Bill Frist

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, tomorrow we will make final remarks on the Oman free-trade bill. The vote on passage of this bill will be at noon tomorrow. This is the first vote of the week. Tomorrow afternoon, at 2:15, we will take up the nomination of Alice Fisher to be Assistant Attorney General. Under the time agreement, there will be 5\1/2\ hours of debate; however, I do not believe all the time will be necessary. Senators will be notified once that vote has been scheduled. Just a moment ago, I filed cloture on the motion to proceed to the Secure Fence Act. That vote will occur on Wednesday unless an additional agreement is reached. I have reminded our colleagues off the floor and will continue to do so on the floor with regard to the fact that next week will be a very busy week. We will complete our business next week. It means in all likelihood that we will have votes on Monday and Friday of next week. Although I don't know exactly when we will finish next week, I think it is important for people to keep their schedules flexible on Saturday. Our intention is to finish--in fact, we will finish--our work by the end of next week.

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, if there is no further business to come before the Senate, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate stand in adjournment under the previous order.

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I have 10 unanimous consent requests for committees to meet. They have the approval of the leaders. I ask unanimous consent that these requests be agreed to and printed in the Record.

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, right on top of the 10 requests is the unanimous consent request that the Armed Services Committee be authorized to meet during the session. For the information of our colleagues, there had been an objection earlier today. I talked to the appropriate Members and that was readily agreed to. So the Armed Services Committee will be able to meet accordingly any time today. Again, for the information of our colleagues, I ask the chairman of that committee to indicate what time they will resume the meeting.

Mr. FRIST. Yes.

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, this morning, following a brief period of morning business, we will resume consideration of the port security bill, with an hour of debate equally divided, followed by a vote on the motion to invoke cloture on the bill. That cloture vote should occur at approximately 11 this morning, and that will be the first vote of today's session. I anticipate that cloture will be invoked, and I encourage all Senators to vote in favor of cloture. The bill managers have been diligently working through the amendments and working through the bill. If we invoke cloture, we expect to complete the bill at a reasonable time today. I encourage all of our colleagues to help the managers so we can finish that bill sometime in the late afternoon today. It means not doing our usual thing of trying to talk and spend a lot of time and then voting later into the night. We really do want to finish this late this afternoon. Senators are reminded that rollcall votes are likely throughout the day and that the filing deadline for second-degree amendments is 10 a.m. this morning.

