Daniel Inouye

Mr. INOUYE

Mr. INOUYE. I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. INOUYE. Madam President, I am overwhelmed by the generous remarks of the distinguished Senator from Illinois. Thank you very much. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. INOUYE. Madam President, I yield back the remainder of the time.

Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. INOUYE. Madam President, the motion offered by the Senator from Texas, Mrs. Hutchison, is very similar to the motion of the Senator from Nevada that the Senate defeated. There is only one difference between the two motions. This motion allows for the cost of inflation to be provided, and the previous one did not. I have already informed the Senate why making reductions in this bill is not a good idea, but I wish to remind my colleagues once again that the level of funding in this bill is consistent with the amount approved by the Congress in the budget resolution. Second, as the Senator from Texas knows, the omnibus bill was written by the Appropriations subcommittees in a bipartisan process and these bills were reported out of the committee--five of them unanimously and two almost unanimously. The subcommittees worked with their House counterparts to craft this legislation. It reflects a fair compromise between the two bodies. But, once again, the argument in favor of cutting the omnibus is that there is overlap between the funds in the Recovery Act and in the omnibus bill. As I have noted previously, this simply is not the case. The funds in the Recovery Act are either unrelated to the omnibus or were assumed in the levels approved by the Recovery Act. This motion also suggests that the committee should cut nonessential spending. I, for one, would argue that this bill contains only essential funds, but I recognize for a few of my colleagues nonessential spending equates to earmarks. I wish to remind my colleagues once again that on the question of earmarks, there is $3.8 billion in congressionally directed spending in this bill. This represents less than 1 percent of the total bill. If you eliminated all of the earmarks in this bill, including those of Hawaii and Texas, you would still have to cut at least $8 billion more from other valid programs. If we have to cut this bill to the fiscal year 2008 level, that means there are a number of worthy projects that will have to be reconsidered. For example, the State and Foreign Operations chapter of the bill provides a total of $5.5 billion for programs to combat HIV/AIDS--$388 million above former President Bush's request and $459 million above the fiscal year 2008 request. This increase was supported by Democrats and Republicans. Of this amount, $600 million is provided for the Global Fund to fight HIV/AIDS, which is $400 million above the request. Additionally within the total, $350 million is provided for USAID programs to combat HIV/AIDS. These additional funds, which pay for life-sustaining and antiretroviral drugs, prevention and care programs, would be lost to the detriment of 1 million people who would receive lifesaving treatment this year. With this funding, 2 million additional HIV infections would be prevented this year. Instead of 10 million lives we are saving today, we have the opportunity to save 12 million people. We have the opportunity with this bill to save or care for 1 million more orphans and vulnerable children who are either infected with HIV or have been orphaned because a parent died from HIV. Do we think that the Senate wants to reconsider this item? Freezing funding would mean $350 million less for the FBI to protect our Nation and our communities from terrorism and violent crime. The FBI would have to institute an immediate hiring freeze of agents, analysts, and support staff. This will mean 650 fewer FBI special agents and 1,250 fewer intelligence analysts and other professionals fighting crime and terrorism on U.S. soil. Surely the Senator from Texas doesn't want us to go back and reduce funding for the FBI. More than 30 Members requested the committee add funds for operations of our national parks. If we have to cut program goals, we will lose 3,000 park rangers. While there are funds in the Recovery Act for the Park Service, these funds were not for rangers or park operations; they were to cover deferred maintenance projects. These are projects that are ready to go and can be started almost immediately to stimulate the economy as intended. There is no duplication between the Recovery Act and the omnibus for our national parks. I could stand here all day and list example after example of the types of programs that are funded in this omnibus bill with the