Kay Hutchison

Mrs. HUTCHISON

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I call up amendment No. 3711, which is at the desk.

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Senator Snowe be added as a cosponsor of the amendment.

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I hope my colleagues will support this air cargo security amendment. This is an amendment that the Senate has voted on twice and passed. It will add significantly to the security of our aviation community. The airports and the top of the airplane are very safe. We have done a super job of creating those safe areas, but what we have not done is matched that with cargo security, what is in the belly of the airplane. We want a seamless aviation system, and with this amendment I think we will have the safest aviation system in the world. I am very proud to have the support of so many of my colleagues, and I hope we send a strong message that this amendment should be added to the final bill. I appreciate the support of the chairman, the ranking member, the chairman of the Commerce Committee, and the Aviation Subcommittee as well.

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I thank the distinguished chairman of the Aviation Subcommittee, the Senator from Mississippi. In fact, one of the unanimous consents we had when we took this intelligence reform bill to the floor was that all the amendments would have to be relevant to the 9/11 Commission. The amendment before us is relevant. I think because the Senate has acted on this, it will be a valuable contribution to the bill. I appreciate the help and counsel of the Senator from Mississippi. I thank the distinguished chairman and ranking member of the Governmental Affairs Committee for bringing this bill to the Senate floor. We will pass this bill, and it will be a good bill. We are all going to work together to make that happen, which the distinguished chairman and ranking member have already proven. I ask for the yeas and nays at the appropriate time for whenever it can be scheduled along the lines that the chairman and ranking member would schedule.

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, do I have 1 minute remaining before the vote begins?

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I rise today to offer the Air Cargo Security Act as an amendment to the Intelligence Reform Act. This is a measure that we need to pass to answer some of the criticisms in the 9/ 11 Commission Report regarding cargo security. I am going to talk further about this bill, but I would like to offer Senator McCain some of the time to also talk because he was one of the cosponsors. It went through the Commerce Committee with his chairmanship. We all agree this is a bill that is needed to add to the security that is in the bill in accordance with the 9/11 Commission Report. I yield to Senator McCain for his remarks, and then I will finish my presentation.

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I thank the distinguished chairman of the Commerce Committee, Senator McCain, for adding his support to this bill. We would not have gotten it through the Commerce Committee without his support. I think it adds immeasurably to the bill that is before us today. Congressional action following 9/11 quickly created the Transportation Security Administration to address the appalling security gaps exposed by terrorists. We took drastic but appropriate steps to considerably increase security of our airports and planes, and 3 years later we are light-years ahead of where we were on that horrific day. I am pleased that the 9/11 Commission raises issues that are similar to those I have discussed since we enacted the Aviation and Transportation Security Act. The Commission report states: Concerns also remain regarding the screening and transport of checked bags and cargo. More attention and resources should be directed to reducing or mitigating the threat posed by explosives in vessels' cargo holds. I have worked since 2001 to enact stringent air cargo security standards and, along with Senator Feinstein, introduced the Air Cargo Security Act to create a comprehensive system to secure shippers, freight forwarders, and carriers. The Senate has twice passed this bill unanimously, but it remains stalled in the House of Representatives. The bottom line is this: Are we safer than on September 11? Absolutely. But have we done enough? Not yet. So I think we can do more. I think this is an opportunity for us to address this issue. The Air Cargo Security Act will make a difference in our Nation's air security. One thing we have not provided since 9/11 is security in the belly of the aircraft equal to protections for passenger areas and airports. Cargo is shipped on passenger aircraft, in some cases, without being screened. That is why we need this amendment. The Air Cargo Security Act would establish a reliable known-shipper program, mandate inspections of cargo facilities, and direct the Transportation Security Agency to work with foreign countries to institute regular inspections at facilities that bring cargo into the United States. The legislation would develop a training program for air cargo handlers and give TSA the power to revoke the license of a shipper or freight forwarder whose practices are unsound. These provisions will go a long way toward further securing aircraft in our country. All of us want America to have the safest aviation system in the world. Closing the cargo loophole is an important step. There is no doubt in my mind that the traveling public is considerably safer. We have made changes to ensure our screeners undergo background checks, training, and testing. Checked bags are scrutinized, flight crew training is constantly being improved, and we are traveling in a more secure system. But we must address the cargo issue. Mr. President, 22 percent of all air cargo in the United States is carried on passenger flights, only a tiny fraction of which is inspected. Beyond transport on passenger planes, there are other issues in the cargo arena. Identification cards used by workers are generally not secured with fingerprints or other biometric identifiers. Background checks for cargo employees are still inadequate. Perhaps the weakest link in the cargo security chain is the freight forwarder. These are the middlemen who collect cargo from the shippers and deliver it to the air carrier. Regulations governing these companies are lax, and the TSA is finding security violations when it conducts inspections. Under current law, however, TSA lacks the authority to revoke the shipping privileges of freight forwarders that repeatedly violate security procedures. This air cargo security amendment would give TSA that power. Air cargo security is not a new problem. In 1988, Pan Am 103 went down over Lockerbie, Scotland, because of explosives planted inside a radio in the cargo hold of a passenger airplane. The 1996 Valujet crash in the Everglades was caused by high-pressure tanks that never should have been put on a passenger aircraft in the first place. My amendment will strengthen air cargo security on all commercial flights. It establishes a more reliable known shipper program by requiring inspections of facilities, creating an accessible shipper database, and providing for tamper-proof identification cards for airport personnel. It gives TSA the tools required to hold shippers accountable for the contents they ship by allowing the administration to revoke the license of a shipper or freight forwarder engaged in unsound or illegal practices. This is the most important part of the bill. The TSA has told me time and again they need to have this capability in order to revoke licenses when they find an unsafe situation. I have had the support of my colleagues, such as Senator McCain. Senator Lott, the chairman of the Aviation Subcommittee, has worked with me on this bill. We have passed this bill twice in the Senate. It is a bill we have looked at, we have vetted. We have had hearings. I see my colleague Senator Lott, the chairman of the Aviation Subcommittee, is on the floor of the Senate. He knows this bill. He worked with me to perfect it. If we can put this amendment on this very important piece of legislation, it will add immeasurably to our aviation security. We will have the most secure aviation system in the world with this amendment on this particular legislation. I yield the floor.

