Chuck Grassley

Mr. GRASSLEY

Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, tomorrow the Senate will resume consideration of the deficit reduction bill. I remind my colleagues that we will have a full week ahead considering this measure, and we will complete action on it this week. Senators should anticipate long days with many votes. I ask Senators to plan their schedules accordingly and to work with the bill managers in offering amendments to this bill. As a reminder, the Senate will recess from 12:30 until 2 p.m. to accommodate the weekly policy luncheons.

Mr. GRASSLEY

Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 9 a.m. on Tuesday, November 1. 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 resume consideration of S. 1932, as under the previous order.

Mr. GRASSLEY

Mr. GRASSLEY. 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. GRASSLEY

Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I rise today to express my extreme disappointment at the acceptance of amendment 2315 to the Labor and HHS Appropriation yesterday. My disappointment stems from the fact that I objected to considering amendment 2315 both verbally and by letter. And my objection was ignored. Senator Specter, the manager of the bill, acknowledged the mistake and promised to respect the Finance Committee's jurisdiction. However, a Member on the other side refused to allow the mistake to be rectified, an unfortunate and unfair action. For the past several Congresses, I attempted to work with the appropriators and other Senators to ensure that they do not encroach upon the jurisdiction of the Finance committee. Unfortunately, the practice continues as it did yesterday. These provisions are not without consequence. They are often written without clear knowledge of all the relevant facts. As a result, problems often occur as they are implemented. I really appreciate the fact that Senator Specter is willing to work with me on this issue and I fully expect that the provision will be taken out during conference.

Mr. GRASSLEY

Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I have notified Senate leadership of my intent to object to any unanimous consent request relating to the nomination of Bertha K. Madras to the position of Deputy Director for Demand Reduction. This action has nothing to do with Ms. Madras or her qualifications for the position to which she has been nominated. I have taken this action because there are a number of outstanding issues regarding the activities and operation of the Office of National Drug Control Policy that should be resolved before considering this nomination. I am hopeful that, with the cooperation of the Office of National Drug Control Policy, these issues can be resolved shortly.

Mr. GRASSLEY

Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, October is Breast Cancer Month, and I wish to honor my wife, who is an 18-year survivor of breast cancer. I don't often speak about this, but October is the month to raise money and bring attention to the plight of those who have breast cancer, most often with the idea in mind of adding to research for a cure of breast cancer. My only opportunity to participate in this, besides a few remarks I make, is the second Saturday of October in Des Moines, IA, they have a 5K to raise money. Sixteen thousand of us participated in that 5K fundraiser in Des Moines, IA. I have nothing to brag about because it took me 28 minutes 6 seconds, but I was glad to have the opportunity to help raise money for the cause. This morning, I would like to read a speech for my wife Barbara Grassley--today happens to be her 73rd birthday--about her personal challenge with breast cancer. Today is my wife's birthday, and it is fitting that we celebrate her victory over this. Barbara's story is a familiar one. She had many busy years raising our five children, helping run the family farm, particularly during those years that I was in the State legislature, busy participating in community and church activities, and even at age 50 going back and finishing her BA degree at the University of Northern Iowa. Barbara never worried about her own health. Then one casual visit to do a free cholesterol screening led to a doctor's visit for a physical exam. It was an appointment that changed her life. She was diagnosed with breast cancer. Just 10 days later, she had a modified radical mastectomy at Covenant Hospital in Waterloo. That was 18 years ago. We are fortunate that her breast cancer was detected early. We know with certainty that early detection can dramatically increase a woman's chance of defeating breast cancer. That is true for women like Barbara who have a family medical history working against them. Parenthetically, I think five out of six of my wife's aunts on her mother's side had breast cancer as well. The need for routine mammograms cannot be repeated too often. Baseline mammograms and regular screening are key to saving the lives of the thousands of women who develop this disease each year. As her husband and as a Senator, I follow closely the legislative commitment made to breast cancer research, education, and prevention. I am proud to be cosponsor of the Breast Cancer and Environmental Research Act. This bill before the HELP Committee would allow the Director of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences to make grants to develop centers across the country. These centers will help conduct research on the environmental factors that may be related to breast cancer. I hope the HELP Committee will consider this bill as soon as possible. In the meantime, we must focus our efforts on finding a cure. In the past week, there have been breakthroughs on cancer research. Every day, we get one step closer to overcoming this disease. This month is Breast Cancer Awareness Month. I hope men and women will take the opportunity to talk to their loved ones about getting a mammogram and preventing breast cancer. I hope we can continue to raise awareness of this disease for the sake of every mother, spouse, sister, daughter, and granddaughter in this world. I remind people especially of the luck of my wife going to that early detection. She went for just one of these community screenings. She didn't go to the doctor with any idea she would have anything wrong; she just went there and there were some questions raised. Every opportunity you have to take a quick one, if there is something wrong that can lead to the routine mammogram, you should do it because that surely made a difference in my wife's condition at the time. Early detection is so important. I yield the floor.

Mr. GRASSLEY

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

Mr. GRASSLEY

Mr. GRASSLEY. And for other Senators who may want to speak, I may be a little less than an hour or I may be a little more than an hour. I do not intend to be here forever, just in case my colleagues are wondering.

Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to address the Senate for 1 hour.

