Tom Harkin

Mr. HARKIN

Mr. HARKIN. Madam President, it gives me great pleasure to hail the ratification of the Optional Protocol Against the Sale of Children, Child Prostitution, and Child Pornography by the U.S. Senate this week. I applaud the strong leadership of Senator Biden, Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and Senator Helms, the Ranking Member of that Committee, as well as Senator Boxer in bringing this new treaty to fruition. The use, procuring, or offering of a child for prostitution, for the production of pornography, or for pornographic purposes is included in the universal definition of the worst forms of child labor in the International Labor Organization's Convention 182 which this Senate ratified in 1999 on a 96-0 vote. Therefore, it is altogether fitting and proper that we now follow through and adopt this new instrument of international law to crackdown worldwide against the despicable acts of trafficking and prostituting of children. This Optional Protocol gives special emphasis to the criminalization of the sale and trafficking of children as well as child prostitution and pornography. It also stresses the importance of improved international cooperation and coordination to combat the sexual exploitation of children everywhere in the world, while also promoting heightened awareness, more information gathering, and public education campaigns to enhance the protection of children trapped in one of the worst forms of child labor. For nearly a decade, I have been working hard to end the scourge of abusive child labor. It is a tragic and disturbing fact that millions of children under 18 years of age currently endure slave-like conditions in brothels, back alleys, and hideaways that jeopardize their basic health, safety and well-being. These children are being tricked, lured, and sold outright for purposes of forced labor and exploitation in the commercial sex trade of prostitution and pornography. In the European Union, the International Organization for Migration reports a marked increase in the number of unaccompanied minors trafficked for sexual purposes from Central and Eastern Europe, Africa and Asia. In India alone, hundreds of thousands of children exist in slavery- like conditions for purposes of forced labor or prostitution, according to the U.S. Department of State Country Reports on Human Rights Practices. UNICEF estimates that at least 200,000 children every year are trafficked into the Central and West African slave trade for purposes of forced labor. In Mexico, a UNICEF study estimates that 16,000 children are victims of sexual exploitation--many of them are prostituted in tourist destinations such as Cancun and Acapulco. In the United States, experts within the Department of Justice estimate that at least 100,000 children are involved in the sex trade in any given year. Approximately 400 cases of Internet child pornography are prosecuted each year in the Federal courts alone. I am pleased to report, for example, that a crackdown on Internet child pornography was launched last year in Des Moines, the capital city of my own home state. A 1999 report issued by the Central Intelligence Agency estimated that up to 50,000 women and children are trafficked into the United States each year. We must not stand by while millions of children are sold for purposes of forced labor and consigned to prostitution and pornography in order to satisfy adults who profit from their abuse. When presented with the dimensions of human trafficking in 2000, I joined 94 of my colleagues in the U.S. Senate to express both our outrage over the criminal behavior of child traffickers and our support for the victims of trafficking by passing the Trafficking Victims Protection Act. This week we are taking more effective action through ratification of the Optional Protocol on the Sale of Children, Child Prostitution, and Child Pornography. It is an important victory in our effort to protect children everywhere. I look forward to continuing this effort with my colleagues in the weeks, months, and years to come. In approving this new stand-alone treaty, we are affirming that the American people believe that all children, given their vulnerability to adult coercion and greed, deserve special protection in international law and practice against sexual predators and exploiters. I also want to take a moment to say how pleased I am that the Senate this week has ratified the Optional Protocol Against the Use of Children in Armed Conflict. As you know, I worked very hard with Senator Helms, in particular, to secure ratification of the International Labor Organization's (ILO) Convention #182 to Prohibit the Worst Forms of Child Labor. Our bipartisan efforts paid off when the Senate in November, 1999 ratified that important new human rights treaty on a 96-0 vote. Now included in the universal definition of the worst forms of child labor within ILO Convention #182 is the prohibition of forced or compulsory recruitment of children for use in armed conflict. Therefore, the Senate's action this week on this Optional Protocol means the U.S. has followed through on our international commitment at the time that ILO Convention #182 was under negotiation and joined the world community in universally condemning and outlawing the recruitment and use of child soldiers. It probably seems unthinkable to most Americans that young children have been recruited, trained, and turned into soldiers who are actively engaged in combat. The latest research estimates that more than 300,000 children under 18 years of age are participating in armed conflicts around the world. For example, there are an estimated 50,000 child soldiers in Burma alone. Hundreds of thousands more are members of armed forces who could be sent into combat at any moment. Although most child recruits are over fifteen years of age, significant recruitment starts at ten years, and the use of even younger children is not uncommon. Robbed of their childhood, child combatants are subjected to a cycle of violence that they are too young to understand or resist. While many of these young recruits may start out as porters or messengers, too often they end up on the front lines of combat. Some are used for especially hazardous duty, such as entering mine fields ahead of older troops, or undertaking suicide missions. Some have been forced to commit atrocities against family members or relatives. Inexperienced and immature, these children suffer far higher casualty rates than their adult counterparts. Those who survive are often physically or psychologically scarred for life. Typically lacking an education or civilian job skills, their futures are often very bleak. Ninety-three percent of Americans believe that combatants should be at least 18 years of age, according to a recent poll conducted by the International Committee of the Red Cross. Accordingly, I want to particularly salute the leadership of my colleagues, Senator Biden, Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and Senator Helms, the Ranking Member of that Committee, as well as Senator Wellstone and thank them for their tireless work to see this treaty through to ratification. There is absolutely no justification for the forced or compulsory recruitment of children under 18 for deployment into combat anywhere in this world and I am proud that America is doing our part to end this egregious abuse of human rights and affront to common decency.