Mrs. HUTCHISON

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, today I wish to recognize Chief Judge Walter S. Smith, Jr., of the Western District of Texas. Judge Smith has dedicated his life to public service and justice, and I am pleased to commend him on his 20th anniversary on the Federal bench. Judge Smith was born on October 25, 1940, to Dr. Walter S. Smith and Mary Elizabeth Smith. He grew up in the central Texas town of Marlin. He attended Baylor University where he received his bachelor of arts and his juris doctorate. While in law school, Judge Smith was editor of the law review and served as president of the Phi Delta Phi law fraternity. Judge Smith began his legal career in private practice in Waco, TX. In 1979, he was appointed by Gov. Bill Clements to the 54th Judicial District Court of McLennan County. Shortly thereafter, Judge Smith was appointed U.S. Magistrate Judge for the Western District of Texas. In 1984, Senator John Tower recommended Judge Smith for an appointment to the Federal bench. President Ronald Reagan nominated him for the position and he received a unanimous Senate confirmation on October 4, 1984. Judge Smith was sworn into office on October 6, 1984, and has served since then as the first and only resident United States District Judge in the Waco Division. Judge Smith was elevated to the position of chief Judge of the Western District of Texas on June 1, 2003, a position he continues to hold. During his legal career, Judge Smith has remained a member of the Texas Bar Association, the Texas Bar Foundation, the McLennan County Bar Association, and the American Judicature Society. In addition to being admitted to practice in the State of Texas, Judge Smith was also admitted to practice in Federal district courts for the Western District of Texas, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, and the United States Supreme Court. Judge Smith is particularly proud of his participation in the formation of the Abner V. McCall American Inns of Court, for which he served as the first president. During his years on the Federal bench, Judge Smith has traveled throughout the Western and other Districts of Texas. In addition to Waco, he has held court in Austin, San Antonio, Pecos, El Paso, Midland, Laredo, Corpus Christi and Forth Worth. Judge Smith is married to the former Brenda Derting. They have two daughters, five granddaughters, and two grandsons. He is an ordained elder in the First Presbyterian Church and has been actively involved in church activities and community service. During his career, Judge Smith has demonstrated the dedication and patience we seek on our judges. He is respected for his fairness and commitment to justice. Judge Smith has been asked to make rulings on many difficult cases throughout the years and has risen to the many challenges with poise and dignity. His knowledge of the law and experience make him a great judge. His dedication to his community and to the rule of law make him a remarkable public servant. I thank him for his 20 years on the Federal bench in the Western District of Texas.

