Bill Frist

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it stand in adjournment until 2 p.m, on Monday, June 20. I further ask that following the prayer and pledge, the morning hour be deemed expired, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, the time for the two leaders be reserved, and the Senate then resume consideration of H.R. 6, the Energy bill; provided further that at 5 p.m. on Monday the Senate proceed to executive session for the consideration of Calendar No. 103, John Bolton to be Ambassador to the United Nations; I further ask consent that the time until 6 p.m. be equally divided between the two leaders or their designees and at 6 p.m. the motion to proceed to the motion to reconsider the failed cloture vote be agreed to, the motion to reconsider then be agreed to, and the Senate then proceed to a vote on cloture on the Bolton nomination.

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I thank the Democratic leader. I believe it is pretty clear in terms of the plans: No more rollcall votes today. We will have a pro forma session tomorrow. We expect people to continue today to offer amendments and to bring them forward on Monday as well. We will have a rollcall vote on the Bolton nomination, to reconsider the cloture vote on the Bolton nomination, at 6 o'clock on Monday. We will complete the Energy bill next week. And then we will turn to the appropriations bills, as we had planned.

Mr. FRIST. That is the cloture motion----

Mr. FRIST. On the Energy bill. Mr. President, we yield the floor and do thank our distinguished colleague from New Jersey for his consideration.

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senator from New York and I be allowed to enter into a colloquy and that the time not be charged against the pending amendment.

Mr. FRIST. Will the Senator yield?

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, we will have a very short colloquy here as to what to expect over the next several days. It will take 3 or 4 minutes. Mr. President, Senators have been asking about the schedule for the afternoon, tomorrow, and Monday. First of all, let me congratulate the chairman and ranking member. We are making good progress. The fact that we do not have a lot of amendments flowing out tonight or a lot of requests even for tomorrow or Monday is a good sign. That, coupled with the fact we made substantial progress, leaves me very optimistic. We dealt with ethanol and oil consumption. So we are making progress. I will come back to what we are going to have to do next week. We will remain in session this afternoon for Members to offer additional energy-related amendments. However, if the amendment requires a rollcall vote, we would order that for next week because of the schedule of tomorrow. We will have no further rollcall votes today. After our business today, we will return to the bill on Monday. I do want to continue to rely on the continued efforts of our colleagues to come forward and offer amendments now. They have the opportunity this afternoon, early into the evening, and throughout Monday. I do want to put our colleagues on notice that if it looks as though there is any question about finishing this bill Thursday or Friday of next week--I have told Senators on our side of the aisle to expect votes on Friday, but we are going to complete this bill next week. If there is any question about that, I do want to put our colleagues on notice that I likely will file cloture on Wednesday. And that is not even a veiled threat at all, but it demonstrates the importance on behalf of our leadership, working with the Democratic leader, that we need to move ahead now and that we will finish this bill next week. Finally, it is also our intention on the Bolton nomination to reconsider the cloture vote on Monday evening. I mentioned earlier that we might do that today, but discussions have continued, constructive discussions have continued over the course of yesterday and over the course of today, and that being the case, we have elected to have that vote on Monday evening. That vote will likely occur--I have not talked specifically with the Democratic leader--around 6 o'clock. Therefore, Senators should be present for that important vote. Let me turn to the Democratic leader. I would ask if he concurs that we must finish this bill next week. And that is why, indeed, I mentioned we may have to file cloture, if we do not make continued progress.

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, this needs to change and it must change. We must establish an interoperable privacy-protected electronic medical record for every American who wants one. Working together, our Nation can confront these challenges, and we can build an interoperable national health information technology system. We know it will save lives. We know it will save money. It will improve quality and it will lead to huge measurable progress in the medical field, in the health field. We face enormous problems as a result of the underinvestment in health information technology. No industry as important to our economy as health spends as little on information technology. Our Nation has nearly 900,000 doctors and over 2.8 million nurses. Americans visit a doctor 900 million times per year. We have nearly 6,000 hospitals all over the country. Our health care system is enormous, yes, but it is dangerously fragmented. Even a small efficiency improvement can greatly reduce cost and improve quality, and there is plenty of room for improvement.