Mr. HARKIN

Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, I am pleased to be offering with Senator Grassley and with our colleagues from Illinois, New York, and Arkansas, a bipartisan amendment of importance to Rock Island Arsenal. This amendment is needed for the continuation of the Arsenal Support Program Initiative, or ASPI. In 1992 we passed the ARMS initiative to help the ammunition plants, including the Iowa Army Ammunition Plant, bring in commercial tenants that would pay part of the cost of these large plants. The initiative has been very successful and has saved taxpayers money. ASPI brings a similar program to the Rock Island, Watervliet, and Pine Bluff arsenals. Rock Island and the other arsenals have extraordinary workforce, space, and equipment that are underutilized in peacetime operations but are needed for wartime surge capabilities as well as smaller critical emergencies. The costs of the underutilized space and equipment must be paid for directly by taxpayers, or charged as overhead to work at the arsenals, causing high prices to military customers and, in an unfortunate spiral, decreasing utilization of the arsenals. ASPI is intended to help bring in commercial firms to use the available workforce, buildings, and equipment and help pay for their costs. ASPI was first passed in the fiscal year 01 Defense Authorization bill as a two-year pilot program. It was funded for the first time last year with $7.5 million in the fiscal year 02 Defense Appropriations bill. This has not given enough time to get the program fully underway. Thus this amendment would extend the program for two additional years, through 2004. It also would update reporting requirements to help Congress evaluate the program. The arsenals have never been more important to our military capabilities and have never faced more difficult times. Rock Island Arsenal has a highly skilled and dedicated workforce, impressive manufacturing capabilities, and a great history of service, but is not being used enough. I am pleased that this bill has funding for the unutilized capacity, but even better, this amendment should reduce the need for such funds in the future. I have every hope that ASPI will be as successful as the ARMS initiative, and will help Rock Island Arsenal thrive in its mission to protect the national security. I am pleased that Chairman Levin has agreed to accept this amendment, and as it is identical to a provision in the House bill, I hope it will soon be enacted into law.

Mr. HARKIN

Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, today I am pleased to join my distinguished colleagues, Senators Hutchinson, with whom I am pleased to work with on the Agriculture Committee and the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) Committee, and Senator Gregg, who is also a member of the HELP Committee, in introducing the Animal Drug User Fee Act of 2002. The Animal Drug User Fee Act would authorize the Food and Drug Administration, FDA, to collect user fees from animal drug manufacturers to support new animal drug applications and investigational applications. This important legislation is modeled after the successful Prescription Drug User Fees Act, which after a few years of implementation has reduced approval and review times by half. The need for expedited review of animal drug applications is substantial. Nine out of ten new animal drug applications are overdue. Prompt approval of safe and effective animal drugs is critical to the improvement of not only animal health but public health as well. Our animal health professionals need the newest and most effective drugs to combat dangerous animal diseases. Under the Animal Drug User Fee Act, the collection of user fees from animal drug manufacturers would be contingent on FDA's Center for Veterinary Medicine, CVM, reducing its review times to a maximum of 180 days over five years. The user fees generated by the Act would amount to $5 million in Fiscal Year 2003, $8 million in Fiscal Year 2004, and $10 million for each of the last three years, totaling $43 million over 5 years. The Secretary may determine the user fee amount and grant waivers in cases where such fees would inhibit innovation or discourage the development of animal drug products for minor uses or minor species. Such user fees would be considered an addition to, not a replacement for, the annual appropriations amount designated for CVM through the annual appropriations process. This legislation enjoys broad support from pharmaceutical, livestock and poultry producers and from the American Veterinary Medical Association, the Animal Health Institute, the National Pork Producers Association, the National Turkey Federation, the National Cattlemen's Beef Association, the National Milk Producers Federation, and the American Farm Bureau Federation. I urge my colleagues to support this important legislation.

