Kay Hutchison

Mrs. HUTCHISON

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, my amendment would increase the number of U.S. Customs and Border Protection officers by 275. This would bring the total of new U.S. Customs and Border Protection officers in this bill to 1,000. In my State of Texas, the Customs and Border Protection officers are assigned in the Houston region are responsible for the seaports along the Texas coast from Port Arthur to the Port of Corpus Christi. Some of these officers are also assigned to Houston's George Bush Intercontinental Airport. The CBP officers work at the Port of Houston in the morning and leave the port in the afternoon to go work at the Houston Intercontinental Airport. Sharing these U.S. Customs and Border Protection officers between port duties and airport duties is unacceptable. With increased security demands being placed on our Nation's ports and the desire to increase the number of containers inspected as they enter the United States, local port officials have long expressed the need for additional personnel in order to carry out the tasks that are so critical to our Nation's economy. With an unprecedented 11 million containers entering the United States annually, cargo doesn't stop when there isn't a Customs agent there to inspect the incoming shipments. What happens, of course, is that the cargo is not inspected. So I hope we can pass my amendment. I believe the Port Security Improvement Act of 2006 is a very good bill, and I particularly commend the leaders of the respective Senate committees for working together to bring all of the port security bills that have been introduced in Congress into one comprehensive bill so that we can address this issue. In the last 5 years, we have significantly strengthened our national defense. I think we saw yesterday that so many things have been done to keep our country safe and secure, because yesterday, of course, was the 5-year anniversary of the attack of 9/11. We have engaged the enemy before they have reached America since 9/11 of 2001. We have improved our homeland security. We have passed the PATRIOT Act to give law enforcement officials the tools they need and the resources necessary to protect our Nation. We must remain vigilant in pursuing terrorists who seek to harm our country. An integral aspect of our national defense and our economy is the security of our ports. Our Nation has more than 360 federally regulated, thriving ports, any one of which could be a target for our enemies. One terrorist incident at a U.S. port could impact an entire coast, and the financial impact of closing one of these ports could be devastating. Texas is home to 29 ports, including 4 of the 10 busiest in the Nation. The Port of Houston is one of the most important ports in the world. It ranks first in the United States in foreign waterborne tonnage, second in total tonnage, and is the sixth largest in the world. It is also home to one of the biggest petrochemical complexes in the world. It is also part of our Nation's U.S. Strategic Petroleum Reserve, the world's largest oil stockpile. Due to the volume of hazardous materials, a terrorist attack in the Port of Houston would be an enormous disaster. An attack in the Port of Houston could also disrupt our Nation's energy supply, delivering a blow to our economy at a time when we cannot afford such a disruption. For years, I have worked with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle for more stringent port security. In the 107th Congress, my colleagues, Senators Feinstein, Kyl, Snowe, and I introduced the Comprehensive Seaport and Container Security Act of 2002. This bill called for container seals and tracking numbers for goods being shipped to the United States. It also called for a plan to increase inspection of merchandise at foreign facilities as well as for a shipment profiling plan to track containers and shipments of merchandise imported into the United States that could be a threat to security. In the 107th Congress, we passed the Maritime Transportation Security Act. This bipartisan bill was landmark legislation that closed a large hole in our national security. I was an original cosponsor of this bill as well. However, when it passed the Senate, I made the point of saying the legislation only laid the foundation for port security and more needed to be done. The following year, I introduced the Intermodal Shipping Container Security Act in both the 108th and 109th Congresses. This was comprehensive legislation, and I am pleased that many of the key provisions in that bill, such as the random inspection of containers, the establishment of minimum standards and procedures for securing containers in transit to the United States, and the implementation of an improved container targeting system, have been incorporated into the legislation before us today. I thank Chairman Stevens and Cochairman Inouye for working with me in the Commerce Committee on these provisions. In addition, Senator Collins and Senator Lieberman have added so much to make this bill even more powerful and more helpful in our overall goal of securing the ports in our country. This legislation calls for the Department of Homeland Security to develop and implement a plan for random inspection of containers in addition to any targeted or preshipment inspection. This significant provision would require the Secretary of Homeland Security to develop and implement a plan to conduct random searches of containers in addition to any targeted or preshipment inspection of the containers as required by law. This would allow the U.S. Customs inspectors to do more at the point of embarkation with the random sampling of different cargo that has been inspected. Another important provision in this legislation is the establishment of minimum standards for securing containers in transit to the United States. The Secretary of Homeland Security is encouraged to promote and establish those minimum standards for the security of containers moving through the entire international supply chain. This is a key element and I am hopeful the Secretary will take this action. We cannot inspect every piece of cargo, or our international commerce as we know it today would come to a grinding halt. However, if we have better technology, such as a seal which is tamper-proof, we will know when the contents of the cargo have been altered. My amendment would add to the numbers of Customs and Border Protection officers. A thousand new officers, when you have more than 360 federally regulated ports in this country, is not asking a lot. We must do more. We must do more at the point of embarkation, the point of origin, at the point where ships come into our U.S. waters, and at the ports themselves. We need more inspectors to be authorized in order to do that. I am asking that my colleagues support my amendment to raise this number to 1,000. We cannot afford, as we are passing this major legislation, not to do it right, not to authorize everything we need and give the Department of Homeland Security the tools they need to do the job of securing our ports. We have done a lot. We have passed maritime security laws since 2001, since our country was attacked. But this bill adds to the measures that we know are lacking in the system today. We are taking more steps every week, every month, and every year to secure our country. I thank Chairman Stevens and Cochairman Inouye, Chairman Collins and Ranking Member Lieberman, Chairman Grassley and Ranking Member Baucus for their leadership in this area. I appreciate that they have come together. It is very difficult in this Congress, when more than one committee has jurisdiction over a major part of the Government of this country. In homeland security we find that the Commerce Committee and the Homeland Security Committee do have overlapping jurisdiction. This bill could have been brought down with in-fighting among the committees, but it has not been brought down because of the leadership of the committees on a bipartisan basis. I appreciate what we are doing today. I urge my colleagues to support my amendment. I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mrs. HUTCHISON. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, while we are waiting, I would like to respond to the Senator from Maine and thank her. She and I have had a conversation about the situation at the Port of Houston. It is particularly dire, in that it is such a busy port and one that has so many unique features. I think the fact that she is supporting the amendment will go a long way toward getting us to the point we need to be. I think her point is very well taken that giving the Secretary of Homeland Security the capability to reallocate personnel within this mandate that we are giving is also the right thing to do, just as we should be allocating our resources for homeland security based on terror threats, based on needs, not based on politics or anything else. We need to secure our homeland, and we need to do it in a professional way. I think this bill goes a long way in a very bipartisan spirit toward giving our Department of Homeland Security the tools it needs to do the job. I am very hopeful we will be able to agree to my amendment and go forward to conference and send this bill to the President very shortly.

