Bill Frist

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. I ask unanimous consent the bill be read a third time and passed, the motion to reconsider be laid on the table, and any statements be printed in the Record.

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. I ask unanimous consent that notwithstanding passage of H.R. 5441, amendments Nos. 4642, 4570, and 4578 be further modified with the changes at the desk.

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. I understand there is a bill at the desk due for a second reading.

Mr. FRIST. In order to place the bill on the calendar under the provisions of rule XIV, I object to further proceeding.

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, today we have been debating the stem cell research bills. That debate will continue at 10 o'clock tomorrow morning, again the time alternating between the two sides. Senators are reminded that we will have votes on these bills tomorrow afternoon starting at 3:45. Each bill does require 60 votes for passage. These votes tomorrow afternoon will be the first votes of the week. Following that stem cell debate, we will be considering the Water Resources Development Act. We hope to complete consideration of that bill on Wednesday afternoon.

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. 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. I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it stand in adjournment until 9:45 a.m. on Tuesday, July 18. 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 proceed to a period of morning business with the time equally divided until 10 a.m.; further, I ask unanimous consent that at 10 a.m. the Senate proceed to the stem cell bills under the previous order. I further ask unanimous consent that the Senate stand in recess from 12:30 to 2:15 to accommodate the weekly policy luncheons.

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate immediately proceed to executive session to consider the following nominations on today's Executive Calendar: No. 735, No. 736, and No. 761.

Mr. FRIST. I further ask unanimous consent the nominations be confirmed en bloc, a motion to reconsider be laid on the table, the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action, and the Senate then return to legislative session.

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Foreign Relations Committee be discharged from further consideration and the Senate now proceed to S. Res. 500.

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, 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 unanimous consent that the Senate stand in adjournment under the previous order.

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, we will have a period for the transaction of morning business this morning. Senators are reminded that we will begin the stem cell debate on Monday. Last night, we reached an agreement to allocate debate time in blocks, alternating back and forth between the majority and minority sides of the aisle. We will begin that debate on Monday at 12:30 p.m. and continue through Tuesday afternoon. Then we will proceed to votes on those bills--as a reminder, we have three bills and each of those three bills will have a 60-vote threshold--beginning at 3:45 p.m. on Tuesday. Those will be the first votes of the week. The issue of stem cell research is one this body has debated in the past, but what I hope we have been able to structure, in consultation with the Democratic side of the aisle, is a way to have a very good debate on what is a very complicated issue, both from a science standpoint and from an ethical and moral standpoint. It really does cause and force, in some ways, each of us as 100 Members of this body-- but equally the American people--to go back and address an issue which is the first major moral, ethical, and scientific dilemma, challenge before us in the 21st century. And it is a tough issue. It is something, as a physician, as a scientist, I have spent a lot of time with, as a transplant surgeon when we are moving tissues around all the time--a heart, a lung, which I routinely transplanted before coming here. It is a tough issue. It involves issues of life and death and promises of new cures for diabetes, Alzheimer's, Parkinson's. We have been prone, in this body and every legislative body, to overstatement, overpromising. I am very hopeful that the debate, the way we have it structured and giving people time to prepare for it, will help educate this body, help educate the American people on an issue that is not going to go away--not just stem cells but as we look at the various challenges that are opened by the Human Genome Project, a very successful project 15 years ago, finished about 5 years ago on this floor--and opens up all concerns of ethical debates. No matter whether people like it, no matter how hard it is, it is very important that this body become very comfortable in dealing with issues of advancing science and the great progress, the new opportunities we can make, whether it is addressing our 60 percent dependence on foreign sources of oil or looking at the great advances in health care and capturing the hopes and promise of new therapies. Whether it is genetic, biological stem cells, or the like means, we are going to have to do a good job in educating ourselves, developing that understanding, being comfortable talking about advances in science. Science used to advance like this, then this, and in the 21st century, science is advancing like this. We, representing the American people, have that responsibility to define that advancing science and where it crosses with ethics and morality. It is going to be a challenging debate, a good debate. I think the American people will pay attention, and I know our colleagues are working very hard on that particular issue. Last night in closing, I proposed a unanimous consent agreement on the Water Resources Development Act, the so-called WRDA Act, a bill I feel very strongly we do need to bring to the floor. Chairman Inhofe has done a tremendous job in packaging the bill so that we can address the various issues with, I believe, nine amendments in the unanimous consent request. The Democratic leader has objected to that request, but I am very hopeful we will be able to address that agreement later today.

