Peter Fitzgerald

Mr. FITZGERALD

Mr. FITZGERALD. Mr. President, I rise today to recognize the week of October 6 as National 4-H Youth Development Program Week. The need to provide a quality education and opportunities for our youth is ever-present. In order to ensure that our country continues to progress, we must encourage our youth to take active roles in their schools and their communities. One hundred years ago, groups of concerned community members organized boys' and girls' agricultural clubs to provide better agricultural education to young people. These clubs adopted a model of learning by doing, and their popularity continued to grow. By addressing the needs of the local community, these small boys and girls clubs rapidly evolved into the National 4-H Program that now can be found in communities across America. Today, 7 million youth and 50 million 4-H alumni participate in over 1,000 4-H programs, ranging from robotics and biotechnology to skateboarding and agriculture. These programs provide opportunities for youth to participate in innovative programs through which they can develop valuable, lifelong skills. During my tenure as a U.S. Senator, I have enjoyed meeting with 4-H leaders and members throughout the State of Illinois, and have seen first-hand how the 4-H program has changed the lives of our young people. I have also appreciated the extraordinary dedication that 4-H leaders bring to their clubs. It was with pride that I cosponsored the resolution submitted by Senator Inhofe and Senator Stabenow declaring the week of October 6 as ``National 4-H Youth Development Program Week.'' I hope that the 4-H program will build on the successes of the last one hundred years and hold true to the 4-H motto ``to make the best better'' in the years to come.

Mr. FITZGERALD

Mr. FITZGERALD. Mr. President, I introduce a bill to reinstate a license surrendered to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission that authorized the construction of a hydroelectric power plant in Carlyle, Illinois. In order to facilitate the construction of the hydroelectric power plant, the bill also contains a provision that extends the deadline for beginning construction of the plant. Carlyle, IL, is a small community of 3,406 people in Southwestern Illinois, fifty miles east of St. Louis. Carlyle is situated on the Kaskaskia River at the southern tip of Carlyle Lake, which was formed in 1967 when the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers completed construction of a dam on the river. Carlyle Lake is 15 miles long and 3\1/2\ miles wide--the largest man-made lake in Illinois. When the Army Corps of Engineers constructed the dam, it failed to build a hydroelectric power plant to capitalize on the energy available from water flowing through the dam. A hydroelectric power facility in Carlyle would produce 4,000 kilowatts of power and provide a renewable energy source for surrounding communities. Furthermore, the environmental impact of adding a hydroelectric facility would be minimal, and such a facility, located at a site near the existing dam, would not produce harmful emissions. In 1997, Southwestern Electric Cooperative obtained a license from the FERC to begin work on a hydroelectric project in Carlyle. In 2000, Southwestern Electric Cooperative surrendered their license because they were unable to begin the project in the required time period. The City of Carlyle is interested in constructing the hydroelectric power plant and is seeking to obtain Southwestern Electric Cooperative's license. The bill I am introducing today is required for the construction of the facility. Legislation is necessary to authorize FERC to reinstate Southwestern Electric Cooperative's surrendered license. Because there is not enough time remaining on the license to conduct studies, produce a design for the facility, and begin construction of the project, the bill includes a provision that allows FERC to extend the applicable deadline. This legislation is an easy and environmentally safe approach to meeting the energy needs of Southwestern Illinois. Please join me in supporting this measure to provide a clean alternative energy source for this part of the Midwest. I ask unanimous consent that the bill be printed in the Record following the conclusion of my remarks.

