Daniel Inouye

Mr. INOUYE

Mr. INOUYE. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that at 4 p.m. the Senate proceed to vote in relation to the Boxer amendment, as modified; that the time from 3:55 until 4 p.m. be equally divided and controlled between Senators Boxer and Inouye or their designees; that no amendment be in order to the amendment prior to the vote; that at 4 p.m. the Senate proceed to vote in relation to the amendment; that when the Senate resumes consideration of H.R. 3222 on Wednesday, following morning business, there will be 30 minutes of debate prior to a vote in relation to the pending Graham amendment; that the second-degree amendment be withdrawn and no other amendment be in order to the amendment prior to the vote; that the time be equally divided and controlled between Senators Graham and Inouye or their designees; that upon the use or yielding back of the time, the Senate proceed to vote in relation to the amendment.

Mr. INOUYE. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the present amendment be set aside to reconsider the Boxer amendment.

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

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 President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I find it, firstly, very difficult to speak in opposition to this amendment. But I do so after consulting with the senior members, the chairman and the vice chairman, of the Armed Services Committee, the Senator from Michigan, and the Senator from Arizona. I have been assured that after due consideration and investigation, they have been convinced that the process of waivers does work. In fact, the investigation has suggested that those who have served after receiving such waivers have done much better in serving our Nation than those who came without any crime. We should keep in mind that when we speak of certain crimes, there is no standard rule throughout the United States. In different States, certain activities are considered criminal, in other States it is not even mentioned. I was an assistant prosecutor a long time ago. I find that in certain States certain activities are considered conservatively and other areas very liberally. For example, in recent days, we have been hearing much about the demonstration in Louisiana on the Jenna 6. Would that be a crime in other States? In other communities? I do not think we have the answer because we know that, depending on jurisdictions, certain activities may be criminal and in others of no concern. Whatever it is, on behalf of the Defense Appropriations Committee, I am calling on the leadership of the Armed Services Committee to conduct a thorough further investigation on this matter. If it does work, and if it is necessary to provide waivers to get certain skills into our military, then we should be told why. But as of this moment, I cannot ignore the advice that I have received from my colleagues who are leaders of the authorizing committee. So, accordingly, at the appropriate time, I will make a motion to table this amendment. Before I do, if I may be very personal about this, I have been a victim of hate and hate crimes, so I do know something about hate crimes. If you can imagine my returning from World War II in my full regalia, uniform with four rows of ribbons, with a hook in my right hand, and going to a barber shop, and they looked at me and said: Are you a Jap? When I told them, no, I am an American: But your parents, are they Japs? And I have to say: Yes, they are Japanese. Well, we do not cut Jap hair. Well, in some jurisdictions, that was appropriate and proper. Today we do have jurisdictions where we do have segregation, maybe not legally but understandably we do. So as I have indicated, at the appropriate time, I will make a motion to table the Boxer amendment. It is not a happy deed. But I believe at this moment, under the circumstances, I am compelled to do so. I yield the floor. The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mrs. McCaskill.) The Senator from California.

Mr. INOUYE

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

Mr. INOUYE

Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, for the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation I report favorably the following nomination lists which were printed in the Record on the dates indicated, and ask unanimous consent, to save the expense of reprinting on the Executive Calendar that these nominations lie at the Secretary's desk for the information of Senators.