Mr. HARKIN

Mr. HARKIN. Madam President, a couple weeks ago, on Memorial Day, we promised to remember and honor those who have sacrificed so much to serve our country. In Iowa, Mary ``Beth'' James and her family were honoring the memory of her husband, Bob James. But I'm afraid we have forgotten Beth, and not done Bob justice. Today I am introducing a bill for Beth and the other ``Forgotten Widows.'' Bob James proudly served his country as an active member of the Army and Army Reserves for 35 years, until he passed away in 1977. Bob's service began with the Amphibious Combat Infantry in North Africa and Italy in World War II. As a junior officer, Bob James landed with the Third Division near Casablanca, and later served with the 34th Division through the North African and Tunisian campaigns, as well as in amphibious landings at Solarno, Italy, the battle of Mt. Casino and four crossings of the Volturno River. He was awarded the Bronze Star medal for the Rome-Arno campaign and was given a battlefield promotion to First Lieutenant. After five years in World War II, he carried a mobilization designation as part of his 30-year reserve duty with the Selective Service Unit in Cedar Rapids that he proposed and was asked by General Hershey to organize. In fact, Bob served longer than the usual 30 years because General Hershey personally requested that he remain in active Reserves until he reached the age of 60. When Bob became ill, he continued to attend Reserve meetings. His wife, Beth, now age 83, remembers Bob telling her on April 9, 1977, Easter Sunday, ``I only have to live another six months.'' You see, he was worried about Beth's welfare after he passed away. He knew he had to turn 60 before he could enroll in the military's Survivor Benefit Plan to provide for Beth after he passed away. Unfortunately, Bob was not able to hold on. Lieutenant Colonel William R. James, USAR, died at age 59\1/2\ in 1977, 5\1/2\ months before his 60th birthday. Under the military's Survivor Benefit Plan, members who choose to enroll in the plan have a small deduction taken from their retirement benefit each month so that their spouses can continue to receive a portion of the benefit after the member dies. When the Reserve Component Survivor's Benefit Plan was established in 1972, members could not sign up for survivors benefits until they became eligible for the retirement benefit at age 60. Because of this arbitrary rule, and because Bob died at 59\1/2\, Beth received no survivor's benefit even though Bob served in the military for 35 years and had more than the maximum number of points used in calculating retirement benefits. Congress quickly became aware of this unjust consequence of the SBP law. One year after Bob's death, Congress took action to correct the unfair enrollment structure of the Reserve Component Survivor's Benefit Plan. Legislation passed in 1978 allows Reserve Component members to decide whether or how they will participate in the RCSBP when they are notified of retirement eligibility, but not yet eligible to receive retired pay, in almost all cases, many years before reaching age 60. Had this legislation been enacted earlier, Bob could have provided for Beth's security. Unfortunately, when drafting the legislation in 1978, Congress forgot about Beth and thousands of spouses like her whose husbands, despite having served their country for at least 20 years, died before they were allowed to enroll in the program to provide for their survivors. Congress continued to ignore these widows until 1997. Led by my colleague from South Carolina, Senator Thurmond, Congress finally took an important, but limited, step to recognize the ``Forgotten Widows,'' as Beth and the other spouses had come to be known. Congress created a special annuity of $165 per month for the Forgotten Widows. For the first time in 20 years, Beth James received some support from our government in return for Bob James' service to his country. While the annuity for certain military surviving spouses created in 1997 was certainly a step in the right direction, it is by no means adequate. The forgotten widows currently receive about $185 per month, after cost of living increases since 1997. In comparison, the monthly SBP benefits average is about $580 for beneficiaries over 62 and the monthly RC-SBP benefits average about $325 for beneficiaries over 62. The current benefit for forgotten widows is low for two reasons. First, the fiscal year 1998 legislation initially set the ACMSS benefit at the minimum allowable amount a service member could elect, even though most members participate at a higher level. Second, the 1997 legislation did not take into account cost of living increases that the widows would have received for more than two decades. If these widows had been enrolled in these programs in 1972 at the minimum level, their monthly benefit today would be approximately $434, rather than $185. The Forgotten Widows' Benefit Equity Act of 2002 amends the Annuity for Certain Military Surviving Spouses program established in the fiscal year 1998 Defense Authorization Bill. It does not change the eligibility criteria for the program. It directs the Department of Defense to calculate each surviving spouse's annuity assuming that the member had enrolled in the SBP before he died and had elected a base amount equal to his retired pay. For almost all forgotten widows this will be much more than the current annuity; if it is not, the survivor will continue to receive the current benefit. This approach ensures that the survivors' annuities take into account the members' rank and years of service, and the past cost of living increases. It is possible that some of the members would not have elected to participate in the SBP, or would not have chosen a base amount of 100 percent of retired pay, and thus the survivors would have received a lower benefit. However, they were never given that choice. And most members today do choose to participate at or near the highest level. In addition, this legislation is not retroactive; the forgotten widows will not be compensated for the thousands of dollars of benefits they would have received for over 20 years. These women, whose husbands devoted over 20 years of their lives to defending our freedoms and some of whom received no pensions of their own, were abandoned by our government for at least 20 years. While Congress recognized our responsibility to them in 1998, we have not fully met our obligation to provide them with an adequate, fair benefit. We can and must do better. We must stand by our Memorial Day promises to remember those who sacrificed for our country. I ask my colleagues to do what is right and support passage of the Forgotten Widow's Benefit Equity Act of 2002. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. HARKIN

Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, I would like to announce that the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry will conduct a hearing on June 25, 2002, in SR-328A at 10 a.m. The purpose of this hearing will be to consider nominations.

Mr. HARKIN

Mr. HARKIN. I thank the Senator from Virginia for his kindness and generosity and for propounding that unanimous consent request. He is a gentleman. Several Senators addressed the Chair.

Mr. HARKIN. I yield.