Mr. FITZGERALD

Mr. FITZGERALD. Mr. President, I introduce a bill to reinstate a license surrendered to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission that authorized the construction of a hydroelectric power plant in Carlyle, Illinois. In order to facilitate the construction of the hydroelectric power plant, the bill also contains a provision that extends the deadline for beginning construction of the plant. Carlyle, IL, is a small community of 3,406 people in Southwestern Illinois, fifty miles east of St. Louis. Carlyle is situated on the Kaskaskia River at the southern tip of Carlyle Lake, which was formed in 1967 when the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers completed construction of a dam on the river. Carlyle Lake is 15 miles long and 3\1/2\ miles wide--the largest man-made lake in Illinois. When the Army Corps of Engineers constructed the dam, it failed to build a hydroelectric power plant to capitalize on the energy available from water flowing through the dam. A hydroelectric power facility in Carlyle would produce 4,000 kilowatts of power and provide a renewable energy source for surrounding communities. Furthermore, the environmental impact of adding a hydroelectric facility would be minimal, and such a facility, located at a site near the existing dam, would not produce harmful emissions. In 1997, Southwestern Electric Cooperative obtained a license from the FERC to begin work on a hydroelectric project in Carlyle. In 2000, Southwestern Electric Cooperative surrendered their license because they were unable to begin the project in the required time period. The City of Carlyle is interested in constructing the hydroelectric power plant and is seeking to obtain Southwestern Electric Cooperative's license. The bill I am introducing today is required for the construction of the facility. Legislation is necessary to authorize FERC to reinstate Southwestern Electric Cooperative's surrendered license. Because there is not enough time remaining on the license to conduct studies, produce a design for the facility, and begin construction of the project, the bill includes a provision that allows FERC to extend the applicable deadline. This legislation is an easy and environmentally safe approach to meeting the energy needs of Southwestern Illinois. Please join me in supporting this measure to provide a clean alternative energy source for this part of the Midwest. I ask unanimous consent that the bill be printed in the Record following the conclusion of my remarks.