Mr. INOUYE

Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, on September 29, 2007, Mr. Hiro Paul Mizue, Chief of the Civil and Public Works Branch, Honolulu Engineer District, HED, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, will retire from U.S. Government service following 34 years of exemplary service to Hawaii, the Pacific Region, the U.S. military, and our Nation. Over the course of these 34 years, Mr. Mizue has served with integrity and distinction. I have personally witnessed his conviction to duty and steadfast dedication to improving the lives of citizens and servicemembers. Mr. Mizue has demonstrated the highest values and ideals over his years of distinguished service, excelling at every assignment in his career, which covers every facet of civil and military planning and design management. He has exercised exceptional leadership and management skills on behalf of the Army Corps of Engineers to achieve much lauded success. His professional career in water resources began with the Los Angeles County Flood Control District in 1968 as a hydraulic engineer. Called to duty by the U.S. Army in 1969, he was assigned to HED as a civil engineer where he worked in the Civil Works Branch at Fort Armstrong. Upon discharge in 1971, he returned to the Los Angeles Flood Control District. In 1974, he relocated to Hawaii, joining the Honolulu firm of Belt Collins and Associates as a civil engineer. He rejoined the Honolulu District in late 1975 as a hydraulic engineer, managing water resources feasibility studies. In 1983, Mr. Mizue transferred to HED's military engineering division where he served as the Chief of the Family Housing/Hospital Division until 1995. During this period, he provided exceptional project management support culminating with $271 million in construction of new family housing for our brave servicemembers on Hickam AFB, Wheeler AAF, Schofield Barracks, Aliamanu Military Reservation, and Fort Shafter. Also of note are Mr. Mizue's efforts in managing $100 million in design-build contracts for a much needed expansion of the Tripler Army Medical. Having demonstrated exemplary leadership and management skills, Mr. Mizue was promoted to Chief of Planning Division in 1995; this office later became Civil and Public Works Branch. In this capacity, Mr. Mizue provided high-quality planning services to the State of Hawaii, Guam, Commonwealth of the Northern Marianas, and American Samoa. In addition, he implemented comprehensive/holistic planning by having Corps planning studies evaluate water resources problems broadly and at a watershed level. This approach formed the basis for Federal, State, and local agencies to implement integrated water resources development projects. Mr. Mizue typified customer care by constantly striving to provide the highest quality planning services and products in a responsive manner. In 2006, Mr. Mizue led HED's response to assist the State and counties with dam safety inspections after the Kaloko Dam failure and later following a 6.7-magnitude earthquake. HED's responses to these disasters demonstrated the exceptional working relationship with the State of Hawaii. Through his leadership, expertise, and experience, HED became recognized as the proven leader in project execution, accomplishment, and responsiveness. During his 12 years as Chief of Civil and Public Works Branch for the Honolulu District, Mr. Mizue parlayed his extensive leadership skills to accomplish notable Branch achievements. A major civil works project built during his tenure was the Alenaio Stream Flood Control project, on the Big Island, completed in 1997 at a cost of $16 million. During the storm of November 2000, the improvement prevented approximately $13 million worth of damages and remains fully functional today. More recently, Mr. Mizue successfully led the district through its biggest civil works construction program in many years with highly visible and vital projects, such as the $28 million Kaumalapau Harbor Project on the Island of Lanai, the $124 million Palau Compact Road Project in the Republic of Palau, and the $19 million Kikiaola Small Boat Harbor Project on the Island of Kauai. Under his tutelage, the Honolulu District has achieved the highest customer satisfaction rating for its civil works program in its history. While these accomplishments attest to his commitment to client satisfaction, his nurturing, and pragmatic management style earned him a reputation as a solid team player and a supportive, fair supervisor and mentor to his staff. Mr. Mizue exemplifies not only an effective manager but, more importantly, a dedicated and caring leader. Mr. Mizue is a recognized representative of the Corps in the Pacific Region. Under his management, the civil works and capital improvement programs expanded in Guam, American Samoa, and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, providing for the essential needs of these communities. Mr. Mizue's exemplary administrative and leadership skills have always led the way. He has established lasting relationships with the Hawaii congressional delegation, as well as the Governors of Hawaii, Guam, American Samoa, and the Commonwealth of the Northern Marianas Islands. The assets that he brings to bear on behalf of the Corps of Engineers are considerable. Born in Tokyo, Japan and raised in California, Mr. Mizue is a registered professional engineer in California and Hawaii, a member of the American Society of Civil Engineers, and a graduate of the CP-18 Executive Development Program. He holds a bachelors of science degree in engineering from the University of California, Los Angeles and a master of science degree in Water Resource Engineering from Utah State University. He received the Commander's Award for Civilian Service in 1993 and 2002. Mr. Mizue is married to the former Ruby E. Ibaraki. They have three children, Evan, Reid, and Cara. Mr. President, Mr. Mizue's lifelong contributions to the Army are considerable. His recognized leadership and management skills, his ability to forge lasting substantive relationships, and his clear direction and vision point to a truly outstanding individual who has dedicated his life to service. The Honolulu Engineer District will continue to serve as ``America's Engineers in the Pacific.'' Paul Mizues's legacy of unwavering dedication to duty to the U.S. Army will carry on. Thank you, Mr. Mizue for a job well done. You have the gratitude of a grateful nation.