Mr. GRASSLEY

Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I rise to discuss the situation in Louisiana, particularly New Orleans, as it relates to the Katrina hurricane. I do that because of a very devoted constituent by the name of Craig Van Waardhuizen of 3716 Pearl Lane, Waterloo, IA. We are members of Prairie Lakes Church, Cedar Falls, IA, a Baptist church. He approached me because he had bad experiences in trying to help people in Louisiana at the height of the hurricane and the period of time thereafter. He says things just were not right. That is quite obvious to all of the country. I had a chance to hear it from a person who witnessed it. He kept a diary of his experiences. He is a sincere enough individual to spend time with me, sincere enough individual to put things down in writing, and he is a sincere enough person who would like to have things that happened to him not happen again in a future natural disaster. So I promised my friend in Waterloo that I would make sure the entire Senate knew of his situation. It will be on record for people to refer to so corrective action can be taken. I suppose most of this falls in the area of FEMA's responsibility, but I am not so sure but what some of it doesn't fall into the area of local responders and to State people as well. But FEMA is the one most referred to. So I am going to spend my time reading word for word from this diary so that people will know the trials and tribulations of one bus driver, trying to help people all the way from Iowa, going to Louisiana to help people there who had problems. This starts on September 1, which is the Thursday after Katrina hit. I believe Katrina hit either on that Saturday or Sunday, the 27th or 28th of August. Presumably some time after Katrina hit, my constituent friend was desiring to help the people in need there. He was affiliated with a bus company that could provide transportation. This starts on September 1, but presumably on the days of Monday, Tuesday, or Wednesday before September 1, he was trying to get involved in helping: September 1, 2005, Thursday: Another day of searching on the internet and contacting our motorcoach associations has brought no success as we (Northwest Iowa Transportation, Inc.) look for ways to help in New Orleans. We have coaches and drivers available to go help in moving people out of the New Orleans area. However, we do not believe that we should just drive down to New Orleans without any contact. It is discouraging when you want to help and yet can't find the avenue to help. September 2, Friday: There is a light in the tunnel. Today we were contacted by Utah Transportation Management to see if we had any coaches and drivers that could go help in evacuation of New Orleans. Finally a way to head to New Orleans and provide the assistance that we have wanted to do since a hurricane hit last Monday. Since this help will fall under FEMA we will be able to use four drivers and two motorcoaches to drive straight through to New Orleans. After finding three other drivers who were willing to help in this effort I head out to New Orleans. We pack extra supplies in the coaches along with water and food for ourselves. We also take along extra paper towels and toilet paper. About 9:00 p.m. we head south from Waterloo-- That is Waterloo, IA-- ready to go provide assistance to those in need. Saturday, September 3: Driving straight through the night and switching off with driving we arrive at the staging area at Le Place, LA. The first thing we notice is the large number of motorcoaches waiting in the staging area and many more like ourselves, just pulling in. Our first order of business was to get in line to refill with fuel. We didn't stop for fuel on our way as we had been told that FEMA would provide fuel for all motorcoaches when we arrived at Le Place. We are ready to go to work and start moving people. The fuel was brought in by the National Guard and they did all the refueling in Le Place. Finally, it was our turn to get fuel. While fueling, we visited with the other drivers to find out what had been happening. We learned that after fueling you would get in another line and wait for orders. Nobody seemed to know who was in charge of the operation and there was very little communication. Finally a man with an orange vest came and asked us to get in line to go transport people. We lined up with 12 other coaches. Nobody moved until the state patrol was ready to provide escort. At last we have action. We are headed into New Orleans to do what we came down to do, move people. We had traveled about 10 miles when we were pulled onto the shoulder. No reason given for pulling all of us over. We sat and waited on the side of the highway wondering what was going to happen. After a waiting about 45 minutes we started traveling again, and it was soon apparent that we were headed back to the staging area. This whole operation seems to lack leadership and direction. We arrived back at the staging area at Le Place. Then we were sent down I-10 to the scale house and were staged with about 40 other coaches. Even the State patrol assigned to us didn't know what was going on. About 10 pm a deputy sheriff patrol showed up with some food for us. They didn't have any news or information. About 11 pm the State patrol said to stay with the motorcoach as we might be called upon at any time. As drivers we decided to get as much rest as we could while we had the opportunity. So then presumably they slept the evening. That is a presumption on my part because it goes on now to Sunday, September 4. This is the fourth day of this tribulation. Last night was a long night with little sleep as it is hard to sleep on the coach. About 4 am a group of school buses arrived from Houston, TX. They had been told to report to this staging area and wait. The morning passed by very slow and we never saw or heard from anybody that knew what was actually happening. This is really amazing as we are all here to work and provide help and we are just sitting along the interstate. At the scale house on the other side of the interstate a unit of federal border patrol agents is also waiting for instructions. They have been waiting since Tuesday for orders. So that means that they had been waiting for 5 days, the Federal border patrol was waiting--that's my assumption--waiting for orders. My writer says: I asked the state patrol to radio to the main staging area where we fueled to see what was going on. The patrol had as many questions as we did. It sure seems like mass confusion and no clear leader. I really wonder who is in charge of this operation. About noon a guy shows up in an orange vest and tells us that we are moving to a new staging area at Lake Charles, LA. Soon the rumor is going around through the drivers that we will be moving people out of temporary shelters to better places. We move to Lake Charles with high hopes that we will finally be moving people. At the edge of Lake Charles we are pulled onto the shoulder of the interstate. With over 60 motorcoaches sitting on the shoulder of a major interstate (I-10), this is an accident waiting to happen. The school buses from Houston are headed back to Houston as they were told there was no work for them. What a waste of resources to have them drive all the way from Houston to New Orleans only to turn around and head back. A highway patrol escort arrives and leads us to a large parking area at the Lake Charles airport. We are all parked in a row with no other instructions. When the last coach is parked a man who tells us he is the dispatcher for this operation arrives and tells us that we are going to regroup. This man has made arrangements for us to have a hot meal supplied by the Lake Charles Firefighters in the armory at the airport. During this meal he informs us that rooms in a motel have been reserved for us for the night. As we sign up for our rooms we are told to report back tomorrow at 1:30 pm for more instructions. Since the rooms are in Beaumont, TX he arranges to have five motorcoaches to take us as a group. At least we will have a good bed to sleep in tonight and we will be able to take a shower. Now, Monday September 5. Continued conversation with other drivers reveals only rumors and no facts. About noon we head back to Lake Charles to report in at this temporary dispatch office at the airport. When we report in, we are told there will be no movement until tomorrow. This is disappointing and hard to understand, especially as we listen to the radio and hear about this huge need to get people moved. Seems to me that there has to be a better way to organize and run this system. Who is in charge and who gives the orders to all of us (drivers)? There is very limited and very poor communication. If I ran operations like this, the company would lose all of its business and drivers. Calling back to the office-- I think he means his own office-- and to any other contact I can come up with doesn't provide any help. About 2 pm the dispatcher comes around looking for two coaches that have two drivers. We are just what he is looking for and we offer to be of service. He tells us to head to Fort Smith, AR as soon as we can hit the road and to report in at Fort Smith. We head right out and make the trip to Fort Smith. As we are going down the road we find out that a mistake has been made. Instead of Fort Smith at Fort Smith, AR, it is Fort Chaffee. The drive to Fort Smith is a long one, about 500 miles. Upon arrival we are to report to Fort Chaffee for instructions. As we are travelling we begin to notice many other motorcoaches headed the same direction. September 6, Tuesday. We arrive . . . and find the directions we were given in Lake Charles to be wrong. Finally, we arrive at Fort Chaffee and enter the base. The guards at the gate are very surprised to see us and they wonder why we are reporting at 2 a.m. The guards give us direction to the area where the people are housed. We get to that area only to find out nobody knows why they sent us to this base. Once again I get on the phone calling the numbers I was given. These calls just get voice mail and nobody ever returns the calls. One of the guards gives me the phone number of the base commander. I give him a call (at 2 a.m.) and have a nice conversation with him. I can see that he has no information to help us out. He suggests getting a motel room and coming back in the morning. There are no motel rooms available and it is now 4 a.m. We decide to head back into Fort Smith to top off the fuel tanks and get a hot breakfast. Looks like we are in a race headed nowhere. At 8 a.m. we report back to the base. We are wondering why we were sent over 500 miles to just sit and wait. The guards at the base are telling us that the people are being moved out to other places to live. Many of the other coaches from Lake Charles are showing up this morning. About 10 a.m. there is movement and they begin to load coaches to move people on. Some guy comes along and tells us to hang in there and we will soon be working. At noon we are moved into position to load people. However, we received no instructions or information as to where we will be going. Even the people we are loading don't know where they are headed. What a way to treat people who have lost everything they have. Soon we are loaded and waiting to go someplace. A representative of the state of AR comes aboard and wishes the people a good future. At the same time we are told we will be escorted by the state police to Siloam Springs, AR. We are part of a 12 coach move with a highway patrol escort for every three coaches. The drive is supposed to take about 90 minutes. The actual drive took us over three hours as the escort never went faster than 40 mph. All of the people are very thankful for the help in moving them and they are very pleasant considering what they have all been through. Finally we arrive at Siloam Springs at a church camp. It seems like the whole community is here to welcome the people and help them make a home. It is very heart touching to see all the generous help. We unload and clean our two coaches. Feeling tired and hungry we head back towards Fort Smith. After what happened last night we see no need to arrive at Fort Chaffee in the middle of the night. We find rooms in Fayetteville and shut down for the night. The whole trip is nothing like we had hoped or thought it would be. Maybe we will feel better in the morning. Morning is September 7, Wednesday. So this would be the seventh--it is my judgment this is the seventh day that my constituents were going through this trial and tribulation. Our week of service is almost over and we sure haven't [done] much of any good. We have spent more time driving around empty as they have moved us all over. This morning we went back to Fort Chaffee and waited for new orders. Many other drivers were also waiting to see what we were to do. About noon we get the word that we were to report back to Lake Charles for the next duty. Here we go again on a 500 mile drive with no passengers. Does anybody really know what is going on? As we drive to Lake Charles, we know it will be about 9 p.m. when we arrive. Hopefully somebody will be around to fill us in. No such luck. When we arrive at Lake Charles the parking lot is filled with hundreds of motorcoaches. There are hundreds of coaches and drivers. Many drivers are very upset as they just sit idle. At Lake Charles we are told to report back in the morning and we are also told good luck on finding any lodging. Looks like another night of sleeping in the coach. I make some phone calls and find out there are some rooms at the casino. I call them and ask about rooms and explain what we have been doing. The manager gives us a deal on three rooms for the four of us. At least we will have a bed to sleep in and be able to take a shower in the morning. September 8. This will be Thursday. This is the last day that we can help as we need to return to Iowa tonight. The coaches need to be back to go on charter trips. We will report to the temporary dispatch office early. With hundreds of coaches just parked it doesn't look good. The dispatcher said there is no work today and the next opportunity might be tomorrow. I ask if there is anybody that needs to move north as we could take people north as we head home. Nothing available today and with all the idle coaches it looks bad for tomorrow. I sign us out and we start back home. I am glad that we came down and tried to help. There is a huge sense of disappointment in the fact that we drove about 3,000 total miles and only hauled 47 people 103 miles. It seems like a huge waste of valuable resources and money. Especially as I look over a parking lot filled with hundreds of motorcoaches. Somebody made the order to get all these coaches here and now they sit idle. It easy to see why people get frustrated with the system. Along with these coaches sitting idle, many school buses were moved to the area and never used. They were sent back home as they weren't needed. Today we learned that in the city of New Orleans all of the school buses were left to get caught in the flood. Why weren't they used before the hurricane and flood to get people moved out of harm's way in New Orleans. There are a large number of public officials at all levels and the news media pointing fingers trying to put the blame on FEMA when they should look at themselves. Why did the school buses get left and not used? Why didn't people