Mr. FITZGERALD

Mr. FITZGERALD. I thank the Chair. Mr. President, I would like to respond to what my colleague from Illinois just said. I think there are a number of points that were glossed over. I do oppose Senator Durbin's bill with respect to O'Hare. Mr. Durbin said it is necessary to pass this bill in order to expand O'Hare Airport. But I would point out that never in the history of our country, that I am aware of, has any airport in this country had a special bill mandating that the FAA approve its particular expansion plans. The fact is, if Mayor Daley of Chicago wants to expand O'Hare Airport, he can simply file an application with the FAA to expand O'Hare Airport. The trouble is, if that were the case--if Mayor Daley were simply to file an application similar to all the other airports in the country--his application would have to be judged on the mere merits. So Senator Durbin and Mayor Daley came up with the idea of drafting a statute. They put that into bill form and are now asking Congress to pass it. The purpose of that bill is twofold: No. 1, the bill would straightjacket the FAA so that they would have no choice but to approve Mayor Daley's specific runway design at O'Hare Airport. I could go on for a very long time. But maybe I will save that for a later date to tell you why it is in fact a bad runway design that Mayor Daley is trying to mandate in Federal law. The bill of Senator Durbin--I don't care what the committee report says--says that the FAA shall implement a Federal policy in favor of approving six parallel runways running in the east-west direction at O'Hare Airport. It says east-west. It is very specific. I take issue with my colleague's comments or suggestions that the FAA could change it. In fact, it would be illegal for the FAA to reposition those runways in a northwest-southeast direction. Mayor Daley's and Senator Durbin's exact runway design will be locked into Federal statutory law if my colleague's bill passes. That is one of the objectives my colleague has. He wants to straightjacket the FAA, put a gun to the FAA's head, and force them to approve a bad runway design that has never been reviewed by any Federal aviation expert. It has never been tested in any modeling. In fact, it appears to be the back-of-a-napkin design. Mayor Daley was before the Senate Commerce Committee, and he admitted that the city of Chicago had never itself done any studies to back up that design. There is another goal my colleague is trying to accomplish with S. 2039. Right now, the city of Chicago has the power to condemn lands around O'Hare Airport and communities around O'Hare Airport, provided Mayor Daley gets a permit from the State of Illinois to do that. Senator Durbin's bill would remove the requirement that Mayor Daley get a permit from the State before he condemns the communities around O'Hare. They cannot pass legislation in the State senate that would get rid of the permit requirement. So they have decided to come to Congress in Washington and to strip away the State's law and permit requirement at the Federal level. If my colleague's bill passes, that will mean Mayor Daley could condemn all the communities around O'Hare without getting a permit from anybody. He would have an unfettered ability to condemn properties in communities that are outside the city of Chicago. Imagine if the mayor of Minneapolis could go willy-nilly and condemn communities all around Minneapolis. Imagine what the communities around Minneapolis would think. I think the State legislature was wise in imposing a requirement that the mayor of Chicago, before he goes out and condemns communities around his city, get a permit from the State of Illinois. I think the Federal Government would unbalance that wise State law if we were to remove that permit requirement. If one person had the ability to willy-nilly condemn all parts of the Chicago area around O'Hare Airport, that would literally give the mayor of Chicago unfettered license to run over anybody he wanted at any time he wanted. I don't think this body should be part of conferring that kind of unfettered ability to run over people on the mayor of Chicago. There are delays at O'Hare Airport right now. That is no doubt true. I stood right here 2 years ago and warned Congress not to lift the delay controls at O'Hare Airport. From 1969 to 1999--for 30 years--the FAA had delay controls at O'Hare Airport so that the airlines didn't schedule more flights than the airport had the capacity to handle. In 1999, Congress took off the delay controls, allowing the airlines to schedule more flights than O'Hare had the capacity to handle. I warned that we would have horrible delays if we lifted those delay controls. That happened. There were interim studies by the FAA which showed that if the delay controls at O'Hare were lifted, delays would go up exponentially, and they have. In my judgment, that was a deliberate attempt by United Airlines and American Airlines to cause delays at O'Hare and to build pressure to further expand O'Hare in an attempt to block a third airport which has been needed in Chicago for nearly 30 years. That is what we now see. I also note that while Senator Durbin's legislation would require the FAA, or force, or command the FAA to approve a runway expansion plan at O'Hare that would increase the capacity of the runways by 78 percent, at the same time the plan is to build new terminals which would only add 12 new gates. This is a very bizarre plan that Congress is entering into. We are going to expand runway capacity by 78 percent, but we are only going to add 12 new gates. That really means that once runway capacity is expanded at O'Hare, it will be possible under this plan to land a plane but you will have nowhere to park it. It doesn't make any sense. It is not appropriate for Congress to be wresting control of airport design from the FAA and curtailing the FAA's discretion. We should leave the FAA's discretion intact. If Senator Durbin believes his runway design for O'Hare Airport has merit, then he should file an application with the FAA and see if the FAA approves it. He should not seek an end-run around the rules that all the other airports in the country abide by, nor should this body be part of stripping away the State of Illinois' requirement that the mayor of the city of Chicago get a permit before he condemns properties and communities that are outside the city of Chicago. It is not right to give the mayor of Chicago unfettered ability to run over anyone he wants at any time he wants. S. 2039 is an unfortunate piece of legislation. I will do everything I can to prevent its passage. I note one good development. The House of Representatives took this bill up in just the last couple of days--I believe on Wednesday--a House companion bill to S. 2039. The House committee stripped out the language that had the effect of putting a straightjacket around the FAA and commanding the FAA to approve a specific runway design at O'Hare Airport. Even the House committee recognizes the impropriety of Congress putting a gun to the head of the FAA and forcing them to approve a specific runway design. The House legislation simply allows Chicago to file a plan with the FAA and to be considered the same way any other airport expansion program or proposal is considered anywhere else in the country. Unfortunately, however, the House legislation does have the language giving the mayor of the city of Chicago unfettered condemnation authority, which I think is, as I pointed out earlier, a big mistake. So with that, I do look forward to the debate. I am sure the debate will be coming. And if I cannot defeat this legislation, I ultimately want to change or modify it to make it less egregious than it now is. In its current form, it is such an egregious piece of legislation that I think it would be inappropriate for our Senate to devote time to it when we have Medicare prescription drug issues, homeland security, and 13 appropriations bills we still have not addressed. With that, Mr. President, I thank this body for affording me this time to speak. I yield the floor and wish all my colleagues a good Fourth of July recess. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. FITZGERALD. I object.