increases that the Senator's amendment would eliminate. These examples shouldn't come as any surprise to the Members of the Senate, if they remember that these bills were written by our subcommittee chairmen and ranking members in a bipartisan fashion. They were marked up in open session with all Members able to offer amendments and the final product was drafted with our House colleagues on a bipartisan basis. Once again, the omnibus bill is a good package of bills. It is bipartisan, it is noncontroversial, and it is in compliance with the budget resolution totals for the committee. The idea of stimulus overlap is not based on fact. The question of earmarks is a minor point in the significant bill that protects Democratic priorities. So I believe this bill deserves the support of every Member of the Senate. I urge my colleagues to vote against this motion. If I may speak on another subject, the Senator from Oklahoma raised questions regarding the Polynesian Voyaging Society. Students learn in different ways, and educators are constantly pressed to find inspiring ways to educate our young people, particularly those who are considered at risk. That is what the Polynesian Voyaging Society offers. The voyages organized by the Society help to train educators and scientists in ocean resource stewardship. In addition, through the use of the Internet, the society interactively communicates with students during the voyage to share the knowledge gained. This initiative supports cultural education programs geared toward enhancing leadership skills and cultural knowledge through deep sea voyaging for students. These traditional voyaging skills utilize noninstrument navigation skills whereby participants have to rely upon themselves and their crews to arrive safely at their destination. The voyage is much more than one of miles; it is a voyage of young people discovering that they are able to accomplish more than they ever thought possible. This knowledge of self-reliance and interdependence helps to transform students, especially native Hawaiian students, so they may chart a positive future. The program also makes science more accessible to school students as they follow the journey. Many students are encouraged to study science and care about the environment because of this program. Numerous college science majors mentioned activities on the Polynesian Voyaging Society as the reason why they chose to study science. This leadership opportunity has been shown to be especially effective with at-risk youth diagnosed with mental illness. The success of traditional methods of addressing mental illness in adolescents involves a strong family support system. One study revealed the students who participated in this program showed great improvement regardless of the support that the student received from family. In effect, this program has been able to transcend existing social problems within the student's own family so that these young people can grow and develop into contributing members of the community. As noted in the National Academies' Study, ``Rising Above The Gathering Storm,'' creating opportunities and incentives for students to pursue science studies is a critical component of ensuring America's future competitiveness. The Polynesian Voyaging Society's programs are geared toward providing such opportunities. On a personal note, the program is geared to assist Native Hawaiians, in particular. As we find in Native societies throughout the United States, Native Americans have not only been mistreated and victims of discrimination, they have been deprived of their culture. In earlier days, they were forced to become Christians. They were forced to wear suits. They were forced not to wear feathers. While in this Polynesian program, I have spoken to many of the students, and there are certain points that should be made. Several students came up to me, for example, and said, ``I am proud to be a Hawaiian.'' That is one of the things we have found lacking in Native Hawaiian youth--pride in their ancestry--especially when they learn their ancestors took a voyage much longer than the one Columbus took across the Atlantic, double the length, and the Hawaiians knew where they were headed--to Hawaiki, which is presently the State of Hawaii. Columbus thought he was going elsewhere, and he got lost. It makes them a bit proud of their ancestry. They learned their ancestors were great warriors, great voyagers, great administrators, and great farmers. This is a very inexpensive way to restore the pride that is much in need among our Native Hawaiian youth. I have been told that the assistant leader will be seeking recognition. I am happy to yield the floor.

