do we even need a Patients' Bill of Rights to protect us from our own health care providers? The fact we even need this legislation, the fact we are debating it in the Senate today, says how badly our Nation's health care system has deteriorated. A Patients' Bill of Rights, even if necessary, should consist of two words: Doctors decide. Doctors decide what diagnostic procedures, what treatments, what surgeries, hospitalizations, and rehabilitation therapies are needed. The health care providers provide them, and the insurer pays for them. It is that simple. It is that sensible. It is that lawsuit free. Our distance from it today is a measure of our social insanity. It is the measure of our health care idiocy. But that is where we are today. There is a term used in sports these days, trash talking. There is a lot of trash being talked about this legislation: It will explode the costs of health care; it is going to cost employees their health care coverage; it will drive businesses into bankruptcy. Those are the same smears and scare tactics that were used against Social Security, against Medicare, against workers' compensation, against unemployment compensation, and against family leave. Is there anything that is good for the American people that is not bad for American business? I don't entirely blame them, because those business men and women have been talked trash to, as well, by their partners in these health care enterprises. Many businesses across this country are bedeviled by increasing costs of their health care. They want to do the right thing for their employees, but they are not in the business of administering health plans. I am sympathetic to this. But I say to those big leaders, if you want to get out of the business of providing health care coverage for your employees, then you need to actively support a better alternative, a separate system of true national health care which is devoted to providing care, not to avoiding costs. Last Saturday in Minnesota, along with my distinguished colleague from Minnesota, Senator Wellstone, and our majority leader, Senator Daschle, we heard from several families who expressed their support for their legislation and the critical need for it from their life experiences. There was a father who spoke eloquently and powerfully about his 4-year-old daughter named Hope. Hope was born with spina bifida. As part of her treatment, six doctors--six physicians-- including one at the Mayo Clinic, prescribed certain physical therapy treatments for her. Yet her HMO was unwilling to provide or pay for those prescribed treatments. It took 8 months of banging their heads against this bureaucratic wall, paying for the treatments that they could afford out of their own pockets, forgoing other treatments that they knew were in the best interests of her young life, until they finally were able to break through and get the care she needed. A mother spoke of her 21-year-old daughter who died of an eating disorder. As she so powerfully stated last Saturday in St. Paul, MN, young people aren't supposed to die of eating disorders. But her insurance company refused to pay for the necessary evaluation of her daughter's illness, it refused to refer her to a specialist who might have made the correct diagnosis, and that young woman is dead today. Her life has been snuffed out, taken away from her family. Her mother set up a foundation just for this purpose, to advocate for the care that should be provided for anyone else in that situation. What a horrible way for a parent to be pulled into this debate, by losing a daughter unnecessarily to a disease, an illness that should not have been fatal except for the lack of proper medical care, medical care that was available in our country and was not made available to her by her insurer. Finally, we heard from the wife of a husband and father of five children, a healthy, active, middle-aged man who suddenly, over the course of just a few months, was caught with some debilitating disease and confined to a wheelchair. For 8 months she and her husband tried to get their primary physician at an HMO to make a diagnosis that could lead to successful treatment. For 8 months this primary physician at the HMO was unable to make the diagnosis and refused to refer this man to a specialist elsewhere for that evaluation. He finally said to this patient, father of five, devoted husband: ``Maybe there is something you need to confess.'' Can you believe the absurdity of that? ``Maybe there is something you need to confess''--as though there were some religious curse. This was a primary physician at an HMO. They could not escape the vice, the trap of that bureaucracy. Finally, on their own initiative, the wife was so desperate, they decided to risk their entire life savings and drove to the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, world renowned clinic, and signed papers saying they would pay personally for the costs of whatever treatments were necessary. The physician there made a diagnosis of a viral disease, an invasive disease, prescribed the necessary treatments, medications, and this man is now at least partially recovered. He tires easily and cannot stand for extended periods of time but is out of a wheelchair and hopefully back to a full recovery. It cost this family $25,000 out of their own pocket to get the medical care they needed. The HMO finally agreed to pay 80 percent of that cost. This legislation is not about lawsuits, it is about lives. It is not about trial lawyers but people, patients, mothers, fathers, children. I am not interested in lawsuits. I hope there is never a lawsuit as a result of this legislation because that would mean there would never be the need for them. It would mean all Americans were receiving the health care they need, the health care they deserve, the health care for which they paid. I support this legislation, and I strongly urge my colleagues to support this as well. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. DAYTON