Mr. FITZGERALD

Mr. FITZGERALD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. FITZGERALD

Mr. FITZGERALD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. FITZGERALD

Mr. FITZGERALD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. FITZGERALD

Mr. FITZGERALD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. FITZGERALD

Mr. FITZGERALD. Mr. President, I rise today to detail some of the benefits of trade promotion authority to American agriculture. Our President, regardless of party, has not had trade negotiating authority since 1994. While other countries have been busy negotiating trade agreements, the world's superpower has been sitting on the sidelines. Today, over 150 trade agreements exist worldwide; the United States is party to only three. This disparity must be remedied, but without trade promotion authority, U.S. exporters and our nation's farmers may be left stuck in the mud. The question is not whether the U.S. should have free trade or no free trade. The question is, will the U.S. participate in the world economy or will we be left behind? TPA is critical to the administration's credibility at the negotiating table. Without TPA, our negotiators may not even get a seat at the table, much less have the opportunity to negotiate vigorously for our national interest. With 96 percent of consumers living outside the United States, the absence of negotiating authority is a price we cannot afford to pay. One third of U.S. farm acres is planted for export, 25 percent of gross farm income is export dependent, and over 12 million U.S. jobs depend on exports. Nearly 100 commodity and agricultural groups and a bipartisan group of ten former U.S. Secretaries of Agriculture support Trade Promotion Authority. Where would American agriculture be without international trade? Last year, U.S. agricultural exports totaled $51 billion. This year, federal officials expect this number to grow to $53.5 billion, an agricultural trade surplus of $14.5 billion. Can we find an additional $14.5 billion a year in the federal budget to offset these losses? According to the USDA, U.S. agriculture is 2\1/2\ times more trade dependent than the general economy. American agriculture needs trade promotion authority to reduce worldwide tariffs. While the average tariff assessed by the United States on agricultural products is less than 5 percent, the average agricultural tariff assessed by other countries exceeds 60 percent. As a Senator from Illinois, I represent a big agricultural state with total cash farm receipts totaling $7 billion in the year 2000. With a 42 percent reliance on agricultural exports, Illinois ranks sixth with agricultural exports of $3 billion. My State's top agricultural exports include--soybeans and soybean products at $1.1 billion, feed grains and feed grain products at $946 million, live animals and red meats at $277 million, and wheat and wheat products at $124 million. When it comes to Illinois agriculture, open markets and trade promotion authority are of tantamount importance. Illinois is the largest soybean producing state in the nation. Under the Uruguay Round, South Korea is required to reduce its tariffs on soybean oil by 14.5 percent from 1995 to 2004. USDA has reported that this ``tariff reduction has supported a threefold increase in export volume.'' Illinois is also the fourth largest pork producing State in the Nation. Since the Uruguay Round agreement went into effect, U.S. pork exports have increased by almost 90 percent in volume and approximately 80 percent in value from 1994 levels. Additionally, Illinois ranks second in corn production. While Brazil, Chile, Paraguay, and Uruguay can trade corn with Argentina duty free, U.S. corn is assessed an eleven percent import tax. Voting against fast-track authority means you endorse the status quo of high tariffs and limited access for U.S. goods, while voting for fast-track gives the administration the tools needed to remedy some of these egregious inequities.

Mr. FITZGERALD

Mr. FITZGERALD. Mr. President, today I pay tribute to the late Stuart R. Paddock, editor emeritus, publisher emeritus, and owner of the suburban Chicago newspaper, the Daily Herald. The Daily Herald, I am proud to say, is my hometown paper. A respected businessman, community leader, and World War II veteran, Mr. Paddock served the Daily Herald for nearly 65 years, during which time he transformed a struggling tri-weekly paper into Illinois' third largest daily newspaper. Mr. Paddock died last week at the age of 86. Stuart Paddock's career with the Daily Herald began inauspiciously as a ``printer's devil,'' the person responsible for pouring molten lead into molds for use in linotype. After graduating from Knox College and serving as a company commander in Europe during World War II, Mr. Paddock rejoined the newspaper in 1946. By 1948, he had been named vice president and board director. In 1970, just 2 years after assuming the Herald's top leadership position, he overcame fierce competition from other publications and established the Herald as a 5-day-a-week paper. For his hard work and dedication, Stuart Paddock earned the respect not only of Daily Herald readers and employees, but of his staunchest competitors. As the Chicago Tribune wrote, ``Stuart R. Paddock Jr. put `daily' in Daily Herald.'' The Herald enjoyed enormous success in the ensuing years, growing from a circulation of 11,800 in 1970 to nearly 130,000 by 1994. The Herald's success was so remarkable for a suburban paper that the Chicago Tribune proclaimed Stuart Paddock ``the Sam Walton of suburban journalism.'' Throughout his career, Mr. Paddock was active in the Illinois Press Association, the Cook County Suburban Publishers Association, the Newspaper Committee for a Free and Competitive Press, and numerous other organizations. In recognition of his outstanding professional accomplishments, Mr. Paddock was inducted into the Chicago Area Entrepreneurship Hall of Fame in 2001. Despite his success as a visionary and leader, Stuart Paddock, affectionately called ``Stu'' by his employees, never lost his sense of commitment to the family he represented and the readers he served. When the Herald's spectacular growth sparked lucrative offers from potential buyers of the paper, he respectfully declined, choosing instead to keep the paper a family business with strong ties to local communities. I knew Mr. Paddock as a man of integrity and vision. He was a gentleman, in every sense of the word. He is beloved by the communities and people that knew him best, and will leave a remarkable void as a civic leader and patriarch of the Paddock and Daily Herald family. In paying tribute to Stuart Paddock, we honor a groundbreaking journalist, a gentleman, and a great American.