heed the notice to get out and move to a safer area? I think the whole process needs to be looked at and evaluated for making improvements. We were not the only ones to wonder what was going on. Almost all the drivers were asking who is in charge and where are the lines of communication. Of all the people who gave us orders, none of them seemed to understand operations and dispatch. From my viewpoint, it appears to me that many of those who were supposed to manage the coaches didn't have any idea of what to do and just how much help they needed. September 9. After driving through the night we arrived back in Iowa. We are tired and ready to be back in our own homes. The hardship we went through was very minor compared to what all the displaced families were going through. As a team, we all agreed that we would go again and we would do whatever we could to provide assistance to people in need. Hopefully, if there is a next time, there will be better organization and all involved parties will work together. About 10 a.m. I received a call from the dispatcher in Lake Charles saying he had a trip for us. He was looking for us and wondered where we were. This is a good example of poor management as this was the same person I had signed out with yesterday morning in Lake Charles. What a joke and what a lack of management. I just hope that all of the drivers and coach companies didn't get mad at the system. If they did get upset with the whole system, there might not be enough help the next time. I would go and help again. It seems like the call to come and help was about two days late. Then when the call went out, too many resources were brought into play and then there was overkill. I do hope to be able to sit down and talk with somebody who evaluates this operation. Let me say parenthetically that he is going to continue to talk to other people, but he asked me to be part of this communication, to lay out, as he saw it, the problems, in hopes that action will be taken here and at the local responder level and the State level to make sure these things don't happen again. I am going to say that sentence again that I just was distracted from. I do hope to be able to sit down and talk with somebody who evaluates this operation. Someway, somehow, there has to be a method to get operation managers in the right place to guide a mass movement of people as fast as possible. Maybe when this is all over people will have time to look back and make new plans. The saddest part of this whole experience was the difference of the news media coverage to the real situation. The devastation was huge. The generous helping spirit of the American people was huge. A large number of resources available and there were people willing to provide assistance. Yet, many of these resources were poorly used as the lines of command and communication were poor. We went down to New Orleans to work hard and help. That goal of providing help was not accomplished in my eyes. Yes, we moved about 94 people on our two coaches. However, we only moved those people 100 miles and we spent the rest of our time driving empty as we were moved from place to place. There needs to be a better system of command and coordination. I am very thankful for this opportunity to go and help, no matter how small the help seemed to be. The people we moved were very thankful and they greatly appreciated the efforts of many. My heart hurts for those people who have lost everything but their lives. I also know that we had the right kind of intentions as we went to help. I now turn to September 20. I just have 3 more days--no, 6 more days. Anyway, they went back to Iowa and then they were called upon again for an opportunity because of Hurricane Katrina. So September 20: Once again the call has come for help in the gulf area of LA and TX as hurricane Rita moves into the area. We have the opportunity to provide service again to those in need. The people who have called us, have assured us that there are better plans and communications in place this time. They have told us that lessons were learned from Katrina. This evening we are headed out with two coaches and four drivers. This combination allows us to get to the area in a straight through drive and be ready to work. Our orders call for us to report to a rest stop on 1-49 north of Lafayette, LA. This will be our staging area. Before we leave, we put extra supplies on board, take some food and pack some bedding. We learned from the last time of helping that we might have to spend nights sleeping on the coach. We depart with high hopes and a thankful heart for this opportunity to provide help. The people who called for this help are aware that we can help until Sunday evening. The drivers and coaches need to be back in Iowa for other charter work next Monday. September 21. The drive down was interesting and we saw a lot of others headed south with the same purpose in mind. We did encounter a slight problem in southern MS. There is a bug that is called the ``love bug'' which is bad at this time of the year. We had to make a couple of extra stops to clean the windshields off. These bugs are nasty. Despite the delay we arrived at the staging area about 4:00 pm. The staging area was a rest stop on 1-49 which was closed down for public use. First order of business was to report in and fuel. After fueling, we reported in for duty. The first thing we were told was to get in line and wait for orders. This is sure looking like the Katrina help situation. The old hurry up and wait plan. Fortunately, we had stopped for a good hot meal in Lafayette and were good to go. As the night moved along it appeared that we were going to sit and do nothing. September 22. A short night of limited sleep in the seat of the coach. It is difficult to sleep on a coach. Good thing we brought food with us. We were able to save some snack bars for breakfast. About 7:00 am the dispatcher came looking for two coaches. We took the call and headed into Lafayette to help evacuate people from a hospital. At 9:00 am we were loaded with about 18 passengers on each coach. We waited on our orders and we waited and waited. About 1:00 pm a doctor connected with Homeland Security gave us the go ahead. We were part of an escorted convoy moving these people from Lafayette to Monroe, LA. A four hour drive under good conditions. Our passengers had been on the coach since 9:00 am and they were not given any food. A very long day for everybody with no food. All of these people had been moved out of New Orleans before Katrina and now they had to move again. This time they moved from a hospital to a gym on the campus of LA Tech in Monroe. Sure am glad we have an escort as the road is jammed with people moving north. There are no gripes on our part as we are doing the work we came down to do. After unloading the people and helping them get moved into the gym, we took the opportunity to shower in the locker room. That was a refreshing moment. Then the drive back to the staging area. As we watched all the traffic moving north, we assumed we would be assigned a task as soon as we got back. That turned into a bad assumption. Upon our return to the staging area, we refueled and parked in line. Here we go again, another long night on the coach. Sleep. didn't come easy and I went for a walk. As I was walking I noticed some empty parking places near the front of the line. I went back to the coaches and moved us up in the line with the thought that we might get an assignment quicker. We didn't come back down to park in a line and wait. September 23, 2005. Hurricane Rita is moving closer to shore. Why are we not moving people? The word among the drivers is that there was a coach accident in TX and things are on hold. This brings up the subject of safety. The majority of the coaches in use are top of the line, with excellent drivers and a great safety record. However, there are some coaches operating with lights out, broken air brakes and other safety related issues. These coaches should be pulled to the side and put out of service until they are repaired. There are more than enough coaches here that are in excellent condition to be used. Poor condition coaches. should not be used. We are in a stressful situation, moving people whose lives are in danger. The coach accident in TX is a tragic deal. I don't know if it could have been avoided. 3:00 am, action at last. Ten coaches have been asked to move to the Baton Rouge airport to move people. We are part of the ten. Upon arrival at the airport we report in. Only, the airport was not expecting us and wonders why we were sent. This brings back bad thoughts of a couple of weeks ago. The airport folks find a place to park us while they determine the next step. We get parked right next to the National Guard base. The Guard asks all the drivers with the ten coaches in for a hot breakfast. This is very welcome and sure beats the snack foods. After breakfast we head back to the coach to nap and rest for whatever the next move might be. By noon the rain has started and Rita is nearing land. Listening to the radio we hear about people who needed help to get out of the area. Why are we sitting here? At this point it is too late to go to the areas in need as we would arrive at the same time as the hurricane. We can only wonder why. About 3:00 pm we get orders to move. We are moved to a large building in Baton Rouge and told to park along side the building. The rain is starting to come down hard. The coaches left at the rest stop on 1-49 are being moved further north to get out of harms way. Two FEMA representatives come out of the building and brief us. We are parked right along side the FEMA headquarters. We are at the main command post. Our orders are to stay prepared to move in case the building has to be evacuated. This is hard to believe. We have been assigned directly to the FEMA staff. During our discussion we ask if we can stay in the building tonight as we have been in the motorcoach since reporting for duty. The two staff members tell us they will check on that possibility. We never hear from them the rest of the night. The hurricane hits land near the LA-TX state line. It is no picnic in Baton Rouge. The wind is high and the rain comes down in sheets. September 24. With all the wind and the heavy rain it was difficult to get much sleep. It is very hard to believe and understand why we were not allowed to come in the building. It would have been a lot safer inside and there was a floor that was devoted to sleeping quarters. They even had cots for people to use. Yesterday the two staff members had told us we could come in the building and use the showers. When we tried to do this, security would not let us near the building and security would not call the two staff members inside. This is crazy. We are good enough to sit outside during a hurricane to be on call to provide evacuation transportation. Yet, we are treated like criminals when we try to get in to use the showers. On the door there is a sign about a national news conference at 2 p.m. I tell the other three drivers with me that we will receive orders to move before 1:30 p.m. Sure enough, at 1:30 p.m. we are given orders to move to the staging area at Le Place. The FEMA staff didn't want us parked near the building when the press conference was taking place. We follow orders and head to Le Place to report in and top off the fuel tanks. There is water everywhere from all the rain. At Le Place we drive through water to report in. Once again the orders are to park and wait. We spend more time driving around empty and waiting for orders than we do working. Nothing is going to happen the rest of today. In the parking area there are city buses from Atlanta, GA. They were asked to come to the area to help move people. Thus far they have done nothing but sit and wait. We said welcome to the crowd. Nightfall comes with no place to obtain lodging. However, there are a couple of restaurants open in the area and we can get a good meal. We spend our evening talking with other drivers and listening to all of the frustration just sitting around. This frustration builds larger each day as you see resources sitting idle. September 25. We are tired and weary from spending the past six nights trying to sleep in the coach. This morning we are able to take a shower at the truck stop. The $9.00 to get a shower is worth every cent. I sure wouldn't pay it. After showers, we meet with the drivers of the other eight coaches we were with in Baton Rouge. As we are talking the dispatcher gives us orders to drive into New Orleans. We are going to be moving a National Guard unit out of New Orleans to the area where Rita has gone through. After taking most of the morning it get organized the unit is ready to move out. We will be bringing up the rear of the convoy: Our route will be I-10 to Lafayette where the unit has been reassigned. I have discovered that these orders were issued at 1 a.m. this morning and it took eight hours for them to move through channels to us and the military. What an amazing chain of command. The commander of the unit fills us in on the route and how to drive in a convoy. The members of the unit are very happy to ride in the air conditioned coach. Upon arrival in Lafayette they set up a command center at an old Service Master store. We have to wait until the command releases us before we can go back to Le Place. The afternoon goes by slowly as we wait to be released from duty. The commander holds us as he sees no reason to be stationed in Lafayette as they have very little damage. Once again, I want to ask who is in charge. About 9 p.m. we are released to go back to Le Place. Arriving in Le Place we find hundreds of coaches parked and waiting for orders. This brings back all the thoughts about wasteful use of resources. Our time is up; we need to head back to Iowa. I make the arrangements to be released and we head out for home. September 26 Another long night of driving and we finally get home, a very tired group. This has proved to be another growing experience. Sleeping every night in the motorcoach, only getting one good meal a day, and only having two showers all week. We all learned a lot about ourselves and what we are able to do when needed. The hardest thing to accept this trip was sitting out the hurricane in the motorcoach. It is very difficult to understand and accept the fact that we were not allowed in the FEMA building during the hurricane. Good enough to be a safety valve, but not good enough to be allowed in the building. Hopefully, at some point in the future I will have an opportunity to share with the right folks and work with them to improve the system and the way it works as it relates to motorcoaches. Especially in the area of equipment safety and using motorcoaches to move large numbers of people in an emergency. That is the end of his diary. He ends with a little paragraph that says: Thoughts of Craig Van Waardhuizen while working through the Katrina and Rita hurricanes in LA. I was lead member of a four member team providing motorcoach service with two motorcoaches. I am a Terminal Manager and Operations Director for Northwest Iowa Transportation, Inc (a motorcoach carrier in Iowa with membership in UMA, ABA and IMG). Craig Van Waardhuizen. I thank my friend Craig for sharing his experiences with the people of the Nation through this, but most importantly for the Senate and my Senate colleagues to take this into consideration.