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

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

Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to vote in relation to the Ensign motion to commit with instructions, as modified with the changes at the desk; and that no amendments be in order to the motion prior to a vote in relation to the motion to commit; that upon disposition of the motion to commit, Senator Hutchison be recognized to offer an amendment which provides for a reduction in funding with no amendment in order to the amendment prior to a vote in relation to the amendment.

Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, the measure before us, H.R. 1105, is consistent with the funding levels approved in the budget resolution. Therefore, I sincerely believe there is no justification for any amendment to reopen this bill to further cuts. The Republicans argue there is an overlap between the funds added in the recovery bill and the omnibus bill before us. At the request of Republican Members, Senator Cochran and I called upon our staff to conduct a bipartisan review of the impact that the Recovery Act has on the omnibus bill. That review determined that there is, at most, minimal overlap. Let me explain. First, there are 900 programs in the omnibus bill. Fewer than 20 percent receive stimulus funds. For those who may want to offer an across-the-board cut to this bill, they would be harming more than 80 percent of the programs for the Department of Agriculture, Commerce, Justice, Treasury, HUD, Energy, and so on. Second, of the programs with stimulus funds, only 100 have an increase in the 2009 omnibus bill above the 2008 funding level, and many of those increases just cover inflation or are relatively small. Nearly half of these programs averaged about $5 million in increase between 2008 and 2009. In many cases this does not even cover the cost of inflation. Analysis will show there are 30 programs in the bill before us which grow substantially between 2008 and 2009 by a total of $15 billion. Of the omnibus growth of the $15 billion we measured, $13 billion is either entirely unrelated to the stimulus bill or is required in addition to the Recovery Act funds to achieve policy objectives or was funded in response to strong political support which would eliminate any chance of reducing it. I would like to mention a few critical priorities that would go unmet if the Congress were to pass a CR rather than the omnibus. On food and medical product safety inspections, this omnibus bill would provide the Food and Drug Administration with an increase of nearly $325 million, of which $150 million is included in the current continuing resolution. If this measure is not enacted into law, the proposed increased funding for the FDA would be reduced by $175 million. This reduction in funding would significantly decrease the number of food and medical product safety inspections, both domestic and overseas, that the FDA could perform. On the matter of consumer product safety, this measure would provide the Consumer Product Safety Commission with an increase of $25 million or 32 percent above the 2008 level. Without this funding increase, this Commission would not be able to implement many of the reforms and new directives contained in the newly enacted Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act to make children's products safer, such as the consumer complaint database, an overseas presence, and increased inspector general staffing, and staffing generally. On the matter of the enforcement of securities law, inadequate resources for the Securities and Exchange Commission would hamper the ability to undertake vigorous enforcement of security laws to help bolster the integrity of the financial markets just when such enforcement is needed. On the matter of the Federal Aviation Administration, this agency faces a crisis in maintaining an adequate workforce of trained air traffic controllers. Without the increase provided in this omnibus bill, the FAA would be forced to freeze or reduce the number of new air traffic controllers the agency can bring on board and train, worsening the experience shortage we already have in our air traffic control towers. One accident is one too many. These are only some of the many priorities in this legislation that would go unmet if we fail to pass this bill as written. This omnibus bill is a good package. It is bipartisan and noncontroversial. It is in compliance with the budget resolution for the committee. Again, I believe there is no justification for an amendment to reopen this bill to further cuts that would do harm to the important national priorities I have mentioned. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. INOUYE

Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Armed Services be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, March 3, 2009, at 9:30 a.m.

Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on March 3, 2009 at 10 a.m., to conduct a hearing entitled ``Consumer Protections in Financial Services: Past Problems, Future Solutions.

Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I would like to ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, March 3, 2009, at 10 a.m., in room SD-106 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building.

Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Foreign Relations be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, March 3, 2009, at 10 a.m., to hold a hearing entitled ``Iranian Political and Nuclear Realities and U.S. Policy Options.''