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays on my amendment No. 4931.

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I urge my colleagues to support this amendment. It increases the number of Customs and Border Protection officers by 275 for a total of 1,000. In my home State of Texas, where the Port of Houston is the sixth largest port in the world, we have officers who have to leave the port at noon and go out to the airport. Because of this, we don't have enough officers to cover our ports. This amendment will add just 275 officers for a total of 1,000 new officers. I think this is an amendment that is very important to add for the overall security of our ports. I urge everyone to vote for it.

Mrs. HUTCHISON

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, as the Senate prepares for final passage of H.R. 5631, the fiscal year 2007 Defense appropriations bill, I would like to thank my colleagues for accepting an amendment that I cosponsored which addresses the growing concern of a number of veterans returning from combat operations overseas that may have traumatic brain injury, TBI. According to reports, preliminary research by the center shows that about 10 percent of all service personnel, and up to 20 percent of frontline personnel, suffer concussions during combat tours. Like any medical condition, early diagnosis is the key to successful intervention and treatment. Unfortunately, many are not being properly screened for this serious and debilitating condition. TBI clinically presents many of the same signs and symptoms of post traumatic stress disorder, PTSD. These two serious but very different medical conditions require separate and distinct treatment programs. Because it is so important that our veteran care facilities have the proper training to distinguish between these two illnesses, I included language in the fiscal year 2007 Military Construction and Veterans Affairs appropriations bill requesting the Department of Veterans Affairs to establish a separate education program to better diagnose TBI. With final passage of this bill, we have another opportunity to further strengthen our efforts to better understand and treat TBI. I am proud to cosponsor this amendment which will add an additional $12 million in funding for the Defense and Veterans Brain Injury Center, DVBIC. The DVBIC is a collaboration between the Defense Department and the VA to deliver care to patients with TBI. During testimony earlier this year, leaders of the DVBIC testified that the center needed $19 million in funding for fiscal year 2007. This amendment brings the total funding from the $7 million requested to a total of $19 million. This funding level is important because it will ensure our combat veterans receive the quality care they deserve.