Mr. FITZGERALD

Mr. FITZGERALD. I emphasize this amendment would in no way impair States that incinerate their waste from continuing to do so. In fact, Illinois has waste incineration. What we are saying with this amendment is we should not be promoting, with Federal incentives or subsidies, waste incineration. It is not a renewable form of energy. It is not a clean form of energy. In fact, it spews terrible, harmful pollutants such as dioxins and mercury into the air. The ash produced by waste incineration is very environmentally harmful. This amendment simply says we will not have a Federal program to promote waste incineration, and no State would be prevented from continuing to burn garbage. We would not be promoting it with a Federal policy. I thank my colleagues for their time.

Mr. FITZGERALD. I ask unanimous consent for an additional minute to reply to the distinguished Senator from Florida.

Mr. FITZGERALD. Madam President, my amendment removes subsidies and incentives currently in the pending bill for garbage incinerators. Many of my colleagues may not realize it, but built into this energy bill is the promotion of more waste incineration around the country by defining waste incinerators as a form of renewable energy. Waste incineration is not a form of renewable energy. It is not really renewable, and it certainly isn't clean and environmentally friendly in the way of wind or solar power energy. The Daschle substitute, which is now pending, defines garbage incineration as renewable energy. Garbage incineration is, therefore, eligible for all the incentives--or what amounts to subsidies, I would say--as though it were a clean and renewable source of energy. My amendment removes the subsidies and incentives for garbage incineration by excluding solid waste incineration from the bill's definition of renewable energy. I tell my colleagues that it would be, in my judgment, a very serious mistake to allow the bill to leave this Chamber with an incentive for waste incinerators all over the country. Back in the 1980s, the Illinois Legislature passed an incentive for waste incineration, and within a matter of a few years waste incinerators were planned for all parts of Illinois. A couple of them, in fact, were built. They were spewing harmful, toxic pollutants, and people were up in arms and demanded that the legislature of Illinois repeal the incentives and subsidies they had for waste incinerators. We do not want to make the same mistake nationwide that my State made at one time. Let's learn from their mistake and let's also stick with common sense. We don't need subsidies and incentives for waste incinerators. We don't want to subsidize the pollution of the United States of America. With that, I see my good friend and colleague from New Jersey who should be recognized. I yield the floor. (Mr. Dayton assumed the Chair.)

Mr. FITZGERALD. Madam President, I call up amendment No. 3124. If I may have a couple of moments, then I will proceed to put the question to the body.

Mr. FITZGERALD. Madam President, I ask for the yeas and nays on my amendment, No. 3124.