Mr. INOUYE

Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, the Senator from Arizona proposes that the Congress should enact a continuing resolution until the end of the year instead of fulfilling our responsibilities and completing work on the appropriations bills for fiscal year 2009. Last summer the Appropriations Committee reported 10 Appropriations bills to the Senate. All of them were reported to the Senate from the Committee with overwhelming bipartisan support. Eight were reported with unanimous support. Of the ten bills, only three were enacted. The other bills were put on hold because the previous administration refused to negotiate on overall spending levels approved by the Congress. Two other bills, Legislative and Interior, were prepared by the Subcommittee Chairmen, in concert with their Ranking Members, but were never completed. These nine unfinished bills were left on the shelf until the current administration was elected. Last fall the House and Senate Appropriations Committees sat down in bipartisan negotiations to work out the differences between these nine bills. The result of those negotiations is the bill before the Senate today, H.R. 1105. This bill reflects a compromise between the bills of both bodies. It is a fair outcome that protects the interests of the House and Senate. This bill was agreed to by the House last week, with votes from Members of both parties. I should point out that Members have had more than a week to review the legislation. The bill and statement have been on the internet since last Monday. I also note that this bill was not done in the dark of night. Virtually every item in the bill reflects the bipartisan work of the Appropriations Subcommittees from last year. Most of this information was posted on the internet and has been available to Members' offices since last summer. Unlike some omnibus bills in the past, there is no major legislation that was added at the last minute. The direction from the leadership of both houses was not to add controversial new material in this bill, and the committees did not. If the Senate were now to determine that we should not complete our work on the fiscal year 2009 appropriations bills at this juncture and instead agree to a continuing resolution for the rest of the year, all the efforts of the Committee in reviewing the budget request, the hearings and staff review, the countless meetings with executive branch officials, the mark ups and the ensuing direction that comes with this bill would be wasted. More importantly than the wasted effort is that the Congress would be abrogating its responsibility. Under a continuing resolution the government operates programs under the authority of the previous year. Programs that should have been terminated continue to be funded. Important new programs cannot be initiated. This is true even if the program is something that was supported by both the previous administration and the Congress. It is true if the Congress passed a new authorization to fund it last year. Is this really how we want to manage the executive branch? Under a continuing resolution funding for the agencies covered by this bill would be held at last year's level. The Congress authorized a pay raise for our civil servants, and it must be paid. But unless funding in the budget is increased, other programs will have to be cut to meet payroll. A continuing resolution doesn't account for the cost of inflation. Even in these tough economic times, there has been cost growth in managing our Government. We all know that it costs more to run these agencies this year than it did in 2008. But under a continuing resolution agencies have to cut necessary functions to cover the higher costs due to inflation. Perhaps most important, under a continuing resolution the Congress foregoes oversight of the executive branch. In each appropriations bill, the committees include guidance on how funding should be allocated. Some programs are increased; others are cut compared to the budget request. When we operate under a continuing resolution, the Congress turns over control to the agencies. Mr. President, the Constitution provides the Congress with the power of the purse to ensure that we exercise control over the executive branch. It is one of the most important rights of the legislative branch. But it is also a duty. It is the duty of the Congress to decide how the executive branch should spend the taxpayer's money. When we decide to govern by continuing resolution we are not responsibly fulfilling this duty. This amendment would turn over control of Government spending to the administration. It would put the Government on autopilot for programs approved for 2008 not 2009. This is not the way for the Congress to manage its business. I will grant that the effect of this amendment would probably cut the earmarks that are included in this bill. And while the majority of my colleagues have supported earmarks in this bill for their constituents, it is well understood that the Senator from Arizona does not. But this amendment isn't about the 1 percent of this bill for earmarks; it is about the 99 percent of the funds in the bill over which we are sacrificing oversight if this amendment were adopted. This is bad policy for both the Congress and the executive branch, and I urge my colleagues to oppose the amendment. As chairman of the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee, it should be noted that if it weren't for earmarks or congressional initiatives, the C-17, the highly acclaimed cargo plane, would be history. Production would have been stopped. But Congress took action to continue. Now all military leaders are saying that was a great decision. The F-22, the fighter of the future--stealth, firepower--that would be a matter of history also. I could go on and on, but we don't have the time. All I want to say is that earmarks are not evil. Yes, there are some that are questionable, and there will come a time to do that. I urge colleagues to oppose the amendment. I yield the remainder of the time. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. INOUYE

Mr. INOUYE. Madam President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. INOUYE. Madam President, does the Senator from Texas wish to speak?

Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. INOUYE. I thank my distinguished vice chairman for his remarks. Mr. President, I submit pursuant to Senate rules a report, and I ask unanimous consent that it be printed in the Record.

Mr. INOUYE. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. INOUYE. I object.

Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I rise today in support of H.R. 1105, the Omnibus Appropriations Act of 2009. This is a measure that should have been completed last year but was not because of the previous administration's unwillingness to negotiate in good faith. But today we have the opportunity to put partisanship behind us and to continue the task of rebuilding our economy, reinvesting in America and, frankly, making our Government work again. I want to point out that today is March 2. We are now almost halfway through the fiscal year. Except for Defense, Veterans, and Homeland Security, our executive branch agencies are all still operating on a continuing resolution. Under the continuing resolution, no new programs can begin. Funding levels are held to last year's level. This means that even things such as price increases due to inflation and the cost of civil servant pay raises must be absorbed within the existing agency funding levels. Many worthy initiatives which were approved by the Appropriations Committee are being held at artificially low spending totals. And, as we all know, the continuing resolution will expire on Friday--this Friday. It is not in the best interests of the taxpayer or the agencies we are funding to operate the Federal Government on autopilot. A yearlong continuing resolution does not allow a Federal agency any flexibility to address changing priorities. Passage of H.R. 1105 begins the process of returning our Departments and agencies to a more regular order. We simply must complete this bill this week--in fact, this Thursday. The 2009 omnibus bill has strong support from both sides of the aisle, including the vice chairman of the Appropriations Committee, Senator Thad Cochran. Further, the distinguished minority leader was accurate with his comments in January that this bill has been fully vetted and is ready for immediate passage. This measure is not, as some have suggested, duplicative of the spending provided by the recently enacted American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. This argument misses the point entirely. The purpose of the recovery package is to jump-start economic growth by making significant investments above the annual budget. The omnibus is the baseline budget. But equally important to the funding contained in the bill is the fact that the omnibus bill will provide much needed guidance to executive branch agencies that have been operating without such guidance under the continuing resolution. In addition, there are a number of new initiatives across the Government that cannot be implemented without passage of this bill. So it is my sincere hope this is the last omnibus bill we will see for some time to come, as it is my intention as chairman of the Appropriations Committee to pass each of our annual appropriations measures through the regular order. But having said that, it is clearly impossible for fiscal year 2009, and for all the reasons mentioned above, there is no doubt that this bill is far superior to yet another continuing resolution. The $410 billion in spending contained in this measure will accomplish a number of objectives, including giving extra momentum to the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, by funding additional projects and, therefore, saving thousands of additional jobs. In this time of economic crisis, nothing is more important than keeping America working. I will offer a few examples of the kinds of initiatives that I included in this 2009 omnibus. Energy security: There is perhaps no issue more critical to the future safety and prosperity of our Nation than energy security. This omnibus bill invests in America's security by prioritizing research and development of renewable energy and energy efficiency, including solar power, biofuels, vehicle technologies, energy-efficient buildings, and advanced energy research. Law enforcement: In the absence of strong support for law enforcement, the current economic downturn threatens to increase violent crime throughout our Nation. As cash-strapped States struggle with tight budgets, this bill will help keep Americans safe by supporting the Community Oriented Policing Services or the COPS Program, and the Byrne Justice Assistance Grants, which help State and local law enforcement fight and prevent crime in communities across America. Public health and safety: In the wake of disturbing incidents of compromised food safety that have jeopardized the health of our citizens, we have significantly increased investments for the Food and Drug Administration to strengthen the Food Safety and Inspection efforts. This bill will also protect the health and well-being of Americans by cleaning our air and our water. It contains investments significantly above the former administration's inadequate request for clean drinking water and wastewater, cleaning up hazardous waste and toxic sites, and for the implementation of the Clean Air Act. Health care: Millions of Americans are struggling to gain access to quality affordable health care, particularly during these difficult economic times. This measure will give scores of Americans better access to health care through State access health grants and State high-risk insurance pools and by supporting community health centers and rural health facilities. Education: As our economy struggles to regain its footing, millions of Americans are understandably fearful they will not be able to afford to pay for their children's college education. This measure provides $1.9 billion to support student financial aid programs, including Perkins loans and Federal supplemental educational opportunity grants. Every day, thousands of Americans are losing their jobs--every day. Every day, State and local governments see increased demand and decreased resources. Every day, projects that could provide good jobs for working Americans are delayed or canceled due to an inability to properly fund them. This Omnibus appropriations act will provide resources, guidance, and new initiatives at a time when they are desperately needed. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting the passage of this measure. Mr. President, I have two documents, one relating to reasons why this omnibus bill should be enacted and the other a copy of a press release made a few weeks ago. I ask unanimous consent that these two documents be printed in the Record.

Mr. INOUYE. Will the Senator yield?

Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that I may yield to the vice chairman of this committee with the understanding that I will hold the floor.

Mr. INOUYE. Is the Senator going to propose an amendment?

Mr. INOUYE. Thank you.