Mrs. HUTCHISON

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I was listening to the debate, and I heard the Democratic leader call this a ``do-nothing Congress.'' He said that several times. I have heard it before. Yet here we have a bill that will go directly to the President. This is a bill that brings together pieces of legislation that have been worked on for years in this body, a chance to score a huge victory for all sides, that gives a minimum wage increase of over $2 that we have been trying to do, along with tax cuts for small businesses so that it is a balance for years in this Congress. We have been trying to permanently ease the burden of the death tax ever since I got to this Senate. It is the small businesses; it is not Bill Gates, it is not Warren Buffett who is worried about the death tax. It is the farmer who is going to have to sell his farm when he dies or his children who will because his children can't pay the taxes because the farm is more valuable than they can earn and produce to pay the taxes. It is the small business that has been built by a family. It is the restaurant owner that is going to have to sell the business that we are fixing tonight. This is a bill that would take away the ability to call this a ``do- nothing Congress.'' Why is it that almost every Republican is going to vote for it and almost every Democrat is going to vote against it? I think this is an excuse to make this a ``do-nothing Congress'' and we are turning our backs on the middle class and the poor people of this country who depend on the minimum wage and death tax relief.

Mrs. HUTCHISON

Mrs. HUTCHISON. I thank the leader for his comments and his offer of assistance. I am told that the House majority leadership is aware of this matter and has given a commitment to work with interested colleagues to reach a resolution that assures no bias on the part of Congress toward any of the four airlines involved in this issue.

Mrs. HUTCHISON

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I ask the Senator from Kansas to yield for a unanimous consent request that I be placed in line after the Senator from Kansas and the Senator from Washington to speak on this bill?

Mrs. HUTCHISON. If the Senator yields, can I then make that proposal?

Mrs. HUTCHISON. I ask unanimous consent I be recognized after the Senator from Kansas and the Senator from Washington.

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I rise today to speak in support of the Gulf of Mexico Energy Security Act of 2006. I was very encouraged by the strong vote to proceed to debate on this bill. I hope we can do this for the people of America to begin to see the energy prices in this country start coming down. I am a cosponsor of this bill. It is a compromise and reflects much hard work from all of the gulf coast producing States, including Florida. I especially want to mention Senators Landrieu and Vitter from Louisiana, who have pushed for a long time for this kind of proposal. The people of America are not interested in political rhetoric. They want Congress to take action on the rising energy costs in this country. This is a potential near-term solution for a long-term problem. For too long, we have neglected our own resources in this country, including those in the Gulf of Mexico. This bill will bring access to more than 8.3 million acres in the Gulf of Mexico for oil and natural gas, with the production in leases 181 and 181 south. It will provide access to over 1.26 billion barrels of oil in these areas. To put this in perspective, the average annual fuel consumption for cars and light trucks, according to the Federal Highway Administration, is 14.5 barrels of gasoline; that is, 607 gallons. This 1.26 billion barrels of oil is enough energy to fuel approximately 87 million vehicles for a year. We cannot afford to stand by and allow our import costs of oil to continue to increase. Since 2001, those prices have gone up 150 percent. Additionally, the bill will provide access to 5.8 trillion cubic feet of natural gas. To put that figure in perspective, it is six times the amount of LNG we import every year, three times the amount of gas currently in storage, and enough natural gas to serve 107 million households. America's yearly natural gas bill has risen from $50 billion to $200 billion over the last 6 years. This increase impacts farmers, ranchers, business owners and households. We must continue to discover and support alternative energy proposals. Congress has done that. Congress passed a bill last year, signed by the President, that focused on other sources of energy besides oil and gas. We gave credits for solar power, biofuel, ethanol, wind energy, all of which are renewable sources of energy that are safe and environmentally clean. That has made a difference. Even wind energy has now become almost 10 percent of the electricity used in my home State of Texas. We know if we put together a number of different kinds of renewable sources of energy such as corn and soybeans, it can be an alternative that takes a tremendous burden off oil and gas, which has been the largest supplier. I am also encouraged that some of our largest integrated oil companies are moving toward those kinds of alternative fuels. I opened a biodiesel plant in Galveston, TX, a couple of weeks ago. That is a step in the right direction. It was being opened by Chevron. We are doing some good things. The global demand for oil and natural gas is rising at a rapid rate. That is what is causing the prices to go up. We have to look to our own resources. One of those major resources is the Gulf of Mexico. I also hope we eventually will look at other resources, such as Alaska, which contains comparable resources to that of the Gulf of Mexico. We can do something ourselves with the resources of our own country if we combine the research and new emerging sources of energy as well as the old standard oil and natural gas sources we also have. If we don't act, we are jeopardizing our economic and national security. This bill also helps the States that are allowing drilling to mitigate the costs this production brings to their States. In my State of Texas, we have 367 miles of coastline which has sustained impacts from production. Texas has helped finance and support much of the gulf coast production. The entire Nation has benefitted from lower fuel costs due to these investments. This production, however, has had an impact on my State and the coastal areas of my State. This bill will begin to help mitigate those impacts. It provides the gulf producing States, beginning in 2007, with 37.5 percent of revenues. Fifty percent will go to the U.S. Treasury, and the rest, 12.5 percent, will be shared among all the States of our country. Every State is going to benefit from passing this legislation. Today, a barrel of oil is selling above $74. Every American is feeling the impact. This is a piece of legislation that can have a very positive impact very quickly. I urge my colleagues to support this legislation. Let's send it to the President. Those leases will soon be ready for bid. It is our responsibility to do that. I yield the floor.