Mr. HARKIN. Madam President, first, I thank the Senator from Virginia, Senator Allen, for bringing this matter to the floor. I was unavoidably detained yesterday. I had a lot of constituents from the Greater Des Moines Chamber of Commerce, about 140 Iowans, with whom I was meeting as we concluded a very busy day to cap off their annual work trip to Washington, D.C. Unfortunately, I was unable to be here in the Chamber to assist and help my good friend from Virginia in offering this amendment. I personally thank the Senator from Virginia for filling in the gap yesterday and getting this amendment up on this bill. This is an issue that needs to be addressed and I could not ask for a more dedicated and steadfast ally than Senator Allen in helping pursue justice for all of the innocent American victims of state-sponsored terrorism. This is an issue that must be addressed by this Congress. That is why the bipartisan legislation Senator Allen and I introduced in April--the Terrorism Victim's Access to Compensation Act (S. 2134) and the amendment that Senator Allen joins me in offering here take two very important steps. First, this amendment would require that compensation be paid first and foremost from the blocked and frozen assets of the state sponsors of terrorism and their agents, not U.S. taxpayers, in cases where American victims of terrorism secure a final judgment in our federal courts and are awarded compensation accordingly. Second, this amendment provides a level playing field for all American victims of state-sponsored terrorism who are pursuing redress in our federal courts and compensation from the blocked assets of state sponsors of terrorism, including their agencies and instrumentalities. Madam President, we are united as Americans to meet the threat of international terrorism. This fight is being waged on many fronts, from the mountains of Afghanistan to the borders and streets of America. Even as we track down the terrorists and defend America, we must never forget that terrorist acts are ultimately stories of human tragedy. We must never forget the victims. I am talking about American victims like the dedicated, professional woman from Waverly, IA, Kathryn Koob, who sought to build cross- cultural ties between the Iranian people and the American people only to be taken hostage in the U.S. Embassy in Tehran and held captive for 444 nightmarish days in Iran. I am talking about American victims like Taleb Subh from LeClaire, IA, who, as a teenager, was visiting relatives in Kuwait and terrorized by Saddam Hussein and his troops at the outbreak of the Persian Gulf War. These are two examples, but Americans in all 50 states have suffered. That is why Senator Allen and I have joined together with 17 co- sponsors on both sides of the aisle to advance this legislation to ensure that American victims of state-sponsored terrorism are justly compensated for their pain, suffering, and losses. Current law allows American citizens to sue terrorists for compensation for their losses. Many Americans have won verdicts and judgments in our federal courts, yet have been unable to collect even though the U.S. Treasury lawfully controls at least $3.7 billion in blocked or frozen assets of the seven foreign governments known to sponsor terrorism. Our own government has worked to prevent these families from collecting. In fact, our own State Department and Justice Department have gone into federal court to single out and block the 52 Americans held hostage in Iran and their families from even being able to pursue justice in our federal courts, let alone collect compensation. To be clear, current law only applies to terrorist states. At present, seven foreign governments are officially designated by the U.S. State Department as state sponsors of terrorism. They are Iran, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Sudan, North Korea, and Cuba. It is those state sponsors of international terrorism, not the American taxpayer, who must be compelled to pay these costs first and foremost. The Harkin-Allen Amendment sends a clear message to foreign governments that sponsor international terrorism: If you sponsor terrorism, if you attack innocent Americans, we will pursue you, we will bring you to justice, and America will literally make you pay. American victims of state-sponsored terrorism deserve to be compensated for their pain, suffering, and losses by those terrorists who sponsor and commit these terrible acts. The Congress should clear the way for those with court-ordered judgments to be paid from blocked terrorist assets and, in so doing, deter future acts of state-sponsored terrorism against innocent Americans. Again, I appreciate the Senator from Virginia taking the initiative on this and getting this amendment up when I was unavoidably detained yesterday. I hope we have a resounding vote in favor of its passage.

Mr. HARKIN. Madam President, I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. HARKIN

Mr. HARKIN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that I be allowed to speak for 4 minutes and delay the vote from 9:35 to 9:39.