Mr. GRASSLEY

Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I have one additional statement in regard to the Katrina situation. As I said earlier before I read Craig's diary, I am a member of the Prairie Lakes Baptist Church at Cedar Falls, IA. Immediately after Katrina, our church in the following 3 weeks sent three different delegations--in other words, three different teams; a team the first week, a different team the second week, and a different team the third week--to go down to Brookhaven, MS, and help the First Baptist Church in Ocean Springs, MS, in their efforts to feed people who were in need and house people who were in need and do other things. I have this letter which was sent to the pastor of our church, Pastor John Fuller, from the pastor of the First Baptist Church in Oceans Springs, MS. It says: Dear Pastor: I have never had the privilege of meeting you--but I know you because I have experienced the heart of your people. Mark Sherwood, Mike and Denise Goyen, Dalen Grimm, indeed the entire crew from Prairie Lakes Church manifested the heart of Mary, the hands of Martha, the hope of Jesus. My wife and I count our Iowa volunteers as among the best of the best. They worked hard, they were sensitive to the people's broken hearts, and they were a blessing to our church, especially to my family and me. It is my desire to come to Iowa, to thank you and your people for the job well done. Mike Barnett. I ask unanimous consent to have that statement printed in the Record, along with the list of the people from my church who were in teams 1, 2 and 3, as well as an article from the Waterloo Courier which talks about this.