Mr. HUTCHISON

Mr. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, the House has passed and sent to the Senate, H. Con. Res. 448, which commends NASA and the crew of the Space Shuttle Discovery on the successful completion of the STS-121 mission earlier this week. I support this resolution and urge my colleagues to join with me and provide the Senate concurrence to this resolution. I also note that the House passed this resolution on July 20, the 37th anniversary of the Apollo 11 lunar landing, adding special significance to the action we are being asked to endorse. The resolution recognizes and applauds the very successful STS-121 mission, which accomplished all of its test objectives regarding on- orbit repair procedures, as well as delivering 14 tons of equipment and supplies to the International Space Station, and a third space station crew member. This restores the space station to its full crew complement since the Columbia accident and allows for additional crew time to be spent doing on-orbit research. The mission also demonstrated that changes made to the external tank, while still not fully completed, resulted in the least amount of foam shedding during lift-off and the cleanest, most undamaged underside of the shuttle yet seen. The successful completion of this second Return-to-Flight test mission is especially significant because it means the Shuttle Program is once again on the threshold of completing the important work of assembling the International Space Station. If all goes as expected, the next mission to the Space Station will take place in just a little over 5 weeks from now, near the end of August. That mission will deliver additional supplies and equipment to the space station, including a new structural truss element and an additional set of solar arrays. Once the solar arrays are deployed, they will not only provide additional power to the space station, which can be used for an increasing number of scientific experiments during the ongoing assembly period, but they will begin to make the space station one of the brightest objects in the night sky. By the time the space station is completed, it will be brighter than any other object in the night sky besides the Moon, an ever-present reminder that we are a species no longer confined to the Earth and able to make use of that unique environment of low-Earth orbit for research that can benefit all of humanity. I applaud the crew of Discovery and the team at NASA who all worked together to restore this Nation's ability to conduct the human exploration and utilization of space.