Mrs. HUTCHISON

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I thank the distinguished chairman and ranking member of the Finance Committee for getting this bill through. These family tax breaks are very important. The most time I have spent on anything in my time in the Senate has been for family tax relief, and particularly marriage penalty relief. The first bill I introduced on this subject was several years ago to try to stop the penalty that people get when there are two working individuals and they get married because then they go into a higher tax bracket, and they get taxed more than if they had stayed single. That is the worst thing we could do in our society because, of course, we know that marriage is very helpful to family stability. It has been shown that children in families where there is a husband and a wife are less likely to suffer child abuse and more likely to do well in school. It has been shown time and time again that families do better in the area of raising their children when there are two parents in the household. But we have had a Tax Code that has discriminated against marriage. That is absolutely ludicrous. Last year, with my colleagues and President Bush, we passed a $350 billion tax cut. This is an economic growth package that is working. We have seen the fruits of our labor. The economy is coming back. The stock market has stabilized. Jobs are being created. So we have freed the economic engines of our economy by keeping more money in small business and more money in the pocketbooks of families. One of the most important provisions provided immediate marriage penalty relief, making the standard deduction double that of single people and enlarging the 15-percent tax bracket for married joint filers to twice that of single filers. This provision saved 52 million married couples, 3.6 million of whom are in Texas, up to $600 on their 2003 tax bills. Enacting the marriage penalty relief was a giant step toward tax fairness. But the bill before us tonight is necessary to keep those tax cuts in place. Since the size of the bill was restricted to $350 billion last year, the marriage penalty relief provision is only effective for 2 years. So if we do not act on the bill tonight, and pass it, marriage could be a taxable event once again in 2005. Without relief, 48 percent of married couples would lose the tax relief they have gained in the last 2 years. Besides lower taxes, the other thing that is so important for our Tax Code is to have predictable taxes so a family can plan on what they are going to have in their budgets. That is why I hope eventually we will be able to make these tax cuts permanent. But at least today we are going to take a major step in the right direction for predictability of the tax cuts. Marriage penalty relief will now be able to be counted on from today through 2010, if we pass the bill before us tonight. I think that is a major step in the right direction. Hopefully, between now and 2010 Congress will see fit, working with President Bush, to make this relief permanent. Then our families will know exactly what they are going to have to spend, and they will have more in their pocketbooks as well. I think it is very important to say this is not something that was easy. We know it was not. There are people who wanted to take the tax cuts away, so acting was very necessary to keep the child tax credit, to keep marriage penalty relief, and to give the overall relief to families in our country. But you can tell it has taken until the last month of this session to do it because many people wanted to put these tax cuts into other spending priorities. I cannot think of anything better than having the money go back in the pocketbooks of those who earn it so they can spend it for their families the way they want to. Mr. President, I know my time is expiring, but I just urge my colleagues to pass this bill. I thank the distinguished chairman and ranking member for making sure that marriage penalty relief is in the bill before us tonight so that we can count on now through 2010 that this will be available for people getting married in our country, to raise their families in the way they choose to do it. Thank you, Mr. President. I yield the floor.

Mrs. HUTCHISON

Mrs. HUTCHISON. I yield back the remainder of our time.

Mrs. HUTCHISON. How much time is remaining on either side?

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senator from California get 2\1/2\ minutes of the majority time.

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, this is a bill that is cut and dried. My distinguished colleague, Senator Feinstein, and I have worked very closely on this bill. We are in agreement on its priorities. I think it is a good bill for the military construction of our country. I don't need to go over the details of the bill. Here is the bottom line: We are trying to fund the necessary military construction that will give a better quality of life and better facilities to those who are doing the job we are asking them to do. It is a pretty important job. They are protecting the freedom we enjoy today. It is that simple. Our bill has prioritized housing, facilities where people will be trained, and especially Guard and Reserve units. In the past, I think we have shortchanged our Guard and Reserve. But we now see how important our Guard and Reserve are, how much they are doing for our country. They are being called in record numbers, and they are stepping to the plate and doing their job. So we have focused on a bill that would give more of our Guard and Reserve better facilities, which they so richly deserve. We have more child development centers because we have more families in the military than before. We have more hospitals and medical facilities because, of course, we want to make sure we have proper medical treatment for our young men and women who are in our Armed Forces and for their families. So I think we have taken our allocation, which is $10 billion, and we have prioritized it to make a better quality of life for those who are giving their lives for our freedom. I think it is a good bill, and I am proud to ask my colleagues to support it.