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, for this month's session of 4 weeks on the floor of the Senate prior to our recess for the elections, we have focused and will continue to focus on the safety and security of the American people. There are a lot of issues that need to be dealt with that we are dealing with in committees and in conference, but the focus on the floor very much is the safety and security of families listening right now, and to our colleagues and their families. We know, having seen what had come close to happening with the events in Great Britain in terms of the terrorist attacks and the plot there that was foiled, we are at risk in this country. Therefore, it is our obligation to address these issues and to do it in a way where we know we are equipped to both obtain information that can undercut these plots and foil the terrorists in whatever activity they are dreaming up. In addition, we have a challenge that is being addressed in committee today, was addressed in committee in the House yesterday, in terms of the terrorist tribunals and military commissions. It needs to be understood by my colleagues and the American people that the detainees we have today--the enemy combatants, people who have wished us harm, people who planned the 9/11 attack--until we act in Congress, in this Senate, they simply cannot be tried. They cannot be brought to justice. That is where we are today. That is why there is so much appropriate focus on making sure our Government, our military personnel, our intelligence officers have the tools they need to keep us safe. So those two issues, the surveillance issue and the military commissions and tribunals, are issues we are addressing, again, in committee. The President has placed a bill before this body. I introduced it about a week and a half ago. That language is available, and I encourage my colleagues to study that. Mr. President, that brings me to the issues of security that I mentioned in terms of surveillance, the detainees who are at Guantanamo Bay. Senator McConnell and Senator Specter and I actually visited that naval base last week and learned a lot. We have border security we are addressing in the Department of Defense appropriations bill that we passed a week and a half ago that is in conference and in our Homeland Security appropriations bill, both of which aggressively address border security. So we have border security. We have port security. We have the military commissions that are being addressed for those individuals at Guantanamo Bay. We have support for our troops in terms of maintaining our security through the Department of Defense appropriations bill that is currently in conference. And then we have the whole issue of surveillance. Today we are going to finish on port security. We all know--and we are reminded by the events surrounding our reminiscences of 9/11 with that fifth anniversary--we are fighting a war against radical ideologues. These are militant extremists, and they have a single- minded goal of destroying our Nation. Increasingly, people are realizing that, but it is taking these reminiscences and the remembering of the great tragedy of 9/11, coupled with the reality of what very well could have happened to hundreds and, indeed, thousands of Americans if that plot had not been uncovered by the British. We know the terrorists are not going to stop. And it is not just a war in one part of the world, it is a war against an ideology. They are not going to stop at anything. The enemy is creative. I mentioned the attacks that could have emerged out of the plot which was uncovered by the British. Who would have ever deemed imaginable a day when business travelers could not be carrying contact lens solution in their carry- on. It is because of an attempt with a ``Gatorade'' bomb. The terrorists are always thinking. They are always thinking of how they can stay one step ahead of even what our imagination is. They are searching for our weak points. They are seeking ways to exploit our weak points. That is why we have to remain vigilant, and that is why we have to address these issues on the floor. The substance of the bill that is on the floor does just that, the port security bill. That is vigilance. Nowhere is it clearer to me that we have to be vigilant than at America's 300 maritime ports of entry. We talk about border security. Well, part of border security is port security. It is a border we have to close and appropriately monitor to prevent the terrorists from doing us harm. These ports are economic centers. As economic centers, our more than 300 sea and river ports are targets in and of themselves. For people who want to hurt us, want to hurt our economy, they can become a target. These ports become even more attractive when they are close to urban centers. These ports facilitate the rapid dissemination of cargo from around the globe to each of our cities and towns. Thus, we know the terrorists, when they want to hurt us, would potentially address these ports. We have done a lot to secure our ports, but the fact remains, they are too porous. That brings us back to the importance of this bill. The bill before us plugs the holes that exist. It toughens security standards for all cargo. And it strengthens and improves programs designed to screen cargo at foreign ports and secures the international supply chain from the very start to the very end. Technologies have advanced. We have developed more accurate detection tools. But we are not using those tools throughout our system. We are not using them universally. Terrorists have access to stealthier weapons, and that is a huge vulnerability just asking to be exploited if we do not keep up, if we do not keep pace. That is why we must pass this bill tonight. The bill establishes a risk-based grant program to help assist ports with training personnel and implementing new security standards. The men and women who operate our ports are our first line of defense. We have entrusted these stewards of security with a serious, with a grave responsibility. Accordingly, the bill ensures that the Department of Homeland Security will move forward with background checks for all port workers so we know who is on the ground at these critical facilities. It sets up procedures for resuming port operations and trade safely and quickly after a terrorist attack to help minimize any effect or any shock to our economy. It establishes the appropriate protocols to ensure that if a terrorist does strike, our ports are not closed longer than necessary. And importantly, we also need protocols in place so we do not reopen ports too early. An incident at a port could be a red herring, a distraction to disguise other, more damaging terrorist activities. These are just a few of the highlights of the Port Security Improvement Act. At its core, it is a multipronged approach to plugging the holes that exist in port security. It institutionalizes multiple and redundant security layers. From the factory of origin to cargo container, from cargo container to port warehouse, from port warehouse to cargo ship, from cargo ship to the port of calling, and from the port of calling to the final destination, at each step this bill toughens our standards. We are making it harder for a terrorist's dirty bomb to hide anonymously in a cargo container. We are making it harder for terrorists to tamper with cargo containers. We are making it harder for terrorists to use our ports as target practice. And we are making it harder for terrorists to use our ports to stealthily gain access to the rest of our homeland. The terrorists we face have a radical agenda. They are ever-vigilant in monitoring and assessing our weaknesses and always looking for new ways to harm us. We must be ever-vigilant in identifying our weaknesses and minimizing and eradicating them. That is what this Port Security Improvement Act does. It is my hope my colleagues will join me in supporting it and in passing this important piece of legislation this afternoon. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. FRIST