Mrs. HUTCHISON

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I rise to speak in support of a resolution the Senate is expected to soon consider, and which I have cosponsored, along with Senator Frist, who is the lead sponsor, and Senators Reid, Biden, Santorum, Nelson of Florida, Kyl, Bond, and Levin. It is a resolution that condemns Hezbollah and expresses support for Israel's right to self defense. All of us are watching in horror what is happening there, and I think it is important that the United States Senate speak forcefully in support of our President. The G-8 leaders have spoken this week to condemn Hezbollah and terrorist activities and to ask the Government of Lebanon to help find the Israeli soldiers who are being held hostage and free them and to disarm Hezbollah. Mr. President, there should be no misunderstanding. Israel has fully complied with the United Nations mandate. They have no forces in Lebanon and yet they have continued to withstand attack after attack from Hezbollah. We watched with sadness last year when Lebanon's former Prime Minister was assassinated by terrorists. I think we have to put the blame where we believe it lies. We know Iran and Syria are infiltrating Lebanon with support for Hezbollah and Hamas. We know Hezbollah and Hamas are committed to the destruction of Israel. Since 1948 it has been forced to continually fight for its very existence, and yet in the middle of this it has stood as a democratic form of government, with a free economy. Israel has never backed away from its fundamental commitment to freedom and human liberty. So, Mr. President, I think this is something the United States Senate should stand firm with this bipartisan resolution that says we do support our President and the G-8 leaders and condemn Hezbollah. We encourage the Government of Lebanon, to stop these attacks on Israel, and locate and return the soldiers who have been taken hostage. Let's add our voice to that of the unified leaders of the world who are saying this should not be allowed to happen. We must speak together, we must stay together, we must support Israel's right to self-defense and understand that they should have the support of a unified world community, saying to the terrorists and the governments that are supporting the terrorists--Hamas, Hezbollah, Iran, Syria supporting them--that the world is not going to sit by and let people be terrorized. This is a global war on terror, and we must speak. I thank the distinguished Senator from Kansas for allowing me to speak. I know I am speaking during the stem cell debate. The resolution will be considered soon, and I wanted to speak on the floor because I think it is so important what is happening in the world today, and we must speak as a unified voice in the Senate.

Mrs. HUTCHISON

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have 5 minutes to talk as in morning business regarding the resolution that will be on the Senate floor later tonight or tomorrow regarding condemning Hezbollah.

Mrs. HUTCHISON. I yield the floor.