Mr. INOUYE

Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, in recent months, the American public has been faced with a series of high profile recalls of consumer products. In the last 2 months alone, approximately 2 million toys were recalled for violating lead paint standards, and more than 5 million toys were recalled for containing magnets that come loose and create an ingestion hazard. The recalls were not limited to toys. Candles, all-terrain vehicles, cribs, bunk beds, space heaters, clothes, knives, scuba masks, radios, lamps, and electronic equipment were also recalled. Public outcry and press reports have intensified the focus on the Consumer Product Safety Commission, CPSC, the agency charged with monitoring the safety of these products. What Americans have found is a CPSC restrained by the combination of a far-reaching mandate, a shrinking staff, and the smallest budget of any federal health and safety agency. This is why I rise today to cosponsor the CPSC Reform Act of 2007, introduced by Senator Mark Pryor. This act is a comprehensive and aggressive reauthorization bill designed to revitalize the Commission and improve consumer safety through stronger consumer protection laws, increased authority, and increased authorization levels necessary for the CPSC to do its job well. To say a CPSC budget and staffing increase is long overdue is a gross understatement. The last time the CPSC was reauthorized was in 1990. In order for the CPSC to complete its mission, it needs steady funding. This is why the CPSC Reform Act officially reauthorizes the Commission for the next 7 years. Beginning with an authorization of $80 million for fiscal year 2009, the funding levels would increase by 10 percent per year, culminating at approximately $141.7 million for fiscal year 2015. Furthermore, to improve CPSC's ability to test consumer products, the bill authorizes an additional $20 million for fiscal year 2009 and fiscal year 2010 for much needed repair, re-equipping, and upgrading of the CPSC's research, development, and testing facility. The CPSC Reform Act also directs the Commission to increase its number of full-time employees to at least 500 within the first 5 years, returning the CPSC to staffing levels comparable to those maintained by the Clinton administration. When the CPSC was established in 1973, it had 786 full-time employees responsible for the safety of 10,000 consumer products. Today, the CPSC is responsible for more than 15,000 consumer products--many of which are manufactured overseas. Yet today, the CPSC functions with only 420 full-time employees. This bill takes great strides in restoring these staffing levels. Additionally, although the CPSC is authorized to have five Commissioners, the agency has been operating with only two Commissioners since July 2006. The CPSC Reform Act eliminates a 1992 limitation on the use of funds for more than three Commissioners and urges the President to appoint a full complement of five Commissioners. Adequate funding and staffing are only the beginning. The CPSC Reform Act also strengthens consumer products safety laws. First, the Act increases the maximum per violation civil penalty from $8000 to $250,000 and the maximum civil penalty for a related series of violations from $1.825 million to $100 million. Second, the Act strikes the requirement that violators of the Consumer Product Safety Act, CPSA, may only be criminally prosecuted after repeated warnings. It also makes a knowing violation of the CPSA punishable by up to a 1-year imprisonment and a knowing and willful violation punishable by up to a 5-year imprisonment. The act also goes to the heart of the recent consumer product recalls. It bans the use of lead in children's products and establishes a maximum level trace amount of lead allowed in such products. It directs manufacturers to label children's products with marks that can be used to identify the source, production date, and other information useful to facilitate a recall. Additionally, the act directs the CPSC to establish a protocol for manufacturers and importers to have independent third party compliance certification for children's consumer products under CPSC jurisdiction. Further, the measure authorizes the CPSC to refer importers found to have committed multiple violations of the CPSA to U.S. Customs and Border Protection with the recommendation that the importer's license be revoked. The CPSC is tasked with keeping unsafe and harmful products off our store shelves and out of our homes and the hands of our children. This line of defense has grown thin because of a lack of resources, staffing, and authorities. Although the dedicated career staff has continued to work diligently under trying circumstances and limited resources, Congress must act quickly to give them the tools to do their job better, so that consumer confidence can be restored. I look forward to working with my colleagues on this comprehensive CPSC reauthorization legislation.