Mr. DAYTON. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce, along with my distinguished colleague Senator Hutchinson from Arkansas, legislation that will increase the use of biodiesel fuel throughout our country. Biodiesel is a natural additive to diesel fuel, much as ethanol is to regular gasoline. It is also a fuel in its own right. Biodiesel is made from soybeans and other vegetable oils. Its use as a 2-percent blend with diesel fuel, and in some instances as high as a 20-percent blend, will increase the demand for these commodities, boost their market price, and reduce the toxic carbon emissions from trucks and other vehicles across this Nation, all at no additional cost to American taxpayers. Our legislation would provide a 3-cent-per-gallon credit to diesel fuel suppliers using 2-percent biodiesel and up to a 20-cent-per-gallon credit for blends containing 20-percent biodiesel. As soybean prices rise then due to the increased usage, Federal spending on the U.S. Department of Agriculture Marketing Assistance Loan Program will be reduced accordingly, resulting in substantial savings for the American taxpayers. A credit such as this would otherwise reduce the revenues that would be going into the highway trust fund. Given the deterioration of many of our Nation's highways, that would be unwise. Thus, this legislation provides for the Commodity Credit Corporation to reimburse the highway trust fund for its forgone revenues. Our current energy crisis is also an opportunity for our country. I currently have a van driving around the State of Minnesota that uses 85-percent ethanol fuel with no difficulties whatsoever. These agricultural fuels are not just possible tomorrow, they are practical today. We just need to help them become financially competitive, until these industries can reach the volume of production necessary to compete with the giant oil industry. In conclusion, this legislation is an important step in several right directions--toward less foreign oil dependency, toward higher agricultural commodity prices for American farmers, toward lower taxpayer costs for our struggling farm economy, and toward a cleaner air quality for us all. I respectfully urge my colleagues to support this important legislation.

Mr. DAYTON

Mr. DAYTON. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce, along with my distinguished colleague Senator Hutchinson from Arkansas, legislation that will increase the use of biodiesel fuel throughout our country. Biodiesel is a natural additive to diesel fuel, much as ethanol is to regular gasoline. It is also a fuel in its own right. Biodiesel is made from soybeans and other vegetable oils. Its use as a 2-percent blend with diesel fuel, and in some instances as high as a 20-percent blend, will increase the demand for these commodities, boost their market price, and reduce the toxic carbon emissions from trucks and other vehicles across this Nation, all at no additional cost to American taxpayers. Our legislation would provide a 3-cent-per-gallon credit to diesel fuel suppliers using 2-percent biodiesel and up to a 20-cent-per-gallon credit for blends containing 20-percent biodiesel. As soybean prices rise then due to the increased usage, Federal spending on the U.S. Department of Agriculture Marketing Assistance Loan Program will be reduced accordingly, resulting in substantial savings for the American taxpayers. A credit such as this would otherwise reduce the revenues that would be going into the highway trust fund. Given the deterioration of many of our Nation's highways, that would be unwise. Thus, this legislation provides for the Commodity Credit Corporation to reimburse the highway trust fund for its forgone revenues. Our current energy crisis is also an opportunity for our country. I currently have a van driving around the State of Minnesota that uses 85-percent ethanol fuel with no difficulties whatsoever. These agricultural fuels are not just possible tomorrow, they are practical today. We just need to help them become financially competitive, until these industries can reach the volume of production necessary to compete with the giant oil industry. In conclusion, this legislation is an important step in several right directions--toward less foreign oil dependency, toward higher agricultural commodity prices for American farmers, toward lower taxpayer costs for our struggling farm economy, and toward a cleaner air quality for us all. I respectfully urge my colleagues to support this important legislation.