Mrs. HUTCHISON

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I have listened to part of the previous presentations. I think the impression has been given that if we just had a Democratic Senate we could accomplish so much more. But I think in the process of making such a presentation many things have been overlooked or not quite stated in a factual way. Let me start by saying what has been said--that Republicans have cut $12 billion from college student aid, frozen Pell grants for higher education. Nothing could be further from the truth. The Republican Congress, since President Bush has been in office, has dramatically increased the absolute commitment to helping lower income students, many who are first-time college graduates in their family, and we are helping at the Federal level to an extent never seen before. For instance, Pell grants will grow by $240 million. The number of recipients will increase by 59,000 to 5.3 million students. Funding for Pell grants rose from $8.8 billion in 2001 to $13 billion in 2006. In 2006, the Department of Education expects to make over $77 billion in grants, loans, and other aid to over 10 million students. It is a fact that we are increasing Pell grants. We are increasing the number of students who are eligible for Pell grants. We need to be honest when we are talking about what the difference would be if there were a Democratic Senate versus the Republican accomplishments. In addition, the Department of Education in 2006 will make or guarantee more than $60 billion in new student loans, a $4 billion increase over the previous year. That is a huge accomplishment in just one year. In addition, one of the things this Senate is focusing on currently is trying to get more of our students into the areas of math, science, and engineering because that is where the jobs are in the future. To make sure our students from low-income areas are able to pursue this type of career and to give them special attention, we have added a SMART grants program for Pell-eligible students that will give them a bonus if they pursue a degree in math or science, or a foreign language deemed to be critical for national security. We have taken steps so low-income students, only Pell grant-eligible students, will get this bonus to move in the direction of good jobs in our country. It is important to stay on the facts and talk about some of the things we have tried to do. ``Tried to do is key.'' Many of the things I have heard in the last hour about what the Democrats would do if they were in charge were somewhat amusing because we have tried to do those very things; it is the other side of the aisle who has kept us from achieving those goals. Consider association health plans--small business health plans that would give millions of workers the opportunity to have affordable health care. Because they work for small businesses--maybe 10 employees or 20 employees--that employer cannot afford to offer health insurance options because the options are too expensive, and employers are not eligible for the big plans that bring the cost down. We brought to the Senate floor, after trying for years, we passed legislation out of committee and brought to the Senate the small business health plans that would give millions of employees of small businesses the opportunity to have affordable health care. It was the Democrats, by an overwhelming majority of their caucus, who voted against association health plans again and again. Making health care more affordable is a goal we have. One of the most important things we can do this year is to broaden the number of people who have health care coverage in our country. If the Democrats would sit down and work with us, we could do that. We cannot do it by ourselves. I am very concerned when it is implied that a Democratic Congress could produce this when it is the Democrats who have obstructed Republican initiatives. Border security. I live in a border state. We have a northern border and a southern border. Since I came to the Senate, we have probably quadrupled the number of Border Patrol agents in both the northern and the southern sectors. We have put billions into more border control facilities, into surveillance techniques that extend the reach when you cannot have a person every mile. You cannot have a person every mile, but you can certainly extend your reach with infrared and UAVs. This is very helpful. We have put our money into this area, and we have made it a focus. Securing our border is going to continue with a Republican Congress. Tax cuts. I have heard many people say: How can you have tax cuts when we have deficits and so many needs in our country? Let's put the facts on the table. Every time in recent history when we have had tax cuts in this country--from President Kennedy, President Reagan, and President Bush--the revenue of our country has increased. It happened again after the tax cuts of 2003. When people can keep more of the money that they have worked for and earned in their pocketbooks, they will either reinvest it in capital, which will increase jobs and prosperity and, therefore, revenue to our country; or they will save it, which does the same thing; or they will spend it and create new opportunities for jobs in the manufacturing sector. That is exactly what has happened when the Republicans, over the objections of the Democratic caucus, did push through tax cuts giving marriage penalty relief, giving lower tax brackets for every American who pays taxes, giving a 15-percent capital gains and dividends rate, giving relief across the board to the people who are earning the money in this country that has caused a revenue increase. Therefore, the deficit of this country is going to be $100 billion less this year than we thought might happen. If we do not continue the tax cuts, it will be a tax increase, and that will stall the economy. We will see the jobless rate rise and our economy will be adversely impacted. So tax cuts are a difference that we will see with a Republican-controlled Congress. Now I will talk about energy. One of the things we have done in this Congress, which has not gotten very much play, is the Energy bill that was passed through the leadership of Senator Pete Domenici as chairman of the Energy Committee. For the first time in 10 years, we passed a significant Energy bill last year through this Republican-led Congress. The focus was on renewables, tax credits for renewables, increased investment in research into renewable energy. Anyone who has filled up a gas tank, anyone who runs a small business and has higher costs of electricity and natural gas knows we have an energy crisis in this country. One of the reasons why is because we are over 60 percent dependent on foreign sources for our energy needs. These foreign sources are unreliable. We need to do what Americans do. That is, stand up and take control of our destiny. That means we are going to create energy that is renewable and clean, that protects the environment, energy such as biodiesel, made from soybeans; energy such as ethanol, made from corn. Wind energy is producing almost 10 percent of the electricity in my home State of Texas and Texas is a big State. It is very important that we have the wind energy credits we passed in that tax bill because it has enhanced energy resources in our country. This is a significant contribution to diversifying our energy sources, and it is so important for our country. My point is this: This Republican Congress has been a steady hand at the wheel. We have supported America's commitment in the war on terror. We have made it a policy that we will not leave when our commitment is not fulfilled. And when it is, and when the generals on the ground say Iraq can secure itself and Afghanistan can do it by themselves, we will then leave. We want to do that. We do not want to stay indefinitely in Iraq or Afghanistan, but we want to keep the terrorists where they are. We will keep our commitment to lower taxes and clean energy. We will keep our commitment to the small business people who are working in America and contributing to the economy. They are the heart of our country. That is what a Republican Congress would do. That is what we are going to continue to fight for. I hope, rather than saying a Democratic Congress would do it differently, when they have blocked so many of the things we have done, they would cross the aisle and say: Let's do these things together. We can do something bipartisan. People in this country do not care about Republicans or Democrats. They want results. We can do it if we work together across the aisle instead of making so many issues political that do not need to be. I yield the floor.