Mr. HARKIN

Mr. HARKIN. Madam President, there few programs that are more important to the health and quality of life of Americans than Medicare. It has been a godsend for millions of Americans. It deserves our strong support. We need to make sure that Medicare is strong, secure and improved for the future. The biggest gap in Medicare's coverage is it's lack of help with the high costs of prescription drugs. I feel strongly that we must move forward to provide seniors with an affordable, reliable Medicare prescription drug benefit this year. I call on our leadership to bring legislation to the floor so that we can provide seniors with much needed relief. Another area that is in urgent need of improvement is the fairness of the distribution of Medicare's payments and costs throughout the states. The Medicare program is placing seniors and health care providers in certain States at a severe disadvantage compared to other States. There are currently unjustifiable inequities in the system that affect the way in which both seniors and health care professionals are treated. Rather than rewarding States with healthy populations, that have efficient, high quality health care practices, and practice health care cost containment, the Medicare system is punishing these States. For example, seniors enrolled in the Medicare program pay monthly part B premiums of $54 across the United States. Medicare part B premiums are set by law to cover 25 percent of total national Part B spending regardless of where one lives or how many services one uses. However, data provided by the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission, Medpac, shows that the amount of part B services seniors use state by state varies significantly, from 70 percent of the national average to 128 percent of the national average. This is because in States like Iowa seniors lead healthier lifestyles and use fewer health care services and we have excellent health care providers who have always practiced efficient, conservative medicine. I believe that a health population, and an efficient health care system, should be rewarded under the Medicare program; however the system has been established to achieve quite the opposite. Not only do seniors in my State have higher Medicare part B premiums because of the higher number of services seniors receive in other states, health care providers in my State are receiving the lowest reimbursement levels in the country. Iowa health care providers receive $3,053 on average per beneficiary, while the national average is $5,490, and the highest state receives over $7,000 per beneficiary. Senator Craig and I, along with a host of our colleagues, have introduced a bipartisan bill called the Medicare Fairness in Reimbursement Act, S. 1020, that would reduce this unjustified disparity that serves to punish the health care providers in our states year after year. Under the FAIR Act, no state would be under 95 percent of the national average, and no state would be over 105 percent of the national average. A similar adjustment would be made for the part B geographic payment indices. We must work to alleviate the disparity that exists between states under the Medicare program, before we drive those states into a crisis. We can no longer ignore the direct and critical connection between provider reimbursement under the Medicare program, and access to high quality health care for our seniors. That is why today I am pleased to be joined by my colleague Senator Craig of Idaho in introducing legislation to increase fairness in Medicare part B premiums for seniors. Monthly Medicare premiums would be set at 25 percent of projected total Medicare Part B costs for each state, rather than nationally. For example, Minnesota seniors utilize the least amount of part B services, 70 percent of the national average. As a result, under our bill seniors in Minnesota would pay a monthly premium of $38, instead of the current national premium of $54. Seniors in my home State of Iowa use 75 percent of the national average of part B services, and therefore, under this bill they would pay a monthly premium of $41, rather than $54. Our legislation is budget neutral. It would simply set Medicare premiums based on state level costs rather than an aggregated national cost figure. It is common sense. If a person in Iowa goes out and buys car insurance, or health insurance for themselves, they will pay different premiums than someone buying insurance in New York or California. It's time for the Medicare program to stop punishing those States that have healthy seniors and efficient health care providers. We need to restore greater fairness in Medicare's payment among the 50 States. However until we achieve greater equity, seniors in low cost States should not have to bear an unfair portion of health care costs. Senator Craig and I will be working to get this issue addressed as a part of Medicare reforms this year. I urge my colleagues to review this important new proposal and to join us in working to achieve its passage.

Mr. HARKIN

Mr. HARKIN. Madam President, I move to reconsider the vote.

Mr. HARKIN. Madam President, I now move to table the McCain amendment and ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. HARKIN. Madam President, first, I wanted to say that I have a great deal of respect for the Senator from Arizona and for his keeping an eye on spending. I think he is to be commended for that. Sometimes it is a lonely job. I commend him for that. I appreciate what he said. He said he agrees with 99 percent of what I had to say earlier. I guess the 1 percent just happens to be the time limits. But I will respond to my friend from Arizona by saying, first, that I want to make it very clear. If there is not an emergency, we will fully offset it. Second, it is not a project that just happened; it was considered to be a project some time ago. But with September 11, and with the recognition now that our food supply is extremely vulnerable, especially animal agriculture more than anything else, because of the concentration, because of the travel in and out of the country, and the ability to transmit some of these very deadly kinds of pathogens that can infect our animals in this country--and some of those can be transmitted to humans--after September 11, it is vitally important that we move ahead as aggressively as possible to rebuild this national lab. Intellectually and honestly, even if it weren't in my State of Iowa, I would be saying the same thing the chairman of the Agriculture Committee and the chairman of the Appropriations Subcommittee on health said. I don't care where it is. This needs to be done sooner rather than later. That is what the debate is all about: Do we want to make our food supply safer sooner or take a chance and make it later? Do we want to increase our ability to respond quickly to a terrorist attack to our food supply sooner or do we want to do it later? That is what this is about. By doing this, we can get this thing finished by 2006. I have a timeline right here in front of me--by 2006; not 8 years, 4 years. Quite frankly, we ought to do everything we can to collapse the timeframe as much as possible. So, Madam President, I just close and ask unanimous consent that a letter dated today, June 6, by the Animal Agriculture Coalition, strongly supporting the $50 million included in the Senate version of the bill for the national animal disease facility, signed by a number of animal agricultural associations in the United States, be printed in the Record.