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

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, one cold May morning earlier this year, a Border Patrol agent found the body of a 3-year-old boy in a blue windbreaker, his arms crossed. He had died trying to cross our southern border, the youngest victim our borders have claimed this year. The boy's mother's name is Edith Rodriguez. She is 25 years old. She attempted to cross the border illegally, in hopes that she might escape the desperate poverty of her home state of Veracruz, Mexico. Edith hired a human smuggler--a coyote. The coyote gave his charges an illegal drug, ephedrine, to help them keep awake and moving. But Edith and her son still could not keep up with the group. So the coyote, in a cruel and heartless act, abandoned them in the desert. Alone. With no food and little water, with a dangerous drug coursing through his system, exposed to the elements-- Edith Rodriguez's little boy died. Edith Rodriguez violated the laws of the United States when she crossed the border illegally. She was wrong to violate our border. But all should agree that her son did not deserve to die. Here are the facts: Every 18\1/2\ hours, someone dies trying to cross the border between the United States and Mexico. About a year ago, I asked the Government Accountability Office to study the deaths that take place along America's borders. Today, my office released that study. The results are sobering, shocking, and, I strongly believe, a cause for action. Since 1995, deaths along our borders have doubled. Despite the heroic rescue efforts of the men and women of Customs and Border Protection, things have gotten worse. In 1995, 266 people died trying to cross our borders. Last year, 427 perished. The increases, it appears, stem largely from an increase in deaths from exposure to the elements in the Sonoran Desert in Arizona. Illegal entries, however, have not increased. Quite frankly, it is getting more dangerous to cross our border. Until recently, CBP did not even keep a systematic count of those who died crossing our borders. We still do not have a unified national strategy for reducing the deaths. We still do not know how well our safety efforts work--if they are saving lives or not. We need to do more. The founding document of our Nation, the Declaration of Independence, lists ``life'' first on the list of Government's responsibilities. The overwhelming majority of the people who cross our border do so in search of a better life. They take enormous risks and make enormous investments in hopes of helping their families. Illegal immigration needs to stop. We must defend our borders. We must construct physical barriers, add detention beds, hire personnel, and equip them with better technology. But we have a higher moral obligation to protect the life of every person--every man, woman, and child--who sets foot on American soil. We must do everything in our power to preserve life. That is why I propose the Border Death Reduction Act. I urge my colleagues to support it. The law will implement the GAO's recommendations. It will require CBP to create a strategy for reducing border deaths. It will mandate a full count of deaths along the border. It will impose tough, new penalties on coyotes who abandon their charges, and it will expand the network of rescue beacons that people in trouble can use to call for help. These beacons, I believe, are an absolutely vital link in our border security system. Let me explain. Rescue beacons are devices at prominent locations that individuals can activate when they need help. They are tall polls with lights at the top and radio transmitters inside. People in trouble can activate a beacon to let CBP know that they need help. We know that beacons work: CBP has already saved dozens of people based entirely on beacon alerts. But individuals who activate beacons do not get a free pass. They will, of course, receive necessary medical treatment. But rescued individuals will still be detained and deported like anyone else who violates our borders. Deploying more beacons in the desert will save lives in the desert and simultaneously improve the security of our frontiers. We cannot delay. We should not rest. We must protect the lives of all those who set foot upon our soil. I urge my colleagues to support the Border Death Reduction Act. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, for decades, healthcare analysts and industry experts have wondered whether healthcare should consume 16 percent of our Nation's economic output, as it currently does. By virtually any measure, we spend more on healthcare than any other country in the world. Consider the facts. According to the World Health Organization; we spend twice as much per person on healthcare as Britain and Japan; and we spend nearly 30 percent more than second-ranking Monaco. In the past 5 years alone, the cost of health insurance to companies has nearly doubled--from $4,200 to $8,100 per family. But experts also concur that rising healthcare costs does not mean the quality of healthcare is improving. Just this summer, the Institute of Medicine released the most extensive report ever on medication errors. The results? At least 1.5 million Americans are sickened, injured, or killed each year by errors in prescribing, dispensing, and taking medications. Errors are widespread--on average, a hospital patient is subjected to 1 error each day he or she occupies a hospital bed--and they are costly, at an estimated expense of $3.5 billion per year. We have good reason to question the cost and quality of our healthcare services. That is why, in August, President Bush issued an executive order requiring all Federal agencies with a health insurance program to increase price transparency and provide options promoting quality and efficiency of care. The Executive Order builds on the Federal Govermment's efforts to release Medicare payment information for individual healthcare providers. While this is an important step toward transparency, more can be done. We need a way to analyze that data and make the results of the analysis consumer friendly, so that patients have real information they can use to make better informed healthcare decisions. The bill before us today--of which I am a proud cosponsor--picks up where current Federal efforts leave off. The Medicare Quality Enhancement Act establishes quality transparency in the Medicare Program. It doesn't require anything extra of providers. In fact, CMS is already collecting the data we need--because any provider that accepts Medicare patients must report quality data to CMS. Instead, the bill requires CMS to establish public-private partnerships with Medicare quality reporting organizations, or MQROs. CMS will provide MQROs with data CMS already collects--Medicare enrollment, claims, and survey and assessment data. The MQROs will then perform the analysis. Any entity or provider will be able to make report requests of MQROs, the results of which will be made public. The methodology an MQRO uses to analyze the data will also be made public. And providers can additionally instruct MQROs to use a certain methodology when making a report request. I know many providers are concerned about CMS's capacity and capability to analyze healthcare quality data. In part, that is why this bill requires CMS to contract with MQROs. The Secretary must determine that each MQRO has the research capability to conduct and complete reports as a condition for entering into the contract. MQROs must also demonstrate that they have the experience and expertise to analyze quality data. As an additional contract requirement, each MQRO must comply with Federal privacy regulations to ensure beneficiary confidentiality. Additionally, MQROs must disclose financial interests as a condition to contract. As a transplant surgeon, I understand the concerns and fears providers have. Many providers are worried that we aren't far enough along in terms of quality data collection to be able to analyze it. But we must push the envelope in this area. It is my hope that provider groups will take the lead and request reports using a methodology and standards of quality that represent the best care in each of their fields. Quality transparency is absolutely essential to improving healthcare. Without it, beneficiaries cannot make informed decisions about their healthcare. Consumers already enjoy transparency in other industries. When we buy a new car, we can open an Internet browser and in a matter of moments can make objective side-by-side comparisons of different models--and then we can take them for a test drive. When we need groceries, we pull out the Sunday supermarket ads to see what is on sale and where. And when we furnish our homes, we shop around--comparing style, price, color, quality, warranty, and service. But right now, we can't do that in healthcare. Whether it is a routine checkup or a heart transplant, we have no way of assessing how much bang we are getting for a buck. Only when we institute quality transparency do we empower beneficiaries to make informed decisions about their healthcare. This bill is a great step toward the goal of complete quality transparency. It is a formidable goal; that is why we are starting with something we know--Medicare. Senator Gregg has worked long hours to bring this bill to fruition, and I thank him for his efforts. I hope our colleagues will join us in supporting this important measure.