Mr. INOUYE

Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, in recent months, the American public has been faced with a series of high profile recalls of consumer products. In the last 2 months alone, approximately 2 million toys were recalled for violating lead paint standards, and more than 5 million toys were recalled for containing magnets that come loose and create an ingestion hazard. The recalls were not limited to toys. Candles, all-terrain vehicles, cribs, bunk beds, space heaters, clothes, knives, scuba masks, radios, lamps, and electronic equipment were also recalled. Public outcry and press reports have intensified the focus on the Consumer Product Safety Commission, CPSC, the agency charged with monitoring the safety of these products. What Americans have found is a CPSC restrained by the combination of a far-reaching mandate, a shrinking staff, and the smallest budget of any federal health and safety agency. This is why I rise today to cosponsor the CPSC Reform Act of 2007, introduced by Senator Mark Pryor. This act is a comprehensive and aggressive reauthorization bill designed to revitalize the Commission and improve consumer safety through stronger consumer protection laws, increased authority, and increased authorization levels necessary for the CPSC to do its job well. To say a CPSC budget and staffing increase is long overdue is a gross understatement. The last time the CPSC was reauthorized was in 1990. In order for the CPSC to complete its mission, it needs steady funding. This is why the CPSC Reform Act officially reauthorizes the Commission for the next 7 years. Beginning with an authorization of $80 million for fiscal year 2009, the funding levels would increase by 10 percent per year, culminating at approximately $141.7 million for fiscal year 2015. Furthermore, to improve CPSC's ability to test consumer products, the bill authorizes an additional $20 million for fiscal year 2009 and fiscal year 2010 for much needed repair, re-equipping, and upgrading of the CPSC's research, development, and testing facility. The CPSC Reform Act also directs the Commission to increase its number of full-time employees to at least 500 within the first 5 years, returning the CPSC to staffing levels comparable to those maintained by the Clinton administration. When the CPSC was established in 1973, it had 786 full-time employees responsible for the safety of 10,000 consumer products. Today, the CPSC is responsible for more than 15,000 consumer products--many of which are manufactured overseas. Yet today, the CPSC functions with only 420 full-time employees. This bill takes great strides in restoring these staffing levels. Additionally, although the CPSC is authorized to have five Commissioners, the agency has been operating with only two Commissioners since July 2006. The CPSC Reform Act eliminates a 1992 limitation on the use of funds for more than three Commissioners and urges the President to appoint a full complement of five Commissioners. Adequate funding and staffing are only the beginning. The CPSC Reform Act also strengthens consumer products safety laws. First, the Act increases the maximum per violation civil penalty from $8000 to $250,000 and the maximum civil penalty for a related series of violations from $1.825 million to $100 million. Second, the Act strikes the requirement that violators of the Consumer Product Safety Act, CPSA, may only be criminally prosecuted after repeated warnings. It also makes a knowing violation of the CPSA punishable by up to a 1-year imprisonment and a knowing and willful violation punishable by up to a 5-year imprisonment. The act also goes to the heart of the recent consumer product recalls. It bans the use of lead in children's products and establishes a maximum level trace amount of lead allowed in such products. It directs manufacturers to label children's products with marks that can be used to identify the source, production date, and other information useful to facilitate a recall. Additionally, the act directs the CPSC to establish a protocol for manufacturers and importers to have independent third party compliance certification for children's consumer products under CPSC jurisdiction. Further, the measure authorizes the CPSC to refer importers found to have committed multiple violations of the CPSA to U.S. Customs and Border Protection with the recommendation that the importer's license be revoked. The CPSC is tasked with keeping unsafe and harmful products off our store shelves and out of our homes and the hands of our children. This line of defense has grown thin because of a lack of resources, staffing, and authorities. Although the dedicated career staff has continued to work diligently under trying circumstances and limited resources, Congress must act quickly to give them the tools to do their job better, so that consumer confidence can be restored. I look forward to working with my colleagues on this comprehensive CPSC reauthorization legislation.