Mr. HARKIN. It is fully paid for. The Senator is right. I am glad he made the distinction. There are those who say we don't have to do it now, we can put it off until later. The USDA said last year in its report to the Appropriations Committee: USDA recognizes the swiftly increasing threats from known and emerging diseases because of increased travel, trade, production concentration, and pathogen resistance. A new disease emerges, on average, once a year, requiring constant vigilance and preparedness. The report went on to quote the Animal Agriculture Coalition which noted: The modernization plan proposed by ARS and APHIS is crucial to fulfilling the mission of USDA, specifically in ensuring a safe food supply and expanding global markets for agricultural products and services . . . if facilities in Ames are not modernized, both agencies could lose their ability to respond to animal disease emergencies. Because of the safety concerns and levels of safeguards necessary to work with animal pathogens, the work done in Ames is not easily transferred elsewhere within USDA. Before September 11, both the House and the Senate Appropriations Committees had moved to provide an additional $40 million for the design of the facility. With the tragedy of September 11, the need for modernization sharply increased. The Senator from Texas mentioned before that it would be 8 years before it would be done. The information we have now is if we move rapidly we will have the facility done in 2006, that is 4 years from now. The Senate Appropriations Committee wisely placed an additional $50 million for construction of the facility in this measure. That is because in these dangerous times we realize that America's food supply could be the target of terrorism. I would like to share with my colleagues some of the facts about the NADL and the important work it does. I think it would shed some light on this debate. The USDA Animal Health Facilities in Ames have the highest level of research capacity, expertise, and track record available in this area. It also provides diagnostic expertise, technology transfer, and training in the event of an outbreak. The National Veterinary Services Laboratories, in Ames, is the principal Federal diagnostic laboratory for animal diseases in the U.S. As such, it is a reference point for the State and other diagnostic laboratories, and provides training and testing. NVSL has recently been involved in West Nile virus diagnosis, mad cow disease diagnosis, and anthrax diagnosis. It has provided critical support to CDC in its investigations of human anthrax cases. The Center for Veterinary Biologics in Ames has the national responsibility for regulating and licensing all biologics for use in animals. Their knowledge, expertise, and capacity to expedite vaccine availability in the event of a bioterrorist outbreak will be centrally important to provide tools for disease control. As an example, they were recently involved in anthrax vaccine issues during the recent terrorism scare. Secretary Veneman recently said we do not need this money right now. But, in a report she provided to Appropriations Committee in May, just last month. She noted that under the lab's master plan, construction would be delayed if less than $331 million is spent on the lab in fiscal year 2004, the start of which is less than 16 months away. So the real question is, do we want to delay this in the hope that maybe, somehow, terrorists will not attack our food supply chain, which is the most vulnerable part of our system right now? I suppose if you wanted to just hope on that, maybe you could vote to support the McCain amendment. But I would not want to hope on that. When we know what to do, we know this is a national animal disease lab that will respond and provide the necessary resources, first to help prevent any widespread terrorist attack on our food supply, especially our animal system of agriculture, and second to respond immediately if, God forbid, anything like that should happen. Providing these funds now would provide important flexibility to the design team and USDA to move forward with components of the facility at a faster pace then in the original plan. Given the threat, sooner will be much better than later. And let's talk a little about the threat because those who are not familiar with agriculture might not understand its seriousness. A new organism of nonnative or native origin, once introduced into the United States animal populations, can initiate an uncontrollable epidemic due to the absence of vaccines or effective drugs, concentration of animal feeding operations in the United States, and a lack of resistance in host animals. This was evident with the introduction of West Nile virus in New York City in 1999. The current situation in Great Britain with foot-and- mouth disease and bovine spongiform encephalopathy also underscores the need to take every possible action to strengthen our animal health infrastructure. That, by the way, is able to be transmitted to humans. So this is a threat that we face. It is no less a threat than a terrorist taking a bomb on an airplane. It is no less a threat than terrorist activity that might involve any kind of explosives or what they might try to do in that regard in the future. This threat is real. Frankly, our defenses are inadequate and we need to be about rebuilding this laboratory and providing the kinds of resources that are needed, as I said, to prevent such an outbreak; second, to control it immediately if something does happen; and, third, to develop the vaccines and responses necessary to keep it under control. So again I say to my friend from Nevada, I thank him for pointing out that this is fully offset. This is not an emergency. For the life of me, I don't understand why the President would not want to move ahead more rapidly with the modernization and rebuilding of this National Animal Disease Laboratory.

Mr. HARKIN. This is not an emergency; it is fully offset in the bill.

Mr. HARKIN. Yes, I am glad to yield for a question.

Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, the question really before the Senate is whether or not we are going to provide $50 million for the modernization of the USDA national animal disease facility. I have listened to the comments made by the Senator from Arizona and the Senator from Texas and, of course, I listened to the statements made by the distinguished chairman of our committee laying out why this is necessary. I will not speak about any of the other amendments offered on this bill, but this one is of the utmost importance if we are concerned about homeland security. Perhaps one of the most vulnerable parts of our country in terms of a terrorist threat that could have a multiplier effect more rapidly than anything else in affecting more people is our food supply chain. That is the most vulnerable right now, and we all know it. The chairman of the committee has asked me as the chairman of the subcommittee that funds Health and Human Services medical research and also the agriculture subcommittee that is chaired by the distinguished Senator from Wisconsin, Mr. Kohl--and I serve on that--to focus on the bioterrorism threat to America. We have had hearings on it. We have looked at this. The National Animal Disease Laboratory is, if not the key, one of the key elements we will need to ensure the safety and security not only of animals but the people of this country. Again, I suppose some people say, sure, Harkin, you are defending it because it is in Iowa. I said some time ago that I was not responsible for the National Animal Disease Lab being located in Iowa. That predates not my birth but it predates my coming to Congress. I can honestly say that I don't care where this facility would be and I don't care in which State it would be. I would be a strong supporter of this amendment and for, as rapidly as possible, refurbishing and rebuilding this National Animal Disease Laboratory, even if it were not in the State of Iowa. Keep in mind, this is a national laboratory. It is not an Iowa lab. It is a national laboratory. It is the premier veterinary, biologic, and diagnostics lab anywhere in the world. But it is about 60 years old. It is run down. We found last year after the anthrax scare that permeated our country in our mail system that we had some very dangerous pathogens located in a strip mall in Ames, IA, because the National Animal Disease Lab did not have the facilities for it. That has since been taken care of but gives Members an idea for the need for this. The National Animal Disease Lab should have been rebuilt and modernized 10 or 15 years ago, probably more than that, but it was not. We got a little complacent. But then when we saw what happened in Europe and Great Britain with hoof and mouth and BSE, it became more and more imperative that we not only rebuild the lab but do it very rapidly. We started on that last year, but the events of September 11 have compelled us to move even more rapidly. The modernization of the national animal disease facilities is critical for both homeland defense and America's defense against animal diseases such as anthrax, brucellosis, salmonella, E. coli, many of which--in fact, all of which in these cases--can be transmitted to humans and cause a lot of illness and death in our population. So the importance of the facility is not in dispute. There are those who say let's wait and do it later. We cannot wait and do it later. We do not have that luxury right now because, as I said earlier, the most vulnerable part of our society right now, in terms of a terrorist threat, is the food supply and the animal systems in our country. Let me read from a USDA 2001 report to the Appropriations Committee to buttress that.

Mr. HARKIN. That is true, yes. I yield the floor.

Mr. HARKIN

Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, next week will mark a new beginning for the Iowa State Education Association when Jolene Franken steps down as President. I would like to take this opportunity to recognize Jolene for her many accomplishments as a teacher and the outstanding job she has done as the head of the organization representing Iowa teachers. She has done Iowa proud. We are all familiar with the expression that teachers touch the future. Whenever I see these words I think of teachers like Jolene Franken, a woman who is passionate about education and our children. As an elementary teacher for thirty years in Iowa, she has touched the lives of thousands of children. Jolene Franken earned her Bachelor of Science degree at Greenville College in Greenville, IL and Masters Degree from Northwest Missouri State University. Jolene exemplifies life long learning and has participated in additional professional development activities at the University of Northern Iowa and University of Iowa. Most of Jolene's career has been spent teaching first grade, but she is always open to new challenges. Most recently, she taught academically talented elementary students in the Denison Community School District's Extended Learning Program. Jolene has also been active in the creative problem solving competition, ``Destination Imagination,'' and has served as coach of the Iowa team for five years. Her Destination Imagination teams have participated in two World Championships. She has also been a driving force behind the Iowa State Academic Decathlon since its inception. Jolene has also been an active member of the Iowa State Education Association and National Education Association throughout her career where she has held numerous offices. As President of ISEA for the past four years, she has been a tireless advocate for children and public education. She has fought to increase awareness of the teacher shortage in Iowa, fought to increase teachers' salaries and has pushed for quality teacher mentor programs. As a first grade teacher, Jolene understands the importance of reading and has been an avid participant in NEA's Read Across America Day. Every year on Dr. Seuss' birthday, Jolene dons a ``Cat in the Hat'' costume to visit Iowa schools and read to the children. I commend and thank Jolene for her hard work to improve Iowa schools and educate Iowa's youth. Jolene's community, her State and her country are better off because of her years as an educator and leader for the futures of all of our children. While I have highlighted some of her accomplishments and interests over the years, the list is so much longer, and I speak from the heart when I say she will be missed. I know she will continue to be active on behalf of Iowa's children I also know that ISEA will be in good hands as John Hieronymus takes over as President. John is a math teacher from Iowa City and has served as vice-president of the organization for the past several years. Jolene Franken is a tough act to follow, but I know he is more than prepared to take on the challenging mission of leading ISEA.

Mr. HARKIN

Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, was 3581 included in that?

Mr. HARKIN. Reserving the right to object.