Mr. DAYTON

Mr. DAYTON. Mr. President, if I might add a refrain to what my distinguished colleagues have been talking about, last year I helped set up a health care hot line in Minnesota. I started getting a flood of calls, just as the Senator from Illinois described, from parents who are fighting those same kinds of battles. I don't have pictures here, but I can see them in my mind's eye, the young boys and girls and the grieving families, fighting families who are trying to deal with the tragedy of their lives and have heaped on them the further tragedy of HMOs or insurance companies not providing or not paying for the care. Suddenly they are incurring tens of thousands of dollars of debt, in addition to God-awful personal losses. So I certainly rise in support of the legislation. I agree with the Senator from Illinois that the change in the leadership of this body-- the now-majority leader and assistant majority leader are making the difference in this legislation coming to the Senate floor. I hope we can commence debate on it today. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. DAYTON

Mr. DAYTON. Mr. President, I rise today to salute the Capitol City and Minneapolis Metal Workers Lodge 459 on the occasion of their 100th Anniversary. For a century, members of this Minnesota Union have fought for and secured fair wages and decent, safe working conditions for all workers. Through the years the brothers and sisters of Lodge 459 have labored tirelessly to guarantee that each worker's rights are respected, each family's future is insured. A strong labor force is the backbone of our economy; it is the power behind every successful business, every growing community. Today, the proud members of Lodge 459 continue in the strong tradition of their parents and grandparents. They reflect the dedication and determination which are the hallmark of the labor movement in our Nation. Together, they will safeguard the future for our children and grandchildren. And in doing so, they will assure that in America, businesses will thrive, communities will grow, and families will succeed.

Mr. DAYTON

Mr. DAYTON. Mr. President, We the People . . . The Citizen and Constitution program, administered by the Center for Civic Education, has provided curricular materials at upper elementary, middle, and high school levels for more than 26.5 million students nationwide. The program provides students with an in-depth, working knowledge of our Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and the principles of democratic government. Members of Congress and their staff enhance the program by discussing current constitutional issues with students and teachers, as well as by participating in other educational activities. The class from Stillwater High School, in Stillwater, MN, took part in the program's national competition here in Washington, D.C., April 21st-23rd, 2001. I would like to thank the students, Lindsay Jasicki, Leah Abbe, Aaron Williamson, Patrick Hueller, Anders Johnson, Stephanie Ebner, Aaron Ulland, Lee Howard, Jessica Mcglauflin, Kyle Ellefson, Jeffrey Morency, Jordan Hild, Rebecca Siemers, Patrick Horst, Blake Rasmussen, and David Hoffman and their teacher, Ms. Kathleen Ferguson, for representing Minnesota at this prestigious event. To reach this level of competition demonstrates a tremendous knowledge of the essential ideals and values of the American constitutional government. My staff and I wish these young ``constitutional experts'' the best of luck in the future.

Mr. DAYTON

Mr. DAYTON. Mr. President, I would like to honor Sean Conley for his recent victory at the 74th Annual Scripps Howard National Spelling Bee on May 31st, 2001. Outspelling 248 other master spellers at the national level over three days, Sean sealed his championship by successfully spelling succedaneum. Sean is from Shakopee, MN, and attends the Minnesota Renaissance School in Anoka, MN. He placed 9th in the 1999 Scripps Howard National Spelling Bee and 2nd in 2000. I join with all Minnesotans in celebrating Sean Conley's achievement. We are extremely proud of him.