Mr. FITZGERALD

Mr. FITZGERALD. Mr. President, I rise today to offer an amendment that excludes the incineration of municipal solid waste from the definitions of renewable energy and biomass in the energy bill's Federal purchase requirement and renewable portfolio standard. This amendment, which is cosponsored by Senators Corzine, Jeffords, and Chafee, closes a loophole in the bill that would encourage the use of municipal solid waste incinerators that emit harmful pollutants into our air. Increased incineration will result in greater pollution which, in turn, will lead to greater health problems for all Americans. The goal of the renewable portfolio standard and the Federal purchase requirement in the energy bill is to promote a cleaner environment and diversify our Nation's energy sources. My amendment to the Daschle substitute helps to achieve that goal by eliminating the incentive for environmentally hazardous municipal solid waste incinerators. Whatever your thoughts are on the ultimate merits of incineration as a tool of waste management, its inclusion in the energy bill as a clean and renewable energy source is hard to defend. This amendment does not preclude communities that elect to generate electricity from incinerating their waste from doing so, but, rather, prevents them from receiving special treatment under Federal law. As many of you know, the renewable portfolio standard requires that utilities either produce a percentage of their power from renewable energy sources or that they purchase credits from another party for any shortfall. Similarly, the Federal purchase requirement in the bill, which I championed during my tenure on the Energy and Natural Resources Committee, requires that a percentage of the power consumed by the Federal Government come from renewable energy sources. Under the existing language now in the Daschle substitute, as amended by Senators Bingaman and Thomas, the incineration of waste would be considered alongside wind and solar as a clean and renewable energy source. I doubt that those in communities with waste incinerators would consider those incinerators as environmentally innocuous as solar and wind energy. During my years in the Illinois General Assembly, in the Illinois State Senate, I was confronted by a similar scheme to promote incentives for waste incinerators. In 1987, prior to my arrival in the General Assembly, that body approved a tax incentive that encouraged the construction of waste incinerators to generate electricity. This subsidy to the waste incineration industry, which amounted to nearly $360 million over 20 years, according to some estimates, led to a proliferation of planned incinerators in mostly poor communities surrounding the city of Chicago. In response to significant public health and environmental concerns raised by these and surrounding communities, I joined several colleagues in repealing this subsidy and preventing the actual construction of many of these incinerators in my home State. I would hope that my colleagues could benefit from the experience that Illinois gained from providing special incentives to waste incinerators. As many of you already know, municipal solid waste consists of residential and commercial refuge or garbage and is the largest source of waste in industrialized countries. Municipal solid waste is often burned as an alternative to placing the waste in landfills. Municipal solid waste incinerators burn this waste and, in the process, can generate electricity. This process only produces a minimal amount of electricity, while the environmental costs are immense. The incineration of municipal solid waste releases numerous pollutants into the air, including acid gases, toxic heavy metals, dioxins, particulate matter, nitric oxide, hydrogen chloride, and furans, to name but a few. The EPA has found that municipal solid waste incinerators are the No. 1 source of dioxin emissions nationwide and are responsible for nearly 20 percent of the Nation's mercury emissions. The release of pollutants from municipal solid waste incinerators can lead to a myriad of serious public health problems. The hazardous materials emitted by municipal solid waste incinerators are deposited in fields, streams, woodlands, and other places. Municipal solid waste pollutants are linked to cancer, respiratory ailments, and reproductive problems. Some contend that incineration can be made clean by removing harmful materials from the waste prior to its incineration or by limiting emissions by using filters and other pollution-control equipment. But regardless of these or other steps taken by municipal solid waste incinerator operators, such as scrubbing technologies, to limit the pollution, incinerators are still not a clean source of energy. Pollution control efforts are largely ineffective because they fail to contain 100 percent of these emissions. And even when most of the emissions are contained, the resulting ash left over from the incineration process must be disposed of as a hazardous waste. If this hazardous waste is not disposed of properly, the ash can also cause considerable health problems. When fly ash is released into the air, people breathe in the small particles which can then sit in their lungs and lead to a number of the ailments I have already mentioned. My amendment clarifies that the definition of biomass in the energy bill should not be construed to provide any special incentives to businesses that incinerate municipal solid waste. Eliminating these types of waste from the definition of biomass is consistent with the definition of biomass provided in the tax portion of the energy bill. The tax portion of the energy bill specifically excludes municipal solid waste in its biomass definition. If we choose to include municipal solid waste incinerators in the definition of biomass, we will be advocating for the economic interest of waste incinerator operators at the expense of the health of the American people. The amendment I am offering seeks to preserve the health of our citizens and to keep our environment clean. Excluding municipal solid waste from the definition of biomass and renewable energy is the environmentally responsible thing to do. It would seem incomprehensible to me to grant municipal solid waste incinerators a special incentive to increase the burning of municipal solid waste that would spoil the environment and put the public's health in jeopardy. This is a commonsense amendment that separates municipal solid waste incinerators from the other clean and renewable energy sources already included in the Daschle substitute amendment. It is consistent with the tax provisions and the energy bill's overarching goal of providing clean energy and a safe environment for future generations. I hope you will join me in voting for this amendment to protect our environment and the health of the American people. I yield the floor.