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, have the yeas and nays been ordered?

Mrs. HUTCHISON. I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mrs. HUTCHISON

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Madam President, I am very pleased to bring forward for the Senate's consideration the fiscal year 2005 Military Construction appropriations bill. I am also pleased to be joined by the ranking member of the Military Construction Subcommittee, Senator Feinstein from California. We have worked very closely on this bill. That has been our tradition. We have never had a problem with our Military Construction bill. Frankly, we have done some very important work and begun to help the Department of Defense shape the military for the future. Our bill provides, including $5.3 billion for military construction, $4.2 billion for military family housing; $166 million for NATO infrastructure, and $246 million for base realignment and closure costs. Although the military construction needs continue to exceed resources available, I am very pleased that the bill provides a significant increase over last year's funding. I believe the bill we have on the floor today attends both to the President's most pressing priorities and to the concerns of Senators. Since September 11, 2001, we have made great demands on our military personnel as they have waged the global war on terror. The sacrifices have been widely shared, but the demands have been particularly acute for our Reserve components who have faced deployments on a scale and for durations unprecedented in the post-World-War II era. Facilities support for the Guard and Reserve have traditionally failed to keep pace with need. I am pleased that this year the administration increased the request for Reserve component funding by 68 percent. Even this higher figure, however, is not adequate and the bill adds an additional $194 million or 31 percent more for critically needed projects in the Guard and Reserve. We believe this bill does a very good job of providing the resources needed to accomplish our military mission. But nothing is so critical to the mission as the people who carry it out, particularly in a time in which so much is being asked of them. For that reason, we have paid particular attention to projects that enhance the quality of life of our military members and their families. The bill provides over $1 billion for construction of new modern barracks, $188 million for design and construction of new hospital and medical facilities, and $11 million for child development centers to serve our military families. It also provides a 9-percent increase over last year for family housing construction operations and maintenance. Because we are concerned about the quality of life of our military families, I want to comment briefly on a provision that is addressed in our bill and is very important to meeting the needs in the future for military housing. In 1996, Congress passed legislation to provide the Defense Department with authority to enter into partnerships with private entities for the acquisition and management of military family housing. Because the initiative was unprecedented, the budget authority for the program was capped at $850 million, pending an evaluation of the program's success. The success has been striking. To date, the Department of Defense has awarded 34 privatization projects comprising 63,200 housing units. Another 63 projects involving 116,000 housing units in 37 States and the District of Columbia are pending. The program has accelerated significantly the elimination of inadequate housing for our Armed Forces and has placed thousands of military families in better housing far sooner than would have been possible otherwise. Customer satisfaction with privatized housing is extremely high, and the Defense Department estimates the program will decrease long-term housing costs by 10 to 15 percent due to more efficient maintenance. The Department expects to reach the statutory cap late this fall, and the cap must be raised or the program would end. However, the Congressional Budget Office has decided to change its methods for scoring the additional authority, counting not just the annual appropriations required to fund the Government's contribution to privatized housing but also all the estimated benefits that accrue to the Government over time. Effectively, the CBO intends to score the additional authority to enter into partnerships as though there were no partnerships, and the Government was paying for all of the new housing itself and paying for it all this year. That approach, besides seriously overstating the Government's expenditures for housing, negates any advantage of privatized housing over traditional military construction. Public-private partnerships are relatively new, and we recognize CBO is struggling to account for them properly. We acknowledge the appeal of a theoretically comprehensive accounting of Federal financial activities. But the practical reality of CBO's proposed approach will be prolonged substandard housing for tens of thousands of our military families, with not a dollar difference in the amount of money Government is spending. So we are not going to allow that to stand. I hope a sensible solution to this issue will prevail. We are going to continue to work with the Budget Committee, CBO, the Armed Services Committee, and in our own Military Construction conference. In the meantime, there is an amendment that is now part of our package that will direct the Defense Department to assess the impact on our military families if we fail to resolve this issue and, by doing so, put a marker down to address the issue in conference if it is not settled elsewhere. Last year this bill differed from the administration's request in only one significant way, and that was overseas construction. The administration was in the early stages of its global posture review and there were many uncertainties about the future of the U.S. military presence overseas. Today, the Department's vision is clearer. The Department has made significant progress in thinking about the future of our overseas military facilities and, over the recess, began to publicly disclose some of that thinking. They have made a major step in the right direction. The Independent Overseas Basing Commission created by last year's Military Construction Appropriations bill is up and running and has begun its assessment of overseas infrastructure needs. The commission's work will help inform our evaluation of our overseas construction requirements. I and my colleague, Senator Feinstein, have visited numerous military installations all over the world. I know our colleagues have as well. I am certain they have found the same thing we have--that the needs at these installations almost always outstrip the resources we are able to direct to them. Although most of the needs are eventually addressed, sometimes the urgency of the requirement isn't fully appreciated here in Washington, where the budget requests are being prepared. This bill provides funding for a number of projects which are badly needed at particular installations and are in the future years defense plan, but which were not included in this year's budget request. All of them have been carefully screened by the military services to ensure that they meet urgent military requirements; all are top priorities for installation commanders, and all have been authorized in the Senate version of the Defense authorization bill. A significant percentage of them support our Guard and Reserve forces, and I am pleased we were able to include them in this bill. They are a priority. The bill before the Senate was approved by the Committee on Appropriations on a unanimous vote of 29-0. I thank my ranking member, Senator Feinstein, for her cooperation and counsel throughout this process, and compliment her staff, Christina Evans and B.G. Wright, who have worked so cooperatively with my staff in preparing this bill. My staff, Dennis Ward and Sean Knowles, also have done a terrific job. They have traveled to the bases where we have requests to find out for themselves that these requests are needed and how we can best meet the needs of all of the military installations in our country and where our troops are based overseas. I so appreciate their professionalism and support. I am pleased to offer the 2005 Military Construction appropriations bill for the Senate's consideration. I yield the floor to my colleague, Senator Feinstein.