Mr. GRASSLEY

Mr. GRASSLEY. I ask unanimous consent the reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Mr. GRASSLEY. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I also ask unanimous consent that Senator Dorgan be added as my only cosponsor on this amendment.

Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, in 15 seconds I wish to say that I appreciate very much the accommodations Mr. Dorgan has made and the fine dialog we had in bringing a compromise to my amendment. I compliment him on the work he did on this issue 2 or 3 months ago on a similar amendment. I appreciate very much the cooperation we have had. I yield the floor.

Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I am going to offer an amendment to this bill regarding the report of the independent counsel on Mr. Cisneros. I know there has been much talk about the need to bring to a close the independent counsel's work, and I agree. I tell my colleagues, as a radio announcer would say, about the rest of the story. The independent counsel completed his investigative activities February 2003. The counsel completed and filed his report under seal to the Special Division August 2004. That is very important for every one of us to understand as we consider this amendment. The investigative work is completed. The report is completed. So what is the holdup in getting this report out to the Congress and to the public? It is not the independent counsel; rather it is the lawyers of the individuals named in the report who have been engaged in one sole pursuit: to foot-drag every inch of the way filing every motion they can to delay, delay, delay. This foot-dragging by the lawyers has been going on for months. It is because of this foot- dragging that the independent counsel has had to continue its work. It has to respond to the mountains of pleas and motions that are filed by these lawyers. I would like to make another point, and that is that the amendment does two things: It provides that the report will be released and published in 60 days, and by extension that the independent counsel will close up and wind down his office within 90 days of publication of the report and can only be extended by a finding of the court and the publication by that court of an exact time of when it will be shut down. In addition, under my amendment it makes it clear that the independent counsel shall not perform any investigative or prosecutorial task in the remaining time period after the report is published. I have had some discussions with my friend, Senator Dorgan from North Dakota, on this subject on the side as I was preparing this amendment, and he has also spoken very eloquently on this subject in a previous day's debate a few weeks back. I want him to know I agree with the concerns that he has that we must see the end of the independent counsel. My first amendment reflected the same sentiment for closing the office once the report is published. But, unfortunately, as I was looking into the matter more closely, it is not straightforward to just shut down the independent counsel's office. The independent counsel, after publication, needs a short period of time to evaluate claims for attorney's fees, transfer records to the archivist, respond to congressional inquiries and possible litigation. My hope, and I believe the hope of the independent counsel, is that barring the unforeseen, this all can be accomplished within the 90 days I have within my amendment. So I want to assure my friend from North Dakota I share his concerns about runaway and unnecessary spending, and would join him in watching this matter closely and will be with him if we are not moving forward at a reasonable pace to bring this operation to an end. Setting aside the matter of closure, I want to focus on one last point: The contents of this report and why they are so vital. I hope I have a good reputation among my colleagues for doing the constitutional job of oversight that each one of us has been assigned, to make sure that the laws are faithfully executed. I hope I have a reputation of doing oversight work regardless of what political party might be in charge of the executive branch of Government. While Mr. Cisneros' name is there, and it is natural to see this through a partisan lens, let me assure my colleagues that is not the case. The media reports are giving very credible commentary that the independent counsel's report discusses problems at the Office of Criminal Investigation in the Internal Revenue Service and the Department of Justice. These matters do not involve Mr. Cisneros but raise extremely important questions about the administration of the Tax Code. As chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, I take with great seriousness accusations of inappropriate activity at the Internal Revenue Service, and also as a senior member of the Judiciary Committee, similar accusations at the Department of Justice. However, as my colleagues know, I cannot legislate or conduct oversight based on whispers or rumors. I need the final report. The American taxpayers have a lot of money in this report. We are talking about millions of dollars. They deserve a right to see this investigation and what their tax money was spent for. More importantly, they deserve for there to be sunshine exposing problems in our Government and for legislators to be informed so that we can take appropriate action, in my case, within the Senate Finance Committee that I chair, or within the Judiciary Committee on which I serve. In conclusion, this is a vitally important amendment. It will give Congress a report that will provide tremendous insight into problems in the administration of the Tax Code and other governmental misconduct. The amendment will also bring closure to the work of the independent counsel, a matter of concern to many and expressed eloquently, as I have said before, by the Senator from North Dakota. I think we provide a reasonable timeframe of 90 days after the report is published to wind down this office, with only the court allowed to continue the office. Further, the amendment also limits the work of the independent counsel to the clerical work of closing the office. My amendment, then, prohibits those things that tend to make things go on and on and never stop--investigations and prosecution. This may not be a perfect solution to getting this report out that has cost millions of dollars, but it is a fair compromise and one that I think will get the job done. Ideally, the report would just be released, but there are people who maybe do not want this report released--consequently all the legal action that has been holding it up for the last several--now, let's say at least 14 months. I send the amendment to the desk and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to set aside the Reed amendment for the purposes of my offering an amendment, and I will speak for about 6 or 7 minutes.

Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Grassley amendment be taken up. We can handle it in about 2 or 3 minutes.

Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I send a modification to the desk and ask that my amendment be modified, which I have the right to do.