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, this morning I am pleased to be joined on the floor by my distinguished colleague from the State of New York. Together we share an important goal to improve health care quality and reduce costs through the use of health information technology tools. I had the wonderful opportunity of spending 20 years as a physician and as a heart surgeon before coming to this body. Like most physicians, I wanted to and, in fact, did use the very latest, most advanced technology, anything that could possibly, in my practice, make my patients live a healthier life, a better life, a more comfortable life. But amidst the artificial heart assist devices, the lasers that are used to remove lesions in the windpipe or the trachea, CT scan machines, x-rays, digital x-rays, digital thermometers, doctors today, unfortunately, for the most part, keep patient records the very same way I did 10 years ago and, indeed, almost exactly as my dad did 60 years ago as he practiced medicine, and that is handwritten on paper in manila folders, typically stored in the basements of clinics or doctors' offices or hospitals. It is amazing because we design hospitals, structures on computers today, we conduct medical research with computers, we use computers in nearly every aspect of the clinical setting, the delivery of medicine. From very compact bedside monitors to these massive MRI scanners we have today, computers power almost everything we use, everything we do in terms of diagnosis in medicine, in health care. But--and this is what we have come to the floor to address--when it comes to health information, when it comes to electronic medical records, we are in the stone age and not the information age. Imagine a traveler far away from home who gets in an automobile accident and is taken unconscious or confused to a hospital. Paramedics rush them to a hospital, and at the very moment that individual arrives at the door of that emergency room, the emergency room physician meets them, but emptyhanded, with no notification of allergies or past medical history or preexisting illnesses, all of which is potentially lifesaving information. That is inexcusable in this day and age. My colleague from New York knows this all too well.

Mr. FRIST. The problem is enormous and the problem is real. So what are we going to do about it? Senator Clinton and I propose three concrete steps to remedy these problems and establish a fully interoperable information technology system. First, we must establish standards for electronic medical records. Sharing data effectively requires more than just that fiber optic cable, more than those Internet connections. It requires standards and laws that make it possible to exchange medical information in a privacy-protected way throughout our Nation. The Government should not impose these standards on the private sector, but it has a duty, and indeed it has an obligation, to lead the way. Medicare, Medicaid, SCHIP, the Indian Health Service, and other Federal programs should lead the way and establish electronic health records for all of their clients. The Veterans' Administration already leads the way with interoperable systems, but we need to get the VA to be able to talk to the Department of Defense.

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, as we talk about these systems and standards and words such as interoperability, which, as the Senator from New York said, does mean being able to connect it all together, people who are listening must ask: Well, how in the world do these electronic health records and the appropriate use of that data bring concrete benefits to them as individuals and to their families? First, it will reduce waste and inefficiency in the system. It only makes sense that fragmented systems, with no interconnectivity at all, have inherent inefficiencies and waste. That is moved aside. That has a very direct impact on lower costs, making health care more affordable and thus available for people broadly. It improves quality. Right now we know that medical errors occur. Too many medical errors occur in our health care system today. By the application of technology, we can move those medical errors aside. They will not occur and that improves quality. They will empower patients. It gives that individual who is listening right now the knowledge and power to be able to participate in a consumer-driven system where choices can be made, where the focus is on the patient, that is provider friendly, that is driven by information and choice and empowerment to make that choice. They will protect patient privacy and promote the secure exchange of life-saving health information. It is spelled out in the legislation. It is going to be privacy protected. For the first time, they will seamlessly integrate this advancement in health information technology with quality measures, with quality advancements, harmonizing and integrating them in a way that simply has not been done in the past. This proposal brings together people, as we can see, from across the political spectrum, and it will unlock the potential of medical information technology for all Americans.