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, one cold May morning earlier this year, a Border Patrol agent found the body of a 3-year-old boy in a blue windbreaker, his arms crossed. He had died trying to cross our southern border, the youngest victim our borders have claimed this year. The boy's mother's name is Edith Rodriguez. She is 25 years old. She attempted to cross the border illegally, in hopes that she might escape the desperate poverty of her home state of Veracruz, Mexico. Edith hired a human smuggler--a coyote. The coyote gave his charges an illegal drug, ephedrine, to help them keep awake and moving. But Edith and her son still could not keep up with the group. So the coyote, in a cruel and heartless act, abandoned them in the desert. Alone. With no food and little water, with a dangerous drug coursing through his system, exposed to the elements-- Edith Rodriguez's little boy died. Edith Rodriguez violated the laws of the United States when she crossed the border illegally. She was wrong to violate our border. But all should agree that her son did not deserve to die. Here are the facts: Every 18\1/2\ hours, someone dies trying to cross the border between the United States and Mexico. About a year ago, I asked the Government Accountability Office to study the deaths that take place along America's borders. Today, my office released that study. The results are sobering, shocking, and, I strongly believe, a cause for action. Since 1995, deaths along our borders have doubled. Despite the heroic rescue efforts of the men and women of Customs and Border Protection, things have gotten worse. In 1995, 266 people died trying to cross our borders. Last year, 427 perished. The increases, it appears, stem largely from an increase in deaths from exposure to the elements in the Sonoran Desert in Arizona. Illegal entries, however, have not increased. Quite frankly, it is getting more dangerous to cross our border. Until recently, CBP did not even keep a systematic count of those who died crossing our borders. We still do not have a unified national strategy for reducing the deaths. We still do not know how well our safety efforts work--if they are saving lives or not. We need to do more. The founding document of our Nation, the Declaration of Independence, lists ``life'' first on the list of Government's responsibilities. The overwhelming majority of the people who cross our border do so in search of a better life. They take enormous risks and make enormous investments in hopes of helping their families. Illegal immigration needs to stop. We must defend our borders. We must construct physical barriers, add detention beds, hire personnel, and equip them with better technology. But we have a higher moral obligation to protect the life of every person--every man, woman, and child--who sets foot on American soil. We must do everything in our power to preserve life. That is why I propose the Border Death Reduction Act. I urge my colleagues to support it. The law will implement the GAO's recommendations. It will require CBP to create a strategy for reducing border deaths. It will mandate a full count of deaths along the border. It will impose tough, new penalties on coyotes who abandon their charges, and it will expand the network of rescue beacons that people in trouble can use to call for help. These beacons, I believe, are an absolutely vital link in our border security system. Let me explain. Rescue beacons are devices at prominent locations that individuals can activate when they need help. They are tall polls with lights at the top and radio transmitters inside. People in trouble can activate a beacon to let CBP know that they need help. We know that beacons work: CBP has already saved dozens of people based entirely on beacon alerts. But individuals who activate beacons do not get a free pass. They will, of course, receive necessary medical treatment. But rescued individuals will still be detained and deported like anyone else who violates our borders. Deploying more beacons in the desert will save lives in the desert and simultaneously improve the security of our frontiers. We cannot delay. We should not rest. We must protect the lives of all those who set foot upon our soil. I urge my colleagues to support the Border Death Reduction Act. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, for decades, healthcare analysts and industry experts have wondered whether healthcare should consume 16 percent of our Nation's economic output, as it currently does. By virtually any measure, we spend more on healthcare than any other country in the world. Consider the facts. According to the World Health Organization; we spend twice as much per person on healthcare as Britain and Japan; and we spend nearly 30 percent more than second-ranking Monaco. In the past 5 years alone, the cost of health insurance to companies has nearly doubled--from $4,200 to $8,100 per family. But experts also concur that rising healthcare costs does not mean the quality of healthcare is improving. Just this summer, the Institute of Medicine released the most extensive report ever on medication errors. The results? At least 1.5 million Americans are sickened, injured, or killed each year by errors in prescribing, dispensing, and taking medications. Errors are widespread--on average, a hospital patient is subjected to 1 error each day he or she occupies a hospital bed--and they are costly, at an estimated expense of $3.5 billion per year. We have good reason to question the cost and quality of our healthcare services. That is why, in August, President Bush issued an executive order requiring all Federal agencies with a health insurance program to increase price transparency and provide options promoting quality and efficiency of care. The Executive Order builds on the Federal Govermment's efforts to release Medicare payment information for individual healthcare providers. While this is an important step toward transparency, more can be done. We need a way to analyze that data and make the results of the analysis consumer friendly, so that patients have real information they can use to make better informed healthcare decisions. The bill before us today--of which I am a proud cosponsor--picks up where current Federal efforts leave off. The Medicare Quality Enhancement Act establishes quality transparency in the Medicare Program. It doesn't require anything extra of providers. In fact, CMS is already collecting the data we need--because any provider that accepts Medicare patients must report quality data to CMS. Instead, the bill requires CMS to establish public-private partnerships with Medicare quality reporting organizations, or MQROs. CMS will provide MQROs with data CMS already collects--Medicare enrollment, claims, and survey and assessment data. The MQROs will then perform the analysis. Any entity or provider will be able to make report requests of MQROs, the results of which will be made public. The methodology an MQRO uses to analyze the data will also be made public. And providers can additionally instruct MQROs to use a certain methodology when making a report request. I know many providers are concerned about CMS's capacity and capability to analyze healthcare quality data. In part, that is why this bill requires CMS to contract with MQROs. The Secretary must determine that each MQRO has the research capability to conduct and complete reports as a condition for entering into the contract. MQROs must also demonstrate that they have the experience and expertise to analyze quality data. As an additional contract requirement, each MQRO must comply with Federal privacy regulations to ensure beneficiary confidentiality. Additionally, MQROs must disclose financial interests as a condition to contract. As a transplant surgeon, I understand the concerns and fears providers have. Many providers are worried that we aren't far enough along in terms of quality data collection to be able to analyze it. But we must push the envelope in this area. It is my hope that provider groups will take the lead and request reports using a methodology and standards of quality that represent the best care in each of their fields. Quality transparency is absolutely essential to improving healthcare. Without it, beneficiaries cannot make informed decisions about their healthcare. Consumers already enjoy transparency in other industries. When we buy a new car, we can open an Internet browser and in a matter of moments can make objective side-by-side comparisons of different models--and then we can take them for a test drive. When we need groceries, we pull out the Sunday supermarket ads to see what is on sale and where. And when we furnish our homes, we shop around--comparing style, price, color, quality, warranty, and service. But right now, we can't do that in healthcare. Whether it is a routine checkup or a heart transplant, we have no way of assessing how much bang we are getting for a buck. Only when we institute quality transparency do we empower beneficiaries to make informed decisions about their healthcare. This bill is a great step toward the goal of complete quality transparency. It is a formidable goal; that is why we are starting with something we know--Medicare. Senator Gregg has worked long hours to bring this bill to fruition, and I thank him for his efforts. I hope our colleagues will join us in supporting this important measure.