Mr. HARKIN

Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, last year, the weakness of our Nation's ability to respond to a bioterrorist attack was exposed. To properly prepare for the future, we must begin to think of our Nation's public health system as the front lines in our battle against terrorism. Unfortunately, our troops were inexperienced, our radar was out of date, and we were short on ammunition. Right now we don't have enough vaccines to protect every American. Public health officials were without the tools and training they need to detect an outbreak and rapidly respond. Prudence demanded action. That is why Senator Specter, Senator Byrd and I crafted and passed a $3.6 billion bioterrorism initiative to reverse this alarming trend. As a result of this effort, our Nation's defenses against bioterrorism has improved since September 11 and the anthrax attacks of last October, but much more still needs to be done. As chairman of the Labor-Health and Human Services Appropriations Subcommittee, I held several hearings with a broad variety of people, ranging from leaders of the Federal Government to first responders to our local public health workers. As a conferee for the bioterrorism bill, I'm proud of the bipartisan work we have been able to achieve on this plan to boost our Nation's bioterrorism prevention and preparedness. The initiatives included in this conference report will build on the Harkin-Specter bioterrorism plan that President Bush signed into law in January, and will aggressively ramp-up efforts to keep America the safest country in the world. I am especially supportive of the provisions in this conference report that I proposed in a seven-point plan I released following the anthrax attack last fall. Specifically, the measure will: Increase training for public health and medical officials: State and local officials, as well as doctors, nurses and other health professionals will be trained in diagnosis and treatment of bioterrorism exposure, as well as rapid communication to colleagues on case exposure and the identification of trends. Bolster vaccine stockpiles: Currently our stockpile of small pox vaccines could only vaccinate about 25 percent of Americans, and our anthrax vaccine stockpiles are also vastly inadequate. This legislation will increase funding to increase supplies and improve systems of transport to make sure that the appropriate pharmaceuticals can quickly get where they are needed. Ensure that there are round-the-clock disease investigators in every state: A number of states have no full-time experts charged with identifying and dealing with infectious diseases. Federal support can be used to ensure that every single state has at least one professional in charge of detecting disease and notifying proper authorities. Increase hospital surge capacity: The conference report will increase funding for planning and staffing to meet possible high-volume cases of infectious disease exposure. Funds would be administered through an innovative grant program that provides support for wide-ranging initiatives that will improve state and local hospital preparedness for response to bioterrorism and other public health threats. Improve surveillance and information sharing capacity at all levels of government: The legislation will ensure that all local health departments have access to the Health Alert Network. Currently, health departments in some states don's have fax machines and Internet access. Funding will expand the Health Alert Network so that health professionals are able to quickly key in on outbreaks and share their information around the country and the world. Expand food safety inspections: Through this bill, every domestic and importer of processed foods must register with the Food and Drug Administration, FDA, farms, restaurants and nonprofit food establishments like soup kitchens are exempted. Also the FDA's authority is expanded to allow them to stop any food or product that may present a public health risk and allows the agency to ban importers who repeatedly violate food safety regulations. Lastly, the FDA is given authority to inspect food processing establishment's records related to food safety. Currently the FDA can only get such records through court action. Create and maintain a comprehensive database of the locations of biohazardous pathogens: Finally, this legislation will for the first time require that the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and Agriculture closely regulate and register the possession, use and transfer of the most dangerous pathogens like anthrax and small pox. Security standards for these facilities will be established, and all people with access to the agents will be screened. Facilities with these pathogens will be inspected, and violation of these rules will be punishable by strict criminal and civil penalties. Again I am very pleased to support this conference report and I look forward to continuing to work in a strong bipartisan process with the President, Secretary Thompson and the rest of the administration to make sure adequate funding is provided for these critically important initatives.

Mr. HARKIN

Mr. HARKIN. It is my understanding from the managers that both sides will agree to my amendment as modified. I thank both Senator Baucus and Senator Grassley, my colleague from Iowa, and their respective staffs for working with my staff. I know it took a lot of time. I know these things are sometimes hard to work out and think about--the meanings of words, phrases, and their impact. I thank them for working this out in a manner that preserves the essence of this amendment, which is, make it one of our primary negotiating objectives; that the President of the United States seek to ensure that countries with whom we have trade not only abide by their own labor laws but abide by ILO convention 182 to prohibit, to put an end to the worst forms of child labor in international trade. I have been working on this issue for 10 years. I first introduced a bill in 1992. For me, today, to have this accepted by the managers to put into the fast-track bill represents a giant step forward. We made the first step a couple years ago when the Senate voted 96 to 0 to ratify ILO convention 182. Now this puts some teeth into it. This says that from now on when we negotiate trade agreements, this will be one of our primary negotiating objectives. The next step, I hope, is for the conference to make sure they keep this language. The House does not have it. I hope our Senate negotiators can keep this language. It is vitally important. It has widespread support in this Chamber on both sides of the aisle. I know it has widespread support among the American people. It has widespread support among our trading partners in other parts of the world. Now is the time for the United States to take that leadership. I hope and pray and trust that when this goes to conference, we will keep this provision that is so vital to ensuring that we have not only a free trading system in the future but a trading system that does not perpetuate this cycle of poverty and of ignorance throughout the globe because so many countries are using abusive child labor to make these products. Hopefully, they will come back from conference and we will have that. I look forward to the day when a new trade bill comes before the Senate for us to ratify and in that trade bill are steps that are being taken, agreements that have been made to end abusive child labor in international trade. That will be the day when we can tell all these children I have shown in all the pictures that they do have a brighter future, that they will be able to go to school and learn and not be caught in this cycle of poverty and repression, bondage, slavery, childhood prostitution, and childhood pornography into which they are now trapped. I thank Senator Baucus and Senator Grassley and their staffs for working this out. I encourage them to do everything they can to hold this in conference. I yield the floor.

Mr. HARKIN. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.