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, let me comment on one other issue before yielding the floor. It has to do with medicine again. It has to do with an issue which is very close to my heart, which I first saw in 1981 before I ever thought about getting into politics or public policy or running for the Senate. I first saw this particular issue in the early 1980s. Nobody had seen it in this country until 1981. Nobody had seen it before 1981, which is not that long ago, 25 years ago, but since that time, it killed 1 person, 3 people, 10 people, 1,000 people, 1 million people, 5 million people, 10 million people, 20 million people--25 million people have died since I first saw it; that is, HIV/ AIDS, a tiny virus. You can't see it, touch it, taste it. We didn't have it in America. We didn't know what it was, and then it hit. Now 25 years later, 25 million people around the globe have died from that little, tiny virus. We don't have a cure for it yet. We don't have a vaccine for it yet, but we have made huge medical progress over the last 10 years. Two days ago, the FDA announced that they had approved the world's first single-pill, once-a-day HIV/AIDS treatment. The bill combines three FDA-approved drugs into a single dose. The impact on HIV/AIDS patients will be profound. It wasn't that long ago that patients had to take 20 pills a day and then 10 pills a day to control the virus, this little tiny virus, not to get rid of it totally but to keep it down so it doesn't have its ravaging impact on the human body. Some pills you have to take with food, some at 8 o'clock, some at 2 o'clock, some at 6 o'clock, some at 10 o'clock. Some people say it is not that big a deal; it is lifesaving. It is a big deal. If you are a patient having to do it or a physician taking care of a patient, it is impossible to comply with that regimen long term. It is inconvenient, it disrupts life, and now it is combined into one pill. By the end of next week, people will be able to control the virus with one pill. Not everybody is going to switch to it, but it opens up huge opportunities. It is good news not just in that it simplifies the prescription regimen of HIV/AIDS patients, but to quote a fellow doctor who is the current Acting Commissioner of the FDA, Andrew von Eschenbach: Compliance with therapy is as important as the therapy itself for a successful outcome. To have a successful outcome, HIV/AIDS patients have to take at least 95 percent of their pills or the treatment doesn't take. It isn't as if you can take 2 or 3 of the 15 pills and it will work. You have to really take just about all the pills. Only one pill a day increases the likelihood of a patient meeting that threshold. That one pill will do the trick. Not only does improved compliance keep HIV/AIDS patients healthy, but it helps slow down that emergence and transmission of strains of virus that have become drug-resistant. The drugs you take over a period of time--the virus is smart, it is cagey, it moves around, and it will develop resistance to those drugs as it comes in. As it gets accustomed to the drugs, the virus will change. Scientists hail this as a medical breakthrough for good reason. Wednesday's announcement approving the new pill was timely. Yesterday, the CSIS Task Force on HIV/AIDS hosted a conference to examine the sustainability of United States-led efforts in combating the virus. I have cochaired the CSIS task force along with my colleague, Senator Russ Feingold. I had the opportunity, as did Senator Feingold, to deliver opening remarks to that conference. Looking back over the 25 years, as we did yesterday, I recalled the same story I just told: 25 million people have died on our watch, over my lifetime as a physician. As recently as 5 years ago, less than $1 billion was spent by the world. If we put together all the world's resources, today it is more than eight times that--eight times that--in just 5 years. Today about 40 million people worldwide, including a million people in this country--a million Americans--are HIV positive. That means they have the virus in them, and it can be detected. Over half of all people living with HIV/AIDS or HIV in the world live in a continent I go to every year, and that is the continent of Africa. Ten years ago, in 1996, I went to Sub-Saharan Africa to Tanzania, to Kenya, in that whole central eastern region of Africa where I do medical mission work. That became an annual trip after 1996. Nothing quite prepares you for walking through a village in an AIDS-afflicted part of Africa. You see older people, and then you see very young people, but you don't see--there is like a big doughnut hole there--you don't see middle-aged people walking around. Why? Because that virus has ravaged traditionally the most productive part of society. They include teachers, police, law enforcement, wage earners, the people who are out moving, herding the animals, the people who are out growing the crops, the people who make up the strongest and most productive fabric of society. The deadly disease has left countless children as orphans. It has disrupted the social framework of many communities. It has challenged the infrastructure and stability of many nations in ways that are totally unprecedented and we just haven't seen in history. I outlined my vision at the conference yesterday for sustaining momentum and winning this war on HIV/AIDS, and already, with the successful development and approval of this single-pill therapy, we have seen how one piece of the vision that I put out yesterday--unity-- is reaching across differences and we can reshape our approach to HIV/ AIDS. The breakthrough this week was made possible because of collaboration, partnership, a very unusual partnership, a collaborative venture by two drug companies that normally are competing. So that is a breakthrough that may not be readily apparent, but those of us who follow health, the pharmaceutical industry, and public health, this is a huge breakthrough. Two drug companies set aside their competition, they set aside their concerns about the bottom line to work together and do what we need to do throughout health care, which we don't do today. As we look to health care 20 years from now, we have to do it, and that is put the patient at the center, put the patient first. That is what these two drug companies did yesterday. I commend the makers of this single-pill therapy. I hope this does start a new trend. I think the computer industry learned this collaborative effort a long time ago, and I am pleased that the pharmaceutical industry is catching on to it, as demonstrated today. I will close with that final thought because it does remind me how important it is to put the patient first. They did this yesterday by developing this pill, having the FDA to approve this particular pill. We need to do that throughout our health care system. We do have a health care system that is chaotic, in terms of its organization. It is not really even a system; it is more of a sector. If we can go back to that principle of putting the patient first, putting the patient in the center, we can weed out the waste and weed out the inefficiency and lower the cost and make a very optimistic future for our health care system.