Mr. DAYTON

Mr. DAYTON. Mr. President, today I take the opportunity to pay special tribute to a remarkable person, Elizabeth M. Bennett, of Wayzata, MN. Beth has led a life of extraordinary service to the communities of Minneapolis and Saint Paul. Most particularly, she has invested her energies with the goal of improving the quality of health care in the Twin Cities. Her activism was not limited to Minnesota, however; early on, she also made her presence felt in Northern California, where she lived for a time, and eventually on the national stage, as well. The extensive list of her volunteer commitments spans six decades, beginning with her activism in high school, where she applied her special gifts for analysis and problem solving. Happily, these talents were also crowned by the ability to lead and inspire, for, in a demonstration of her early promise, she started a YWCA leadership group at West High School in Minneapolis. For this effort, she was awarded the Harry S Truman National Leadership Award in 1947. From there, Beth was well on her way. As a young person, Beth dreamt of entering the medical profession, an ambition which was never realized. Instead, she directed her passion for better health care into her volunteer work, serving as a board member for a variety of institutions. She volunteered to participate-- early, effectively, and equipped always by mastery of the subject at hand--in the public discussion encompassing the community's broad health care agendas. Her interests have included the uninsured, and health care research for children and seniors, always staying current with the rapidly changing profile of health care needs and delivery systems in our society. In addition to investing her time, heart, and mind, she raised many millions of dollars. For her extraordinary fund raising, she has not always received sufficient recognition. But I am pleased to say that in 1988, she was awarded the well-deserved National Association of Fundraisers Award. Beyond the tangible, however, Beth touches others with that indispensable, inimitable spirit of enthusiasm, encouraging them to become involved, too. Many have found exposure to Beth's zeal and breadth of knowledge about a cause to be irresistible and have been moved to strong support, sometimes for the first time. Beth was instrumental in the creation of the new Children's Hospital in 1958, planning for community health care facilities and programs, consideration of issues in medical education, and the relationship between the University and private community entities and served on its Board for 35 years. She served on the boards of Northwestern Hospital and Abbott Hospital in various capacities and was a major force in their merger in 1994, serving for over 40 years. She acted as a liaison between Abbott- Northwestern and Children's (now Allina Health System) during a crucial early period, planning for community health care facilities for adults as well as children. Continuing her lifelong advocacy of quality health care for the citizens of the State of Minnesota, Beth has been a member since 1990 of the board of directors of the University of Minnesota's Children's Foundation (which supports pediatric research), recently as its Chair, and concurrently chairs the pediatric portion of Campaign Minnesota at the University of Minnesota. In recognition of these numerous contributions she has made to health care, Beth was recently recognized with the University of Minnesota Dean of the Medical School Community Service Award. While health care is closest to Beth's heart, she is also dedicated to higher education, having served on the boards of the University of Saint Thomas for the lasts 7 years and the Minneapolis College of Art and Design. In addition, she has served as a board member of WAMSO (Women's Association of Minneapolis Symphony Orchestra), the United Way, and The Bakken Library. Her love of the arts also inspired her to serve as a docent of the Minneapolis Institute of Arts. Long a member of the Junior League of Minneapolis, she spent 15 years on its board of directors and also chaired its Prevention of Accidental Poisoning in Children Project. While residing in California in the 1950's, she belonged to the board of directors of the Children's Hospital of the East Bay in Oakland and volunteered at the Oakland Well Baby Clinic. Those who are fortunate enough to know Beth called her a jewel. To legions, she has been a champion, having created a solid legacy of support for many institutions and their constituents. While I trust that Beth's vocation of service has truly been its own reward, I hope that my remarks today might reflect a small measure of the goodness, self-giving, and strength she has long brought to us Minnesotans.

Mr. DAYTON

Mr. DAYTON. Mr. President, I join with the senior Senator from Minnesota and all my colleagues from steel states, in making every effort to revitalize this important and basic American industry. There are thirty-four Senators representing twenty-four States in the Steel Caucus, and we all agree that without immediate relief from the flood of foreign steel, the future of the United States steel industry is in jeopardy. The provisions of the Steel Revitalization Act will give our domestic steel industry the time it needs to recover from the import surges of the past three years. This bill also acknowledges the highly integrated process of making steel. It provides import relief for steel products that include iron ore and semi-finished steel. Minnesota and Michigan are the two leading states in the production of taconite. Taconite is essentially pelletized iron ore that is melted in blast furnaces and then blown with oxygen to make steel. Every ton of imported, semi-finished steel displaces 1.3 tons of iron ore in basic, domestic steel production. This means reduced production, cutbacks, and plant closings, causing devastating economic uncertainty in critical regions of these states. This bill will provide much needed help to the hardworking people and their families who live in the Iron Range regions of Northeastern Minnesota and Northern Michigan. The bill also helps the steelworkers and the steel-making communities of West Virginia, Pennsylvania, Indiana, Ohio, to name only a few. In this crisis, we are all one family. We are people who believe that America's steel industry is a basic industry, essential to the economic and national security of our country. Yesterday, the Department of Labor informed 1,400 workers from the LTV Steel Mining Company in Hoyt Lakes, Minnesota that they are eligible for trade adjustment assistance because of the increase in imported steel products. Last December, LTV declared bankruptcy, making these workers permanently unemployed. Trade adjustment assistance will help with extended unemployment benefits, training and relocation. I know that these workers are grateful for this assistance, but it is help that comes after LTV has closed its doors forever. The bill we introduce today will give the industry time to restructure and provide needed capital to companies through the Steel Loan Guarantee program, a program established through the efforts of the distinguished Senator, Robert Byrd. The Steel Revitalization Act will help retired steelworkers with a health care fund; and help companies with necessary consolidation while at the same time requiring them to retain the majority of their workforce. The United Steelworkers state: ``On a level playing field, there would be no steel crisis, but there is no level playing field.'' The Steel Revitalization Act will help strengthen the steel industry and make American steel competitive once again. I promise the Minnesota taconite workers, their families, and the communities of the Iron Range, to work hard to pass this bill.