Mrs. HUTCHISON

Mrs. HUTCHISON. I call up amendment No. 4377 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, this amendment would require the Department of Defense to clarify in the Quadrennial Defense Review the homeland defense and civil support missions of the National Guard and Reserves. The QDR is a comprehensive examination of national defense strategy, force structure, force mobilization, and modernization plans, infrastructure, budget plans--all elements of the defense program. It is the planning that goes on every 4 years. The QDR is in process now for the next 4 years. The goal of the QDR is to determine the defense strategy of the United States and its established defense programs for the next 20 years, and it is updated every 4 years. For decades, homeland defense has been a mission of the Department of Defense. However, only after the 9/11 attacks in 2001 did this very important mission really come to the forefront in defense planning. Unfortunately, the present QDR lacks sufficient guidance for the Guard and Reserve components in this very important mission they have. The amendment I am proposing would require the Department of Defense to include in the QDR a definition of the homeland defense and civil support missions of the National Guard and Reserves. The Department has not really formalized the requirements for the role of the National Guard and Reserve in homeland security. We know the President has ordered the deployment of Guard and Reserve to our borders to try to secure our borders, so we need a really comprehensive look and guidance for the Reserve component, particularly the Guard, concerning their roles and how they will be able to train and equip for homeland security missions. Today, the National Guard and Reserve must debate the merits of their initiatives and their equipment procurement. That is not the way it should be. Our Guard and Reserve do a fabulous job. They are on active duty in Iraq and Afghanistan today. They have gone through several cycles of deployment to Iraq and Afghanistan. There is a Texas Guard unit in Bosnia in command and control today, continuing the peacekeeping mission there. They are doing their jobs, they are being called up at a level that is very high, but ambiguities remain in their homeland security mission. Competition for resources continues, and there is a lack of clarity about what role the Department actually expects them to have. This omission was painfully obvious after 9/11. After Hurricanes Rita and Katrina and now with the deployment to the border, which I totally support, their mission is once again expanding. This amendment will provide the DOD with the information it needs to determine the role the National Guard and Reserves should have, must have, and will continue to have, but with more clarification, in the defense of our country. This is a very important amendment. I believe it will add to their responsibilities, and they will be able to get the equipment and the training they need to do the jobs we are asking them to do in homeland defense and for the other civil emergencies we have. Mr. President, I ask for the support of my colleagues for this amendment.

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I urge the adoption of the amendment.

Mrs. HUTCHISON. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, the National Biocontainment Lab, NBL, at the University of Texas Medical Branch, UTMB, in Galveston is an important tool in our continued fight against bioterrorism and emerging infectious diseases. As a Regional Center of Excellence for Biodefense and Emerging Infectious Diseases Research, RCE, for Federal Region VI, UTMB's lab is able to research and develop new therapies, vaccines, and tests for microbes that might be used as weapons by terrorists, as well as naturally occurring diseases such as SARS and West Nile virus. I was happy to support UTMB in 2003 in their efforts to establish the NBL in Galveston. In letters and conversations with Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institutes of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, and Dr. Elias Zerhouni, director of National Institutes of Health, I conveyed the importance of this facility and the benefits to housing the NBL at UTMB. Once again, I am pleased to support the NBL and UTMB with this amendment. By understanding the staffing and training requirements needed at this new facility, our doctors and scientists will be better prepared and more able to recognize a bioterrorist attack. Amendment No. 4222

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, Social Security numbers are included on all military identification cards including the service member, military spouse, and all dependents over the age of ten. In light of the recent theft of millions of veterans' personal information from the Department of Veterans Affairs, all federal agencies must take measures to protect crucial information. To this end, I have introduced an amendment that would require the Department of Defense to conduct a feasibility study on prohibiting the use of Social Security numbers on all military identification cards. When the Department of Defense began using Social Security numbers on identification cards in 1967, identity theft was not a problem most Americans worried about. Electronic transactions were, for the most part, non-existent, and we did not have the kind of access to personal records that we have today. By simply gaining access to someone's Social Security number, a malicious person could attempt to open a line of credit, obtain a false driver's license or passport, or completely steal another person's identity. Our military men and women should not have to worry about these problems while defending our country. We cannot wait until an incident occurs within the Department of Defense that compromises the security of our military members. The federal government must be proactive. The feasibility study I have proposed has a reasonable finish date of six months from enactment and would give the Department ample time to study this issue and find a self-imposed solution. Social Security numbers are not included on driver's licenses or passports. Colleges and universities are using generic numbers for student identification rather than Social Security numbers. It is time the Department of Defense provides this important safeguard for our troops. amendment no. 4398