Mr. GRASSLEY

Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, because I am chairman of the Senate Finance Committee and we have jurisdiction over taxes, I want to respond to some of the comments that have been made over the last 2 or 3 days, both on the floor as well as in news conferences, by the Senate Democratic leadership on the reconciliation tax relief bill that will be before Congress sometime between now and Thanksgiving. Quite frankly, it is necessary to pass because if we do not, then taxes are automatically going to go up without a vote of Congress. It is not necessarily the biggest tax increase that Congress has ever voted but a very sizable tax increase. Obviously, if we are going to increase taxes, it ought to be done by a vote of the Congress and not done automatically. So we have to take action before we adjourn this fall, and that is what the reconciliation tax relief bill is all about. It is quite obvious from these news conferences that the Democrats have been having, in statements on the floor, that they do not seem to understand that this is going to happen, and if it does happen, it is going to hurt middle income taxpayers as well as lower income taxpayers. In press reports for several weeks now, the distinguished Democratic leader suggested that we cease all efforts to address expiring tax relief provisions. The senior Senator from Nevada stated as follows: I think we need to revisit this budget and reconciliation. Is it really the time to have $70 billion more in tax cuts? Well, we are not going to have $70 billion more in tax cuts if we pass this reconciliation tax relief package. We are going to continue the tax policy we have had for the last several years, and if we do not pass it, we are going to have a $70 billion tax increase, and that is what inaction is going to bring about. I see the Senator suggesting that that happen. I am going to say why that is bad not only for taxpayers, but that is bad for the economy of our country. Then we also had the assistant Democratic leader, the senior Senator from Illinois, likewise attack the notion of tax relief. This very afternoon, the ranking Democratic member of the Budget Committee, the senior Senator from North Dakota, attacked the idea of further tax relief. Those words again. They want people to believe that we are going to cut taxes further, but if we do not take action, taxes are going up, not down. If we pass a bill, they are going to stay where they have been for the last several years. Clearly, this line of attack is being coordinated by the leadership team on the other side of the aisle. As is usual with the question of tax relief, the East Coast media tend to be echoing the line of attack from the leadership of the opposition. Yesterday, October 19, the Democratic leadership held a press conference to criticize further tax relief efforts. The purpose of the press conference was opposition to Republicans' attempt to spend billions on tax breaks for special interests while cutting health care, student loans, and other crucial assistance through their--meaning Republicans--immoral budget. Now, understand, morality is brought into this. That kind of incendiary language is what makes folks outside of the Washington Beltway angry. Not only is it patently false, it is also over the top. Anybody with an ounce of common sense knows it. Immoral? Give me a break. What is immoral is wasting taxpayer money to gin up this kind of partisan ``attack dog'' language because it diverts legislative resources from what this Congress needs to be doing and that is solving problems. I have heard from my friend and ranking member, Senator Baucus, that the Democratic leadership may now be supporting an extension of some of these provisions that they seem to be attacking at the same time. Be that as it may, we have to look at a lot of other things besides the largely business tax relief that is included in what we call extenders, extending from one year to the next or the next several years things that automatically expire, that if we do not extend them, taxes go up rather than staying level. I want to put all this debate in context, because until now, what I have set in motion here is what is coming from the other side so you have a context for the points I wish to make. First off, let's take a look at the Democratic leadership's point on the budget. Why is the budget important, some people ought to ask and legitimately ask. The budget--we call it the budget resolution--is a blueprint or kind of an outline that sets the overall level of spending and the revenue of the Federal Government. The budget, then, sets the ground rules for all the other spending and revenue legislation that will be considered by the Senate over the course of a year. So we pass the budget resolution in the spring, and all the appropriations bills and the tax bills and everything else have to fit into that budget resolution. Under the Senate rules, then, a bill that exceeds the levels set in the budget resolution could possibly be, and often is, subject to a 60- vote point of order; in other words, taking 60 votes to go beyond the budget, which is very difficult to get in this body. That is why you get a lot more fiscal discipline with a budget resolution. By imposing this supermajority requirement, the budget encourages the Senate to stay within the overall limits we set in our resolution while at the same time providing opportunities to exceed those limits if there are extenuating circumstances. Chairman Judd Gregg of the Budget Committee has used this tool of a point of order to keep spending under control. On this appropriation bill that was just completed after 2 or 3 days' work, that has proved effective, in three or four instances, to keep a lot of additional spending from happening--spending that, if we just had a simple majority without a budget resolution, could possibly not have been prevented. By the way, despite all the posturing about fiscal responsibility coming from the Democratic side, I am still waiting for spending cuts, ideas on how we can save money on expenditures, coming from the other side. I have asked my colleagues on the other side of the aisle over the years to put their money where their mouth is. The Finance Committee that I chair produced $180 billion in revenue raisers and got $135 billion of that enacted. So we have produced on the revenue side. I am going to be showing with that chart here in just a little bit where we have also had other tremendous advantages from the tax policy of the last 4 years. But where are the critics, then, who seem to always want to raise revenue? Where are they when there is an opportunity to come up with ideas to save money on the spending side of the ledger? I have always said it would be one thing to raise taxes, and I might be willing to consider doing that if I could ever come to the conclusion that you could raise taxes high enough to satisfy the appetite of a lot of big spenders in this Congress to spend money. If I would ever see a limit, I might be willing to settle for something if that was the end of it. But you never have the end, it seems. You never have enough revenue for the people who want to spend money. Budget reconciliation, as has been the point of the news conference I already referred to, is often the subject of much controversy. So I would like to take a moment and focus on the reconciliation bill my committee is going to have to consider between now and adjournment in order to retain the present level of taxation. If we do not take action, which is what the Democrats are asking us not to do, taxes are going to go up. As chairman of this tax writing committee that we call the Finance Committee in the Congress, I have a responsibility for all of the legislation that affects Medicaid, Medicare, Social Security, the income tax code. The budget resolution we passed earlier this year provides reconciliation instructions for my committee to achieve $150 billion in program savings. And by the way, we finally have a package put together that will do this, a package that I believe we will be able to vote out of committee next Tuesday. We have set our committee there so we will meet our savings on the expenditure side--we will meet those goals. Of course, then the other part of my work is the $70 billion of tax relief that is not a tax reduction but maintaining the existing level of taxation. While these instructions from the Budget Committee--or you might say now it is policy, by the full Senate--do not actually require the Finance Committee to enact any specific policy, there are numbers and policies that are assumed within the numbers that the Senate has given me. Today, I will focus on the tax relief portion of the budget. After all, that is where the attacks have come from the Democratic leadership through their news conferences and statements here on the floor of the Senate. Start with a basic number. When the Senate Budget Committee considered the resolution over a half year ago this year, Republicans laid out a plan to reconcile tax relief--in other words, to keep the taxes from automatically going up, not to cut taxes from where they are today. This plan was the product of discussion with members of the Republican caucus. Although the process was driven by Republican members, the substance of the proposal is bipartisan. Our objective, then as now, is to preserve current law levels of tax relief. The plan centers on a seamless extension of tax relief provisions that began in President Bush's first term, in 2001. It is critical that these provisions be rationalized with a common sunset date. Assuring taxpayers of the continuity of promised tax relief should be our highest priority. Predictability of tax policy, in other words, is essential to a vibrant, growing economy. Taxpayers should not face the reversal of the level of tax relief we have delivered. It is going to have terrible economic consequences if we do. Let me repeat. Reconciliation is about preventing automatic tax increases, it is not about new tax relief proposals. Some on the other side have been critical of the $70 billion in reconciled tax relief from the day we passed the budget resolution. Where, let me ask, is the Democrat leadership's plan for tax relief? Or do they propose that we start taxing middle-income Americans by letting these things sunset and have an automatic increase in taxes? Has anyone seen a Democratic proposal for maintaining existing tax policy so we do not have an automatic tax increase? All we seem to hear, based upon these news conferences and statements, happens to be criticism. How many times have we heard about the alternative minimum tax or what we call AMT? We heard about it plenty of times. We even heard incorrect assertions that this budget does not address alternative minimum tax problems. Guess what. The reconciliation bill has room for extending the current patch, or ``hold harmless'' for millions of families who, if we do nothing, are going to face the alternative minimum tax. These are not the wealthy people that the alternative minimum tax was intended to hit. These are going to be 5 million more middle-income tax-paying people who presently are not hit by it. So where is the Democratic leadership plan for AMT relief? When they say we ought to rethink this budget resolution, are they saying we are going to tax these 5 million people who have not been hit by this by doing nothing between now and the end of the