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I see none of my colleagues on the floor at this juncture who want to speak, so I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I will soon ask for several unanimous consent requests and then probably go back into a quorum call for little bit, and I will have a final statement on stem cells that will be very brief. Mr. President, as I mentioned this morning, there has been an objection to proceeding on the unanimous consent request of last night, or late yesterday afternoon, on the Water Resources Development Act. At this point, I want to turn my attention to that. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that at a time to be determined by the majority leader, in consultation with the Democratic leader, on Tuesday July 18, the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 93, S. 728. I further ask that the committee-reported amendments be withdrawn and the managers' substitute amendment at the desk be agreed to as original text for the purposes of further amendment and that the only other amendments in order be the following, the text of which is at the desk, with the specified time agreements equally divided in the usual form: Boxer, Folsom Dam, 1 hour; Feingold-McCain, mitigation standards, 1 hour; Feingold-McCain, peer review, 4 hours; Inhofe-Bond, independent reviews, 1 hour; Inhofe, fiscal transparency, 1 hour; McCain-Feingold, prioritization report, 2 hours; McCain-Feingold, chief of engineers, 1 hour; Nelson of Florida, water projects, 1 hour; Specter, Federal hopper dredges, 1 hour. I ask unanimous consent that there be 2 hours of general debate on the bill, and that following the disposition of amendments and the use or yielding back of time, the bill, as amended, be read the third time and the Senate proceed to the consideration of Calendar No. 166, H.R. 2864, the House companion, and that all after the enacting clause be stricken, and the text of S. 728, as amended, be inserted in lieu thereof; that the bill be read the third time and the Senate proceed to a vote on passage, and S. 728 be returned to the Senate calendar. I further ask that no points of order be waived by virtue of this agreement.

Mr. FRIST

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

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I understand there was an inadvertent clerical error in Chairman Inhofe's statement in the Congressional Record last night. I ask unanimous consent that the correct statement be printed in the Congressional Record at this point and that the permanent Record reflect this correction.

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I thank my colleagues, especially Chairman Inhofe, for, as I mentioned this morning, doing an outstanding job in putting together a package, a mechanism by which we can develop this important water resources development bill. It is a very important bill which affects the United States, our economy, our infrastructure, in a very dramatic way.

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, last week, on the fourth of July, a day when Americans across the Nation were outside barbecuing, watching fireworks, and celebrating the 230th anniversary of our independence, North Korea launched seven long- and medium-range missiles into the Sea of Japan. One of the missiles, the Taepodong-2, has a potential range of approximately 9,000 miles--placing the United States well within reach of attack by North Korea. Kim Jong II's regime took this dangerous and provocative action despite repeated warnings not to do so from the United States, its close neighbors and participants in the six-party talks, and many others in the international community. Last week's missile launches reminded us yet again of the threat posed by Kim Jong II's regime. North Korea's pursuit of nuclear weapons and its possession of long- range missiles that could potentially strike our Nation is a grave threat to the security of the American people--and to peace and stability in East Asia. Since November 2005, North Korea has boycotted the six-party talks aimed at ending the regime's illicit nuclear weapons program. The combination of nuclear weapons and long-range missiles capable of threatening the American people is a threat that the United States should not tolerate. For these reasons, I rise this morning to introduce the North Korea Nonproliferation Act of 2006. This legislation will add North Korea to the list of countries currently covered by the Iran and Syria Nonproliferation Act. Under this bill, the President would be required to submit a report to Congress every 6 months listing all foreign persons believed to have transferred to or acquired from North Korea materials that could contribute to the production of missiles, nuclear weapons, and other weapons of mass destruction. This legislation also authorizes the President to impose sanctions on all foreign persons identified on this list. These sanctions include prohibitions on U.S. Government procurement from such persons and on the issuance of U.S. Government export licenses for exports to such persons. Ultimately, the bill will lead to U.S. sanctions on foreign persons and foreign companies that transfer missile- and WMD-related items to North Korea, or that buy such items from North Korea. The U.S. is already doing this with respect to transfers of these items to and from Iran and Syria under the Iran and Syria Nonproliferation Act. The time has come for us to treat transfers of these items to North Korea no less seriously than we already treat transfers of these same items to Iran and Syria. We currently are working with our allies and partners at the U.N. Security Council to send a strong and unified message to the North Koreans that their latest provocations are unacceptable. Japan has introduced a resolution that would prohibit the very same transfers to North Korea that this bill would sanction. However, some at the UN, particularly China, are opposing the Japanese resolution. In fact, China and Russia have introduced a competing resolution that does not prohibit the transfer to North Korea of sensitive items that could contribute to that country's weapons programs--which is the critical element of the resolution that has been offered by Japan and supported by the U.S., the U.K., France, and others. This bill will reinforce the crucial elements of Japan's Security Council resolution if that resolution is adopted. It will also serve as an alternative to that resolution in the event that China vetoes or otherwise sidetracks it. The United States cannot allow Kim Jong II and the North Korean regime to obtain additional materials for its WMD and missile programs. If the U.N. Security Council fails to act, the United States must fulfill its responsibility to protect the American homeland from the North Korean threat. These items in the hands of Kim Jong II pose a direct threat to the American people, the people of the region, and peace and security in East Asia. If we are in earnest about protecting the American homeland, then it is imperative that we prevent the North Korean regime from acquiring these dangerous materials. I thank Chairman Lugar, as well as Senators Inouye and Brownback, for cosponsoring this bill, and I urge the rest of my Senate colleagues to support it. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I now ask for a second reading, and in order to place the bill on the calendar under the provisions of rule XIV, I object to my own request.