Mr. DAYTON

Mr. DAYTON. Mr. President, I join the senior Senator from Minnesota, Paul Wellstone in honoring the 150 year anniversary of the University of Minnesota. The many milestones so aptly described by Senator Wellstone illustrate the distinguished history of one of America's great land grant schools. From the most humble beginnings in 1851, before Minnesota could call itself a State, the University established itself, as a small preparatory school. Today, it is a premier land grant University, with a major medical school, an Institute of Technology, School of Agriculture and three campuses in greater Minnesota. The University serves nearly 60,000 undergraduate and graduate students. The value of any great learning institution is measured both within its hallowed, academic halls as well as beyond the geographic borders of a central campus. The University of Minnesota Twin Cities has long been considered one of the Nation's top 25 public research universities. The University also serves a large and diverse state by reaching young people through the campuses at Morris, Crookston, and Duluth. In addition, the University has formed a unique partnership with the Rochester Community and Technical College, and Winona State University to form the University Center at Rochester. Each of these campuses has its own identity, and adds a unique dimension to the University, and to the State. Rochester, the newest campus, is a joint venture with three different institutions and two academic systems. Because of this partnership, a student attending the University Center at Rochester can pursue a doctorate program or certificate. Established in 1959, the University of Minnesota, Morris is today considered one of the top three public liberal arts institutions in the country. University of Minnesota, Crookston attracts nearly 3,000 students, earning one of U.S. News and World Report's Best College rankings and Wired Magazine's Most Wired Campus Designation. And, the University of Minnesota Duluth, ranked as one of the 12 best Midwest regional public universities, serves the academic needs of the State with a comprehensive undergraduate and graduate program. Equally important, UMD is a vitally active partner in the economic development of Northern Minnesota. We celebrate the University's Sesquicentennial by looking back through the long lens of a history rich with the achievements that have informed the people of our great State. These are the accomplishments in which the University of Minnesota played a key role. They include helping Minnesotans develop a strong agricultural economy, building a global reputation in medical sciences, establishing the relationship between the University's intellectual resources and community service, and forging an academic base, providing the brainpower that has carried Minnesotans into the new millennium. While we celebrate the University's past, we recognize that it is a part of our present and our future. It educates our children, grows our economy, and evaluates our decisions with sound research and good science. I join all Minnesotans in celebrating the University of Minnesota's 150th anniversary. I know there will be many more productive years to come.

Mr. DAYTON

Mr. DAYTON. I yield the floor.

Mr. DAYTON. I thank the Chair. I thank the Senator from Massachusetts who long before I came to this body was championing the cause of American schoolchildren, and also his colleague, the chairman of the committee, the Senator from Vermont, and the Senators from Iowa and Nebraska, who coauthored the earlier IDEA amendment. I just want to take their excellent idea and make it even better. My amendment would accelerate their timetable and mandate 40-percent Federal funding for the cost of special education in 2 years instead of waiting for 6 years. Why? Because this promise was made 25 years ago when the Federal mandates under IDEA were enacted. Congress then promised the State and local school districts that the Federal Government would pay for 40 percent of their costs. A quarter century later, Federal funding for special education costs average 12 percent nationwide, only 9 percent in my home state of Minnesota. That broken promise affects every schoolchild and every school in Minnesota and, I expect, our entire country. Since every school must provide special education services to every child who needs them, those missing dollars must, in Minnesota, be taken away from other funding for regular education programs. Every student in Minnesota gets shortchanged because the Federal Government has not kept its promise. Now, I'm told that I may be asked: Where will this money come from? Well, Mr. President, I'm a brand new Senator, and this is my very first amendment to come up for a vote on the Senate floor. So, I'll admit my ignorance. But, I cannot for the life of me, figure out how, in a budget which projects a $5.6 trillion surplus during the next ten years--$2.1 trillion for so-called discretionary spending--there isn't enough money for special education. Later today, I'm told, we'll be voting on a $1.35 trillion tax cut. Where will that money come from? From the American taxpayers, obviously. So, I'm willing to ask the American Taxpayer, are you willing to share this surplus with American's neediest children? I'm confident that, in Minnesota, the answer would be an overwhelming ``Yes.'' Yes, there is enough money available to us for tax reduction and funding for special education. To the Members of the Senate today, and to the House and Senate conferees: Can't you find room in your hearts and in your budget to fulfill a twenty-five year broken promise to the children of America with disabilities and with special needs. And to the dedicated teachers who devote their lives to reaching and teaching them. We have the money to fund this commitment. This is not a budget decision. This is a values decision. This is a priorities decision. If we aren't willing to finally fulfill a twenty-five year broken promise to America's school children with a small part of a $5.6 trillion surplus, then we have no one to blame, but ourselves. Mr. President, I urge adoption of my amendment.