year? Where is the response for the current period? I have been looking for it. I can't find it, from the other side. All we are hearing is another excuse to make the American taxpayers second- class citizens. In this case, spending for the hurricane might be the excuse. There always seems to be a reason to deny tax relief or automatically increase taxes on middle-income Americans. Likewise, there always seems to be an excuse for dodging spending restraint. Let taxes go up automatically, don't do anything to reduce spending. In short, it seems that the Democratic leadership cares more about spending taxpayers' money than keeping the tax burden low. The American taxpayer has done his or her part. Receipts are way ahead of last year--way ahead of where even we predicted they would be. According to Treasury data, receipts last year were $1.880 billion. This year, receipts are $2.154 billion. So this is an increase of $274 billion coming in this year, more than last year without increasing taxes, with no rates of tax increase. Even taking into consideration that level of taxation, in a news conference the Democratic leadership said we ought to rethink our tax policy. According to the Congressional Budget Office--and I might refer to that occasionally as CBO--the CBO receipts are up for this fiscal year alone by $97 billion over what CBO guessed they would be earlier this year--$97 billion more coming in than the official estimators said just a few months ago would be coming in. Whichever figure you might use, either that $274 billion more coming in in 2005 than in 2004 or the $97 billion more that is coming in, more than the CBO estimated, this is very definitely an impressive improvement on the revenue side of the budget. That amount exceeds the amount of reconciled tax relief over 5 years by $70 billion that we provided in this budget resolution that will be the subject of legislation on this floor in the next 4 weeks. As a percentage of the economy, which is known as the gross domestic product, Federal receipts are up to about 17.5 percent of GDP. The historical average is right about 18 percent. When I say historical average, I mean over a period of time from the late 1950s until today averaging about 18 percent of taxes coming into the Federal Government as a share of the gross domestic product. So we are getting back to historical averages, but you wouldn't know that by listening to some of the alarmist claims for more revenue that you hear in speeches on the floor of this Senate. Where is the extra money coming from? It is coming across-the-board. A good chunk of it is coming from nonwithheld income taxes, and that would be from capital gains dividends, higher than expected small business income. No one should be surprised by these developments. They are consistent with economic and fiscal history. The bottom line is that when the economy grows, the Federal Treasury benefits as well. That is shown very clearly on this chart. Over 40 years, up until now--and beyond that, guessing what the economy might do for another 10 years--we see the green line here, the gross domestic product, the measure of it on a yearly average. That is the green line. It is fairly constant, not so erratic. The revenues coming in are the red lines. That tends to be much more dramatically different from year to year than what the GDP measurement is. You can see here, going back 40 years, when the GDP goes down, you have a very dramatic drop in taxes coming into the Federal Treasury. When they go up, you have a much more dramatic increase in taxes coming into the Federal Treasury. You can see that several times--quite a drop here in the gross domestic product but a very dramatic drop in income coming in. More recently, we had the Clinton recession that we inherited, plus 9/11. So you find a dip in the gross domestic product here, but, boy, you see a very dramatic drop in the income coming in at this point. We passed the tax bill of 2001, and we passed the tax bill of 2003. You know that Greenspan said the growth in the economy is very related to those tax reductions we had at that particular time. You can see that we have a rise since then in the gross domestic product. You have a rise in income. But this chart was made before we had some more recent figures. This red line, the point right here, would be about right here, reflecting that $274 billion more coming in in 2005 over 2004. You see a little rise in the gross domestic product, a very dramatic rise for the most recent figures at this point here instead of this point here-- a more dramatic rise in the income coming into the Federal Treasury from our taxes because there was a little bit of an increase in the economy. People are saying here we have to increase taxes, whether it is automatically or whether you vote them. You don't have to do that. You can see we are projecting a very good income coming into the Federal Treasury just when there is a slight increase in economic growth of our country as reflected in what we call the gross domestic product. Some people here have it backwards. They think Federal revenue drives the economy. It is almost as though they believe raising taxes will lead to more growth. Growing economic activity, as shown by this chart, is fueling the good news on the receipt side of the Federal budget. In this environment, it is a wonderment why the Democratic leadership would want to send such a negative message to the financial markets. Why does the Democratic leadership want to raise capital gains tax by 33 percent and double the tax on dividends? In these uncertain times, why would the Democratic leadership want to drive a stake in the heart of this growing economy, not only a growing economy but a more vastly growing amount of money coming into the Federal Treasury? A cynical person might feel that the Democratic leadership is only looking at political gain by driving down our economy. I can't believe my friends in the Democratic leadership would want to cause economic pain for short-term political gain. But with all these speeches that are going on around here and all these news conferences about rethinking the budget, you have to wonder, don't you? To sum up on my first point, the taxpayer is not the problem. The taxpayer is sending plenty of money to Washington, DC by $274 billion more in 2005 over 2004 with these lower levels of taxation we have. The revenue side of the budget is coming in fine, way beyond expectation. I will turn to the specific plan we are going to present to the Senate when we have this reconciled tax package out here. Again, this is a tax relief plan expressed in these news conferences that the Democratic leadership wants to kill. The reconciliation instruction gives us the resources to maintain current law tax relief. Put another way, the reconciliation instructions to my committee are our best means to protect against tax hikes on millions of American taxpayers. Let us take a look at the tax increases the Democratic leadership would put on the American people by inaction by this Congress--an automatic tax increase. That is the Christmas present we would be giving the taxpayers, if we adjourn by Thanksgiving. What a Christmas present. First and foremost, the tax relief plan continues to hold harmless for the alternative minimum tax. This piece of the plan--the largest, I might add--is worth $30 billion to 14 million American families. Does the Democratic leadership want to push millions of middle-income families into the alternative minimum tax? If the answer is no, then they ought to support our reconciliation bill. Second, the plan extends the progrowth piece of the 2003 tax relief bill, specifically lower capital gains and dividend rates. As the Finance Committee hearing showed earlier this year, we got testimony about how these incentives have helped the stock market recover. A lot of folks on Wall Street tell us they have assumed continuation of these progrowth tax relief measures in the pricing of stocks. Does the Democrat leadership want to play games with stock prices? If the answer is no, then they ought to support our reconciliation bill. A third point: Other widely applicable tax relief benefits are addressed in our bill. I am talking about these middle-income tax benefits we already have on the books that would expire. The deductibility of college tuition, the small savers tax credit, the small business expensing--all of these provisions are bipartisan. Millions of taxpayers are already relying on them. Does the Democratic leadership want to take away the deductible for college tuition from families who send their kids to college? Does the Democratic leadership want to eliminate the small savers credit? Does the Democratic leadership want to take away expensing of equipment from our small business folks and farmers? If the answer is no, then they should support our reconciliation bill. The fourth example is our plan is going to address expiring business and individual provisions that we call extenders because we extend them from year to year or maybe 2 or 3 years at a time. But they eventually run out. These provisions include the research and development tax credit, the State sales tax deductibility from the Federal income tax, and the deduction of teachers' out-of-pocket expenses. As I noted, the Democratic leader did not come out and say he would support taking a look at some of these regular extenders, but they are a small part of the picture. I note that the ranking member of the Budget Committee hasn't come that direction yet. The Democratic leadership is not singing with one voice on this subset of expiring provisions. But if we do what the Democrats said they wanted to do in their news conference, these could possibly expire. Does the Democratic leadership then want to eliminate the research and development tax credit? Does the Democratic leadership want to eliminate the sales tax deduction from the Federal income tax? Does the Democratic leadership want to eliminate the deduction for teachers' out-of-pocket expenses? If the answer is no, then they ought to help us get this budget tax reconciliation bill passed. These are all about growth of the economy. In the Midwest, farmers--and I am one of them--have a saying: Don't eat your seed corn. Keep planting seed corn. That makes the economy strong. The tax relief seeds we planted a few years ago are yielding, as you can see here, a good harvest of revenue to the Federal Treasury. What it comes down to is this: We need to take care of legislative business. We need to continue the tax relief promised to the American people and not let it expire, not let there be an automatic tax increase. If there is going to be an automatic tax increase, it ought to be voted by Congress. We ought to have guts enough to increase the taxes. But we are better off with a plan that stops this automatic tax increase. The revenue side of the budget is performing fine, as you can see here. The American taxpayer is doing his or her share by the tune of $274 billion more coming in this year, 2005, over 2004. Now is not the time to shortchange the American taxpayers by raising their tax burden, particularly on middle-income taxpayers. I ask my friends in the Democratic leadership to please refrain from raising taxes on millions of middle-income Americans. It is simple: Maintain existing levels of taxation. You do that by supporting the reconciliation bill that will be coming before this Congress shortly.