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I understand there is a bill at the desk, and I ask for its first reading.

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, last week, on the fourth of July, a day when Americans across the Nation were outside barbecuing, watching fireworks, and celebrating the 230th anniversary of our independence, North Korea launched seven long- and medium-range missiles into the Sea of Japan. One of the missiles, the Taepodong-2, has a potential range of approximately 9,000 miles--placing the United States well within reach of attack by North Korea. Kim Jong II's regime took this dangerous and provocative action despite repeated warnings not to do so from the United States, its close neighbors and participants in the six-party talks, and many others in the international community. Last week's missile launches reminded us yet again of the threat posed by Kim Jong II's regime. North Korea's pursuit of nuclear weapons and its possession of long- range missiles that could potentially strike our Nation is a grave threat to the security of the American people--and to peace and stability in East Asia. Since November 2005, North Korea has boycotted the six-party talks aimed at ending the regime's illicit nuclear weapons program. The combination of nuclear weapons and long-range missiles capable of threatening the American people is a threat that the United States should not tolerate. For these reasons, I rise this morning to introduce the North Korea Nonproliferation Act of 2006. This legislation will add North Korea to the list of countries currently covered by the Iran and Syria Nonproliferation Act. Under this bill, the President would be required to submit a report to Congress every 6 months listing all foreign persons believed to have transferred to or acquired from North Korea materials that could contribute to the production of missiles, nuclear weapons, and other weapons of mass destruction. This legislation also authorizes the President to impose sanctions on all foreign persons identified on this list. These sanctions include prohibitions on U.S. Government procurement from such persons and on the issuance of U.S. Government export licenses for exports to such persons. Ultimately, the bill will lead to U.S. sanctions on foreign persons and foreign companies that transfer missile- and WMD-related items to North Korea, or that buy such items from North Korea. The U.S. is already doing this with respect to transfers of these items to and from Iran and Syria under the Iran and Syria Nonproliferation Act. The time has come for us to treat transfers of these items to North Korea no less seriously than we already treat transfers of these same items to Iran and Syria. We currently are working with our allies and partners at the U.N. Security Council to send a strong and unified message to the North Koreans that their latest provocations are unacceptable. Japan has introduced a resolution that would prohibit the very same transfers to North Korea that this bill would sanction. However, some at the UN, particularly China, are opposing the Japanese resolution. In fact, China and Russia have introduced a competing resolution that does not prohibit the transfer to North Korea of sensitive items that could contribute to that country's weapons programs--which is the critical element of the resolution that has been offered by Japan and supported by the U.S., the U.K., France, and others. This bill will reinforce the crucial elements of Japan's Security Council resolution if that resolution is adopted. It will also serve as an alternative to that resolution in the event that China vetoes or otherwise sidetracks it. The United States cannot allow Kim Jong II and the North Korean regime to obtain additional materials for its WMD and missile programs. If the U.N. Security Council fails to act, the United States must fulfill its responsibility to protect the American homeland from the North Korean threat. These items in the hands of Kim Jong II pose a direct threat to the American people, the people of the region, and peace and security in East Asia. If we are in earnest about protecting the American homeland, then it is imperative that we prevent the North Korean regime from acquiring these dangerous materials. I thank Chairman Lugar, as well as Senators Inouye and Brownback, for cosponsoring this bill, and I urge the rest of my Senate colleagues to support it. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of S. Res. 530, introduced earlier today by Senator Biden.

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I further ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate, and that any statements relating to the measure be printed in the Record.