Mr. FRIST. I thank my colleague in this endeavor. As mentioned earlier, we began working on the information technology aspects of health care about a year ago and published our first op-ed together about July of last year. In closing, this is not going to be an easy process. I look back at the technology in my past in medicine for 20 years, but then also in my dad's practice; he practiced medicine for 55 years. I remember he had one of the very earliest electrocardiogram, EKG, machines in the State of Tennessee. At that time--because there were so few machines and so few cardiologists--he would take referrals from all over the State of Tennessee. The machine itself was bigger than the desk before me, at the time. What would happen then is, if there was a machine in a little rural community 100 miles away from Nashville, the machine there would take a piece of paper, they would run it through, they would send it by mail. It would take 2 days to get to Nashville. Dad would read it and send it back. Four days later, that doctor would be able to read that EKG. Then, when I was about 9 or 10 years of age--because their bedroom was right around the corner from mine--I remember so well when he installed a telephone to put another big box there to have the first in Tennessee again of a machine--and it was amazing at the time--one could transmit these EKGs electronically over the telephone wire and have it interpreted at the bedside. He would keep it there because people, of course, have heart attacks in the middle of the night. Then it would take probably about 30 or 40 minutes to get the result back. Of course, today we are at a point where with a little tiny machine, an EKG machine, we can get an instantaneous readout not just of the paper and of the EKG but the result actually read by the box. I have been able to see huge progress in my own life and watching my dad's practice and my practice. Now we need to see all of that sort of progress condensed, applied not just to the technology but to the collection of information, the promotion of electronic health records, and the appropriate sharing of that information which is privacy protected. That is the sort of progress we are going to see. We are going to see it come alive on the Senate floor and with the House and work in concert with the President of the United States to make sure that the great advantages, in terms of lowering costs, getting rid of inefficiencies, and promoting quality will be realized. The bill that we will shortly introduce does present a comprehensive approach of medical information and the use of medical information as we address our health care challenges. It provides that important backbone and critical building block for a better, a stronger, and a more responsive health care system for all Americans. Again, I thank my distinguished colleague from New York. We urge all of our colleagues to look at this bill and support this bill. With this legislation, there is no doubt in my mind that we will, yes, help save money and help save time, but most importantly we will save lives. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill we will shortly send to the desk be printed in the Record.

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, this needs to change and it must change. We must establish an interoperable privacy-protected electronic medical record for every American who wants one. Working together, our Nation can confront these challenges, and we can build an interoperable national health information technology system. We know it will save lives. We know it will save money. It will improve quality and it will lead to huge measurable progress in the medical field, in the health field. We face enormous problems as a result of the underinvestment in health information technology. No industry as important to our economy as health spends as little on information technology. Our Nation has nearly 900,000 doctors and over 2.8 million nurses. Americans visit a doctor 900 million times per year. We have nearly 6,000 hospitals all over the country. Our health care system is enormous, yes, but it is dangerously fragmented. Even a small efficiency improvement can greatly reduce cost and improve quality, and there is plenty of room for improvement.

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, this morning I am pleased to be joined on the floor by my distinguished colleague from the State of New York. Together we share an important goal to improve health care quality and reduce costs through the use of health information technology tools. I had the wonderful opportunity of spending 20 years as a physician and as a heart surgeon before coming to this body. Like most physicians, I wanted to and, in fact, did use the very latest, most advanced technology, anything that could possibly, in my practice, make my patients live a healthier life, a better life, a more comfortable life. But amidst the artificial heart assist devices, the lasers that are used to remove lesions in the windpipe or the trachea, CT scan machines, x-rays, digital x-rays, digital thermometers, doctors today, unfortunately, for the most part, keep patient records the very same way I did 10 years ago and, indeed, almost exactly as my dad did 60 years ago as he practiced medicine, and that is handwritten on paper in manila folders, typically stored in the basements of clinics or doctors' offices or hospitals. It is amazing because we design hospitals, structures on computers today, we conduct medical research with computers, we use computers in nearly every aspect of the clinical setting, the delivery of medicine. From very compact bedside monitors to these massive MRI scanners we have today, computers power almost everything we use, everything we do in terms of diagnosis in medicine, in health care. But--and this is what we have come to the floor to address--when it comes to health information, when it comes to electronic medical records, we are in the stone age and not the information age. Imagine a traveler far away from home who gets in an automobile accident and is taken unconscious or confused to a hospital. Paramedics rush them to a hospital, and at the very moment that individual arrives at the door of that emergency room, the emergency room physician meets them, but emptyhanded, with no notification of allergies or past medical history or preexisting illnesses, all of which is potentially lifesaving information. That is inexcusable in this day and age. My colleague from New York knows this all too well.

Mr. FRIST. The problem is enormous and the problem is real. So what are we going to do about it? Senator Clinton and I propose three concrete steps to remedy these problems and establish a fully interoperable information technology system. First, we must establish standards for electronic medical records. Sharing data effectively requires more than just that fiber optic cable, more than those Internet connections. It requires standards and laws that make it possible to exchange medical information in a privacy-protected way throughout our Nation. The Government should not impose these standards on the private sector, but it has a duty, and indeed it has an obligation, to lead the way. Medicare, Medicaid, SCHIP, the Indian Health Service, and other Federal programs should lead the way and establish electronic health records for all of their clients. The Veterans' Administration already leads the way with interoperable systems, but we need to get the VA to be able to talk to the Department of Defense.