Mr. GRASSLEY

Mr. GRASSLEY. I ask unanimous consent to speak for roughly 15 minutes instead of the 10 minutes.

Mr. GRASSLEY

Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I rise today to speak regarding the repeal of expanded Federal Government micro-purchase limits, as well as to speak regarding recent regulatory action taken by the Office of Management and Budget on this matter. We are all deeply concerned with the recent events surrounding Hurricane Katrina and the massive rebuilding and reconstruction efforts ongoing in the gulf coast. While we all agree that help is needed, many have argued how best to provide this help. The second supplemental emergency appropriation for Hurricane Katrina included a number of provisions to help provide for rebuilding and reconstruction--including nearly $61 billion. This money will help rebuild the gulf coast, yet there were some provisions in that second supplemental that leave the rebuilding effort vulnerable to fraud, waste, and abuse of taxpayer dollars. One such provision was the repeal of the limitations on micropurchase spending authority. Micropurchases represent delegated buying authority for Federal agencies and were designed to save money by providing flexible spending. Micropurchases are usually small--averaging $600-- and are most often made through Government credit cards. By law these Government credit card micropurchases were originally capped at $2,500 per purchase. This limit was raised following 9/11 for emergency purposes only, to $15,000 domestically and $25,000 abroad. The second Hurricane Katrina supplemental raised this emergency rate from $15,000 to $250,000, per purchase. This change represents a nearly 1600 percent increase. Imagine a Government bureaucrat being able to walk into a store, purchase an item for $250,000 without prior approval, and say, ``Put it on the taxpayer's tab.'' History has proven that these Government credit cards are prone to fraud, waste and abuse of taxpayer funds. I began looking into this issue several years ago. Working with the Government Accountability Office, GAO, and the various inspectors general over the years, I have uncovered hundreds of millions of dollars lost to fraud, waste, and abuse due to inadequate controls on Government credit cards. This history of abuse prompted my immediate attention and intervention with OMB regarding the increased threshold. Through negotiations during the critical early hours following the passage of the micropurchase increase, OMB agreed to issue guidance which provided a temporary limit on who could utilize the new limits. This guidance helped to prevent undocumented spending and potential abuse; however, it only served as a temporary stop-gap measure. On September 15, I introduced legislation on this topic. The bill introduced, S. 1716--the Emergency Health Care Relief Act of 2005-- contained a provision that would roll back the increased micropurchase thresholds to a responsible level while maintaining flexibility for those providing relief in the impacted Gulf States. I included this provision in the bill I introduced because of my experience in fighting fraud, waste, and abuse that has occurred as a result of Government credit cards. Unfortunately, S. 1716 has been held up in this body for too long, preventing legislation from fixing this potential giveaway and delaying health care to those most desperately in need. I was pleased to hear that Senators Dorgan and Wyden have voiced their concerns by recently introducing legislation on this matter. I am also pleased that legislation which was introduced by Senators Collins and Lieberman on this matter was recently reported out of Committee in a favorable voice vote. Both of these bills represent what I believe is the sense of Congress, that this increased limit must be reduced statutorily. On October 3, OMB revised its guidance for micropurchases, reducing the increased limits from $250,000 to $2,500, the same correction sought in the different legislation introduced by Senators Collins and Lieberman and the subsequent legislation by Senators Dorgan and Wyden. I applaud OMB for stepping forward and taking corrective action; however, I remain concerned that this limit could be changed by OMB at any time as the increased limit still remains in the law. Fortunately, OMB has listened to my recommendations and recognized the need to rescind this provision and is now supporting efforts to provide a legislative fix. I have learned from OMB that all agencies within the Government have agreed that the higher limit is unnecessary and also support reducing the increased limit. The micropurchase threshold increase needs to be repealed permanently by Congress and not merely corrected through regulatory guidance. As this body continues to hold up action on S. 1716, the best option for quick and decisive action to reduce this increased credit limit is to support the legislation introduced by Senators Collins and Lieberman which was recently voted out by the Committee on Homeland Security and Government Affairs. S. 1716 remains an important piece of legislation providing health care for those who have been affected by the tragedy in the Gulf States. By no means should my support of this legislation be seen as reducing the need to pass S. 1716 however; it just makes sense for this body to move quickly in closing this potential loophole for fraud, waste, and abuse. I urge all my colleagues to join me in supporting quick passage of both S. 1716 and the legislation offered by Senators Collins and Lieberman, to help prevent relief dollars from being lost to fraud, waste, and abuse and provide the much needed health care to the region devastated by Hurricane Katrina.

Mr. GRASSLEY

Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President. I am pleased to join my colleague Senator Murkowski in sponsoring a resolution commemorating the annual ``Red Ribbon Week.'' Celebrated October 23-31, Red Ribbon Week encourages individuals, families, and communities to take a stand against alcohol, tobacco, and illegal drug use. I hope the rest of the Senate will join in supporting this resolution and support this very important campaign. The tradition of Red Ribbon Week now in its twentieth year of wearing and displaying red ribbons started following the assassination of U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency Special Agent Enrique ``Kiki'' Camarena. In an effort to honor his memory and unite in the battle against drug crime and abuse, friends, neighbors, and students from his home town began wearing red ribbons. Shortly thereafter, the National Family Partnership took the celebration nationwide. Since then, the Red Ribbon campaign has reached millions of children, families, and communities across the country, spreading the message about the destructive effects of drugs. In my State of Iowa, this year's theme for Red Ribbon Week is ``Take a Stand--Be Drug Free.'' Schools and community groups across the State are organizing a variety of activities including pledges, contests, workshops, rallies, theatrical and musical performances, and other family and educational events all designed to educate our children on the negative effects of drugs and promote a drug-free environment. Research tells us that the longer a child stays drug-free the less likely they will become addicted or even try illegal drugs. This is why it is so important to maintain a coherent anti-drug message that begins early in adolescence and continues throughout the growing years. Such an effort must involve parents, communities, and young people. Red Ribbon Week provides each of us the opportunity to take a stand by helping our children make the right decisions when it comes to drugs. In light of the growing epidemic of methamphetamine abuse throughout the Nation and especially in State of Iowa, this year's Red Ribbon Week holds greater importance. I urge colleagues to join us in passing this resolution to demonstrate our commitment to raising awareness about drugs and encourage everyone to make healthy choices.

Mr. GRASSLEY

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

Mr. GRASSLEY. I would ask to be recognized for 12 minutes as if in morning business.