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions be authorized to hold a hearing during the session of the Senate on Thursday, September 14, 2006, at 10:30 a.m. in SD-430.

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on September 14, 2006, at 10 a.m., to conduct a hearing on ``A Review of the Department of Defense's Report on Predatory Lending Practices Directed at Members of the Armed Forces and Their Dependents.''

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, September 14, at 10 a.m. The purpose of the hearing is to consider the nomination of C. Stephen Allred, of Idaho, to be an Assistant Secretary of the Interior, Vice Rebecca W. Watson, resigned; and Robert W. Johnson, of Nevada, to be Commissioner of Reclamation, Vice John W. Keys, III, resigned.

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Armed Services be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on September 14, 2006, at 10:30 a.m., in closed session to mark up the Military Commissions Act of 2006.

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Indian Affairs be authorized to meet on Thursday, September 14, 2006, at 9:30 a.m. in room 485 of the Russell Senate Office Building to conduct a hearing on the nomination of Carl J. Artman to be Assistant Secretary for Indian Affairs, U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington, DC, to be followed immediately by a business meeting to approve the nomination of Carl J. Artman.

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary be authorized to meet to conduct a markup on Thursday, September 14, 2006, at 9:30 a.m in the Dirksen Senate Office Building, Room 226. Agenda I. Nominations Terrence W. Boyle, to be U.S. Circuit Judge for the Fourth Circuit; William James Haynes II, to be U.S. Circuit Judge for the Fourth Circuit; Peter D. Keisler, to be U.S. Circuit Judge for the District of Columbia Circuit; William Gerry Myers III, to be U.S. Circuit Judge for the Ninth Circuit; Norman Randy Smith, to be U.S. Circuit Judge for the Ninth Circuit; Valerie L. Baker, to be U.S. District Judge for the Central District of California; Francisco Augusto Besosa, to be U.S. District Judge for the District of Puerto Rico; Philip S. Gutierrez, to be U.S. District Judge for the Central District of California; Marcia Morales Howard, to be U.S. District Judge for the Middle District of Florida; John Alfred Jarvey, to be U.S. District Judge for the Southern District of Iowa; and Sara Elizabeth Lioi, to be U.S. District Judge for the Northern District of Ohio. II. Bills S. 2831, Free Flow of Information Act of 2006, Lugar, Specter, Schumer, Graham, Biden, Grassley; S. 155, Gang Prevention and Effective Deterrence Act of 2005, Feinstein, Hatch, Grassley, Cornyn, Kyl, Specter; S. 1845, Circuit Court of Appeals Restructuring and Modernization Act of 2005, Ensign, Kyl; S. 394, OPEN Government Act of 2005, Cornyn, Leahy, Feingold; and S. 2644, Perform Act of 2006, Feinstein, Graham, Biden. III. Other Matters Changes to 18 U.S.C. 2441, War Crimes.