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, as we talk about these systems and standards and words such as interoperability, which, as the Senator from New York said, does mean being able to connect it all together, people who are listening must ask: Well, how in the world do these electronic health records and the appropriate use of that data bring concrete benefits to them as individuals and to their families? First, it will reduce waste and inefficiency in the system. It only makes sense that fragmented systems, with no interconnectivity at all, have inherent inefficiencies and waste. That is moved aside. That has a very direct impact on lower costs, making health care more affordable and thus available for people broadly. It improves quality. Right now we know that medical errors occur. Too many medical errors occur in our health care system today. By the application of technology, we can move those medical errors aside. They will not occur and that improves quality. They will empower patients. It gives that individual who is listening right now the knowledge and power to be able to participate in a consumer-driven system where choices can be made, where the focus is on the patient, that is provider friendly, that is driven by information and choice and empowerment to make that choice. They will protect patient privacy and promote the secure exchange of life-saving health information. It is spelled out in the legislation. It is going to be privacy protected. For the first time, they will seamlessly integrate this advancement in health information technology with quality measures, with quality advancements, harmonizing and integrating them in a way that simply has not been done in the past. This proposal brings together people, as we can see, from across the political spectrum, and it will unlock the potential of medical information technology for all Americans.

Mr. FRIST. I thank my colleague in this endeavor. As mentioned earlier, we began working on the information technology aspects of health care about a year ago and published our first op-ed together about July of last year. In closing, this is not going to be an easy process. I look back at the technology in my past in medicine for 20 years, but then also in my dad's practice; he practiced medicine for 55 years. I remember he had one of the very earliest electrocardiogram, EKG, machines in the State of Tennessee. At that time--because there were so few machines and so few cardiologists--he would take referrals from all over the State of Tennessee. The machine itself was bigger than the desk before me, at the time. What would happen then is, if there was a machine in a little rural community 100 miles away from Nashville, the machine there would take a piece of paper, they would run it through, they would send it by mail. It would take 2 days to get to Nashville. Dad would read it and send it back. Four days later, that doctor would be able to read that EKG. Then, when I was about 9 or 10 years of age--because their bedroom was right around the corner from mine--I remember so well when he installed a telephone to put another big box there to have the first in Tennessee again of a machine--and it was amazing at the time--one could transmit these EKGs electronically over the telephone wire and have it interpreted at the bedside. He would keep it there because people, of course, have heart attacks in the middle of the night. Then it would take probably about 30 or 40 minutes to get the result back. Of course, today we are at a point where with a little tiny machine, an EKG machine, we can get an instantaneous readout not just of the paper and of the EKG but the result actually read by the box. I have been able to see huge progress in my own life and watching my dad's practice and my practice. Now we need to see all of that sort of progress condensed, applied not just to the technology but to the collection of information, the promotion of electronic health records, and the appropriate sharing of that information which is privacy protected. That is the sort of progress we are going to see. We are going to see it come alive on the Senate floor and with the House and work in concert with the President of the United States to make sure that the great advantages, in terms of lowering costs, getting rid of inefficiencies, and promoting quality will be realized. The bill that we will shortly introduce does present a comprehensive approach of medical information and the use of medical information as we address our health care challenges. It provides that important backbone and critical building block for a better, a stronger, and a more responsive health care system for all Americans. Again, I thank my distinguished colleague from New York. We urge all of our colleagues to look at this bill and support this bill. With this legislation, there is no doubt in my mind that we will, yes, help save money and help save time, but most importantly we will save lives. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill we will shortly send to the desk be printed in the Record.