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Madam President, I yield such time as he needs to the distinguished chairman of the Homeland Security Appropriations Committee, who did such a wonderful job this week passing our Homeland Security appropriations bill that is going to fund homeland security for all of our country, after which I would like to reclaim the floor for the Military Construction Subcommittee report.

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, this would now be the appropriate time because I know of no speakers.

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, before Senator Feinstein yields the floor, in case she has anything else to say, I say to the Senator from Delaware that he was very persistent last year. We did everything to try to help him with that last component of the increase in the capacity for Dover. We were not able to do that last year. Senator Feinstein did make it her highest priority this year. I want the Senators from Delaware to know that. I supported it fully, but we did remember that the Senator had pressed hard. Every one of us knows the great role that Dover Air Force Base plays in our military. They have one of the hardest jobs in all of our military, and that is the comforting of families when their loved ones are returned home, many times no longer alive in body but certainly in spirit. That is a huge job that is done beautifully at Dover. We appreciate that. We have added to the capacity of Dover Air Force Base that has such an important place in our military facilities throughout our whole country. We thank the Senator from Delaware for coming to the floor of the Senate to reemphasize that importance. I thank him very much.

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I thank Senator Reid for his very kind words. It means a lot to Senator Feinstein and myself that he would come to the floor and recognize the job we are doing. It is very thoughtful and we appreciate it very much. Once again, I think we have a good bill that has taken into consideration the priorities of our military, our administration, and the Senators who all came together to put a bill on the floor that would address the needs in a fair and balanced way throughout our country, and I thank my colleague from California. We have a great working relationship, which shows in the bill because it passed unanimously out of the committee, and I think it will pass unanimously out of the Senate. Hopefully we can go forward to start the construction projects October 1, the beginning of fiscal year 2005. I yield back the remainder of my time. florida national guard hurricane damage

Mrs. HUTCHISON. I would be pleased to engage in a colloquy with the Senator from Florida.

Mrs. HUTCHISON. I thank the Senator from Florida for bringing this issue to the attention of our committee and the Senate. Contingency funds exist to support the requirements of the Florida National Guard and I am confident they will have what they need when they need it.

Mrs. HUTCHISON

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

Mrs. HUTCHISON

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

Mrs. HUTCHISON

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I commend Michael Schneider to my colleagues. He has had 25 years on the bench, starting as a municipal judge and working his way to the Supreme Court of Texas. He is one of the most respected judges in Texas, and I hope all my colleagues will vote for him. I ask my colleague, Senator Cornyn, if he wishes to finish this minute.