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

Mr. FITZGERALD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to set aside the pending amendment to call up amendment No. 3124, which is at the desk.

Mr. FITZGERALD

Mr. FITZGERALD. Mr. President, in the upcoming discussion on the expansion of O'Hare, in which I know the Presiding Officer has been deeply involved, one of the issues the Senate will be debating will be a competitive bidding requirement for the contracts and concessions at O'Hare Airport. I intend to offer an amendment that would apply Federal competitive bidding procedures to the contracts at O'Hare and which would require the city of Chicago to disclose the recipients of those contracts. The lead articles in the two major Chicago newspapers over the weekend illustrate precisely why this competitive bidding amendment is essential. The two papers, taken together, report a pattern of flagrant and chronic abuse in the city of Chicago. The Chicago Tribune reports that Mayor Daley's pals get rich yet again on a huge public works project that the city of Chicago thoroughly misrepresented. Simultaneously, the Chicago Sun-Times reports that, because of a budget crisis, city workers get the choice of unpaid days off or layoffs. That is the pattern: The connected guys get the bucks; the ordinary guys get the shaft. Yesterday, the Tribune reported that a major Chicago deal was enacted with the aid of an intense public relations campaign that misled the citizens of the city and the State on a number of key issues. That deal--Soldier Field--followed a distinctly Chicago pattern. After the deal was rammed through, we find that misrepresentations were so egregious that it is difficult to call them misrepresentations and not outright fabrications. We also find that several political friends and allies of both the mayor and the Governor make serious money off their inside connections. I will read from the Tribune. The title of the article is ``Bears play, Public pays.'' It is by Andrew Martin, Liam Ford, and Laurie Cohen. I ask unanimous consent that this article be printed in the Record.

Mr. FITZGERALD

Mr. FITZGERALD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that I be allowed to speak for up to 15 minutes as in morning business.

Mr. FITZGERALD

Mr. FITZGERALD. I thank the Chair. Mr. President, I think I can sum up in that short period of time. I urge all my colleagues to support this amendment. It is a very good amendment, and most of the arguments I have heard about it on the other side, in my judgment, are not true. The bill will have no chilling effect on the financial derivatives market. It does not apply to purely financial derivatives, and there is an important public policy reason for this. We are trying to comport our commodity futures laws in this country to comply with the principles laid down by the President's working group in the last couple of years. Somehow when we passed the Commodity Futures Modernization Act last year, at the end, a mysterious rifleshot exemption that applied to a handful of commodity trading firms that trade online. It is not quite clear where it came from, but it creates an uneven regulatory playing field where certain firms have a narrow exemption, there is no transparency in their markets, and they are not reporting volume or open interest. In my judgment, it is important to consumers of these online exchanges to have that information available to them. It is possible that a client can be ripped off on an online exchange, and the transparency created by this amendment will solve that problem.

Mr. FITZGERALD. May I inquire how much time remains?

Mr. FITZGERALD. I thank the Chair. I urge my colleagues to vote with Senator Feinstein, Senator Corzine, and myself in favor of cloture. Cloture Motion

Mr. FITZGERALD

Mr. FITZGERALD. Mr. President, I would like to take a moment to commend the Girl Scouts on their 90th anniversary, which was celebrated last week with the passage of a resolution designating the week of March 10 through March 16, 2002, as ``National Girl Scout Week.'' In less than a century, the Girl Scouts have gone from a group of 18 girls in Savannah, GA, to a worldwide organization with a current membership of over 3 million. In Illinois alone, there are 19 chapters across the state working to keep alive Juliette Gordon Low's mission of inspiring girls to reach their highest potential. Today, the Girl Scouts are helping girls develop the skills and interests they need to be happy and productive citizens in the 21st Century. Through their many programs for girls aged 5 to 17, the Girl Scouts encourage community service, a clean environment, a healthy and active lifestyle, and an interest in world affairs. I would also like to recognize the work of over 900,000 volunteers who generously give their time and efforts to make the Girl Scouts a celebrated success. I urge all of my colleagues to join me in congratulating the Girl Scouts and the millions of girls who have put so much hard work into their scouting.