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. Madam President, in the past few weeks a number of allegations have been leveled against the Guantanamo Bay detention center. There have been some legitimate questions about the treatment of detainees, which is fair and responsible. The United States is governed by the rule of law. And it is proper for the Congress, in its oversight role, to ask the executive branch about such matters and make sure the interests of our constituents and the Nation are being properly addressed. That being said, in many cases, the allegations that have been made recently have been false, distorted or misreported. Newsweek, as we are all too familiar, erroneously reported that an American guard flushed a Koran down a toilet. That report, which was later withdrawn, resulted in widespread protests and the deaths of several individuals. When the facts came out, we learned that, in the 3 years that Gitmo has been in operation, there have only been 5 cases of ``mishandling'' of the Koran by our military staff. In those few instances where mistakes were made--and people do make mistakes--they were corrected and persons were held accountable. We also learned that the prisoners themselves had abused the Koran 15 times, in some cases, reportedly, to implicate our soldiers in a religious crime. Multiple inquiries have found that the detainees at Guantanamo are being treated in accordance with the Geneva Conventions and U.S. law. They are well fed and well housed. They have access to clean showers, Muslim chaplains, and even psychological counseling if they request it. Some might say they are living in more luxury and safety than our soldiers and marines fighting the terrorists in Afghanistan and Iraq. Our service men and women in the field usually eat cold, packaged meals; sleep in crude living areas without beds; and often wonder if they will live to see the next day, all in the cause of promoting freedom and democracy and defending our country. One thing is for sure, the detainees are enemy combatants who were picked up off the battlefields of Afghanistan and elsewhere. They are hardened terrorists and have pledged their lives to jihad, the death of Americans, and the destruction of our country. They are being held at Guantanamo so they don't kill more Americans, either at home or abroad. They are being held at Guantanamo so that we can question them, so that we can prevent their colleagues from committing more terrorist acts. The intelligence we have learned about the terrorists, their networks, their plans, and so on, has been a treasure trove that has saved lives and is helping us win the war on terror. Personally, I am convinced that Guantanamo is humanely and fairly serving its much needed purpose. And I am also convinced that if we closed the camp, it wouldn't make one bit of difference to the terrorists who hate us and murdered 3,000 innocent American citizens before Guantanamo or the war on terror was ever conceived of. And it will make no difference to those who have agitated and protested against American policy from the very start. We can debate whether Guantanamo helps us save lives and win the war on terror. But what I can't stomach are the comparisons being made between Guantanamo and some of the most egregious symbols in the history of mankind. I am referring to the remarks of Amnesty International officials that compared the U.S.-run Guantanamo to the Soviet gulag. I am referring to the International Committee of the Red Cross official who reportedly compared U.S. soldiers to Nazis. And, regrettably, I am referring to a Senate colleague who, this week, called Guantanamo a ``death camp'' and drew parallels to Hitler's Germany, Stalin's gulags, and Pol Pot's killing fields. This was a heinous slander against our country, and against the brave men and women who have taken great care to treat the captured terrorists with more respect than they would ever have received in any point in human history. It is reported that nearly 9 million people were killed by Adolf Hitler; about 20.7 million were killed in the soviet gulags from 1929- 1953; and over 1.5 million people were killed in Cambodia from 1975 to 1979. And there is no need to recount the brutal torture and manner in which many of these people died, most of whom, if not all, were innocent people. Do we know how many people have been killed at Guantanamo? Zero. That's right: zero people. And yet we have members of this body who have come to the Senate floor to level the most egregious charges, compare our troops to Nazis, and charge the United States with crimes against humanity. To accuse our sons and daughters, who are serving proudly to keep killers from the battlefield, with committing genocide and war crimes is beyond the pale. It is wrong to make these comparisons; it is wrong to suggest such things. It is unfair to our military; it is unfair to the American people; and it is unfair to this body. This is wrong and it is the worst form of demagoguery. It is anti-American and only fuels the animus of our enemies who are constantly searching for ways to portray our great country and our people as anti-Muslim, anti-Arab. It is this type of language that they use to recruit others to be car bombers; suicide attackers; hostage takers, and full-fledged jihadists. It is darkly ironic that those who want to close Guantanamo for the sake of public diplomacy are themselves wreaking great damage to our public diplomacy by floating outlandish and slanderous allegations. It has to stop. We can, and should, have serious debates about legitimate policy questions. But comparing our Nation, our Government and our military to the regimes of Hitler's Germany, Stalin's Soviet Russia, and Pol Pot's Cambodia is the height of irresponsibility. Frankly, I think it demands an apology to our service men and women, and to all others in our Government who are working hard every day to stop the terrorists, prevent attacks on our homeland, and to win the war on terrorism. We are fighting a war. And young men and women are out in the field, risking their lives. For their sake, the toxic rhetoric must stop.