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Special Committee on Aging be authorized to meet Thursday, September 14, 2006 from 10 a.m.-12 p.m. in Dirksen 562 for the purpose of conducting a hearing.

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on Aviation be authorized to hold a hearing at 10 a.m. on Thursday, September 14, 2006 to discuss rural air service.

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that on Thursday, September 14, 2006 at 9:30 a.m. the Subcommittee on Clean Air, Climate Change, and Nuclear Safety be authorized to hold an oversight hearing on the NRC's responsibility and capability for long- and short-term spent fuel storage programs.

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the subcommittee on Federal Financial Management, Government Information, and International Security be authorized to meet on Thursday, September 14, 2006, at 2:30 p.m. for a hearing regarding ``Part Two: Federal Agencies and Conference Spending''.

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I rise today to recognize the month-long celebration beginning today honoring the heritage of Hispanic Americans. Every year, we set aside a month to pay special regard to the contributions of Hispanic Americans. The tradition began nearly 40 years ago, when Congress authorized President Lyndon Johnson to proclaim National Hispanic Heritage Week. Two decades later, President Ronald Reagan expanded the celebration to 4 weeks--today's National Hispanic Heritage Month. While the celebration has begun only recently, Hispanics have always defined America. The history of Europeans in what is now the United States, in fact, begins with the voyage of a Spanish explorer named Ponce de Leon who landed on Florida's west coast in 1521. Since then, Hispanic Americans have infuenced every aspect of our history and culture. Let me discuss just a few: David Glasgow Farragut, a proud Tennessean of Spanish descent, proved the North's most able naval commander during the Civil War. He becamd the first admiral of the U.S. Navy. Severo Ochoa, a Nobel Prize recipient, revolutionized modern medical science when he discovered RNA, ribonucleic acid, one of the chemical building blocks of life. Celia Cruz, a singer, introduced salsa music to the United States through her recordings and performances. Louis and Walter Alverez, both research scientists, originated the once-controversial theory that asteroid impacts can explain the periodic mass extinctions that have shaped the history of life on Earth. Roberto Goizueta, Oscar Hijuelos, Benjamin Cardozo, Alberto Gonzalez, Rita Hayworth, Roberto Clemente--entrepreneurs, artists, public servants, athletes, scientists, scholars--these names stand out, but many others move America forward every day. We cannot name all of the countless heroes who have fought in wars, treated the sick, taught our children, and devoted themselves to public service. Through continuing migration to our shores, Hispanic Americans continue to strengthen American culture. Foods, music, and artistic forms considered unalterably ``foreign'' just a few short years ago have now become firm parts of the American identity. Today, as we begin a month-long celebration of Hispanic hereitage, I join with all Americans in recognizing the invaluable role of Hispanic Americans in shaping and enriching these United States.

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. Reserving the right to object.

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, this morning we will resume debate on the port security bill immediately following the 30-minute period of morning business. We have an agreement for a vote in relation to Senator Reid's amendment to occur at 12:15 today. There is a point of order against that amendment, and therefore the vote is likely to be on a motion to waive the budget relative to that amendment. The managers have done good work on the bill thus far, but we have not had an agreement yet as to when we can finish this security legislation. Therefore, last night I filed a cloture motion on the bill so that we will conclude the bill this week. I have indicated we are willing to vitiate that vote if an agreement is reached that will bring the Senate to a reasonable conclusion on this port security measure. In the meantime, we will continue to work on amendments, with rollcall votes each day. I also remind Senators that under the rule, Senators have until 1 p.m. today in order to file timely first-degree amendments.