Mr. DAYTON

Mr. DAYTON. Mr. President, I am pleased to offer this amendment, which is also sponsored by Senators Corzine and Wellstone. This amendment would bring the Federal share of funding for special education up to its long-promised 40 percent level in 2 years. I greatly admire the efforts of my senior colleagues, the authors of this legislation, who have negotiated the previous agreement which is now contained in the legislation. I applaud their efforts and I support their work. However, I would like to see their timetable for funding 40 percent of the costs of special education accelerated. That is the promise I made to Minnesota educators, parents, and students. The failure of the Federal Government to pay for 40 percent of the cost of special education is a broken promise which now extends for 25 years. This unfunded Federal mandate is having devastating consequences for schools all across Minnesota. Federal law requires these important services to students with disabilities and special needs, but it does not provide the funds necessary for them. There is no question that school districts must provide them and should provide them. But without the necessary and long-promised funding from the Federal Government, Minnesota school districts must take money away from other students and from other education programs. In Minnesota, that means local property taxes must be increased to make up the shortfall. Yet even then there is still not enough money available to do justice to all students. Then schools are blamed, teachers are blamed, and even students are blamed. Yet the failure is ours. The failure is our unwillingness to provide the funding necessary to allow schools to succeed, teachers to succeed, and students to succeed. Without my amendment, we are saying: Yes, we recognize our responsibility. We intend to finally keep our promise, but we need 6 more years to do so. That is too much procrastination. The recently passed budget resolution said that Congress can afford huge tax cuts for the very wealthiest Americans. However, we cannot afford to keep our promises to the schoolchildren of America, especially those who have the greatest needs. That is just plain wrong. It is time to put our money where our mouths are. We can no longer hide behind the claim that we don't have the funds to do what is right. We have the money. The question is, Do we have the will to spend some of it on behalf of better education for all of America's children? That is the decision we must make today on this amendment. My amendment would increase education funding by $12 billion in fiscal year 2002 and by $18 billion in fiscal year 2003. That is a lot of money, no doubt about it. But it is less than one-fifth the cost of the proposed tax cuts for 2002, and less than one-third of the tax cuts proposed for 2003. We could still have major tax reduction for middle- income working Americans, and even for upper income Americans, and still keep our promise to fund 40 percent of America's special education costs. That is the decision before us today. That is the question which my amendment addresses. On behalf of Minnesota's schoolchildren and educators, I urge the Senate to adopt this amendment. Its benefits will accrue to every classroom, in every school, in every school district throughout America. It will help take the President's words: ``leave no child behind'' and make them a living reality for millions of schoolchildren throughout our country. I am reminded of the title of the old television show, ``Truth or Consequences.'' Either we tell the truth or we face the consequences. The truth is that we are not meeting our financial commitment to public education throughout America. The truth is that the Federal Government has mandated important special services to children with special needs for the last 25 years but has not provided its promised funding necessary to fulfill this pledge. The consequences of our failures are children throughout America who are not receiving the special education they need and deserve. The consequences are lost hopes, lost dreams, and lost lives. It is time to tell the truth. This amendment will restore the truth to a 25-year unfunded mandate. Mr. President, I urge the Senate's passage of this amendment. I yield back my time.

Mr. DAYTON. I will make it a second degree.

Mr. DAYTON. Mr. President, I call up amendment No. 622, and I ask unanimous consent to modify my amendment.

Mr. DAYTON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that it be set aside.

Mr. DAYTON. Mr. President, what is the pending business?

Mr. DAYTON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that my amendment be set aside.

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

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