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. Madam President, I want to take a few moments to reflect on an important holiday coming up this weekend--Father's Day. On Sunday, families across America will celebrate their dads with lunches and dinners, homemade gifts, and, if my family is typical, some gentle teasing. It is a day we show our gratitude, and we remember how important our dads are in our lives. I was very close to my dad, and I cherish my memories of him. When I lived in Nashville, I used to drive by my parents' house everyday on my way to work. And everyday, no matter where I was, I would call to touch base and say hello. My father was a man of extraordinary kindness and generosity. He was known throughout the community for his good works. Before he died, he wrote a letter to his grandchildren, passing on his humble wisdom collected over a lifetime. In it, he told them: ``Be happy in your family life. Your family is the most important thing you can ever have. Love your wife or your husband. Tell your children how great they are. Encourage them in everything they do. ``Be happy in your community. Charity is so important. There's so much good to do in the world and so many different ways to do it.'' He also wrote that, ``I believe that life is made up of peaks and valleys. But the thing to remember is that the curve is always going up. The next peak is a little higher than the previous peak, the next valley isn't quite so low. ``The world is always changing, and that's a good thing. It's how you carry yourself in the world that doesn't change--morality, integrity, warmth, and kindness are the same things in 1919 when I was born, or in 2010 or later when you will be reading this. And that's a good thing, too.'' I have worked hard to live up to his high ideals and the sterling example he set before us. And I have worked hard to instill these values in my own sons Bryan, Jonathan and Harrison. If I have half succeeded, that is a very good thing. As we celebrate our fathers this weekend, I also encourage everyone to reflect on the importance of fathers to the social fabric. The National Fatherhood Initiative, a non-profit devoted to promoting responsible fatherhood, reports that today's fathers are more present in their children's lives than ever. Dads in two-parent families spend more time with their children than the previous generation of dads. Research also indicates that today's fathers are more active and more nurturing. And it has a big impact. Children with involved, loving fathers--as compared to children without--are more likely to do well in school, have healthy self- esteem, show empathy, and avoid drug use, truancy, and criminal activity. The bottom line is kids do better when their dads are around. For a while America forgot just how important dads are, but now we know in our heads what we have always known in our hearts. So, this Father's Day, we salute them. Dads on the front line who risk their lives for our freedom. Dads on the home front who go to work everyday to support their families. America honors you as everyday you honor us.

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. Madam President. Nashville, TN is home to some of the best music in the world. Last weekend, I had the pleasure of being back home during the 2005 Country Music Association Festival--``Country Music's Biggest Party.'' More than 130,000 country music lovers from around the world come to hear their favorite stars perform for the 4-day extravaganza. The energy is electric. From legendary artists like Kenny Rogers and Dolly Parton, to new talents like Sarah Evans, Rascal Flats, and Gretchen Wilson, more than 400 country music stars perform over 70 hours of music. Not only are fans treated to the best country music has to offer, they get to meet their favorite stars up close and personal at the Fan Fair Exhibit Hall where performers sign autographs and mingle with the crowd. This year, fans were treated to the first ever Music Festival Kick- Off parade in downtown, and a spectacular fireworks display, Sunday night, at the Coliseum. In just 4 days, the festival generates more than $20 million for the local economy. The CMA Festival has become a Nashville institution, joining the Grand Ole Opry and the Ryman Auditorium as symbols of our rich musical traditions. Nashville's thriving music scene has also attracted another festival called Bonaroo--a 4-day event that brings more than 75,000 music lovers to Manchester, TN. The event showcases a wide variety of music including rock, jazz and bluegrass. This year, more than 80 bands participated, including: the Allman Brothers; Dave Matthews; and Alison Krauss. In just 4 years, Bonaroo has become America's premier rock festival. Tennessee is truly a musical mecca. And it has launched some of the biggest careers in music history, including: Elvis Presley; Hank Williams; Johnny Cash; Loretta Lynn; B.B. King; and Garth Brooks, one of the biggest selling popular music artists of all time. I'm proud and blessed to be from this extraordinary place. And I am proud to be from Nashville, ``Music City USA.''

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of S. Res. 175 submitted earlier today.

Mr. FRIST. I ask unanimous consent that the resolution and preamble be agreed to en bloc, the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table, and that any statements relating thereto be printed in the Record, without intervening action or debate.

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. I ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table.

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, if there is no further business to come before the Senate, I ask the Senate stand in adjournment under the previous order, following the remarks of Senator Sessions.

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that tribute statements regarding former Senator Exon be printed as a Senate document, provided that Senators have until the close of business on June 30 to submit such statements.