Mr. INOUYE

Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I would like to recognize a great American and a remarkable man, who has an exceptional record of public service. He has honorably served our country with distinction for over 43 years of active duty and National Guard Service, as well as 16 years of service as my executive assistant. GEN Alexis Lum retired in February 1991 as the adjutant general for the State of Hawaii Army National Guard. His military service began in 1945, when he was drafted shortly after graduating from Roosevelt High School in Honolulu. He served as an enlisted man in the Pacific, attaining the rank of staff sergeant. When discharged in 1947, he became a student at the University of Hawaii where he received his bachelor of science degree in civil engineering and a ROTC commission as a second lieutenant. He was recalled to active duty in April 1951 for the Korean conflict and served as an infantry platoon leader. Released from active duty in 1954, he then joined the Hawaii Army National Guard as a first lieutenant. As a major, he was part of the National Guard call-up in 1968 and served in the Republic of Vietnam, initially as the executive office of an engineer battalion. Promoted to lieutenant colonel while on this tour, he served his last 4 months in Vietnam as commander of the same battalion. His National Guard service included varied command and staff positions. He was promoted to brigadier general in 1980 and was assigned as the assistant adjutant general, Army. In 1982 he was appointed as the adjutant general, Hawaii by Governor George Ariyoshi and was promoted to the rank of major general. He attended many military service schools including the Army's Command, General Staff College, and the Industrial College of the Armed Forces. His military decorations include the Distinguished Service Medal, the Legion of Merit, the Bronze Star Medal, the Meritorious Service Medal with cluster, the Army Commendation Medal, and numerous service medals. In his civilian life, between tours of active duty, he was an engineer with the Navy Civil Service at the Naval Ammunition Depot, Lualualei, Oahu. He started as a junior engineer in 1954 when he was released from active duty. He progressed to the director of the engineering division and deputy public works officer for the Naval Ammunition Depot. He retired from Federal civil service in 1982, when he was appointed the adjutant general. His wife is Leimomi--Momi--Mookini Lum. She served for 32 years with the Honolulu Police Department, as a police investigator, and retired in 1982. Her last 20 years of police service involved working in the juvenile crime prevention division of the Police Department. Together they have three children, Mrs. Angela Thomas, Mrs. Alexia Carvalho, and Mr. Oliver Lum, and four granddaughters.

Mr. INOUYE

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

Mr. INOUYE

Mr. INOUYE. I thank my colleague for his consideration and support of the Soil, Water, and Ecosystem Services CRSP. Passport Services Offices

Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I would like to discuss with the Senator from Vermont an issue that has major implications for food security and environmental protection in developing countries and the United States. Over the last decade, the Soils Management CRSP has performed admirably with the University of Hawaii serving as the management entity. It is through my relationship with the University of Hawaii that I have learned that this program has successfully developed globally applicable science-based principles and tested them on a site- specific basis in more than 22 developing countries in Africa, Asia, and Latin America. This has enabled users to access decision support tools to diagnose problems at specific locations in any country, and prescribe alternative solutions to correct them. While the Soils Management CRSP has been successful during its planned 10-year life, I am pleased that the U.S. Agency for International Development will build on the accomplishments of this program and seek a broader scope for a succeeding CRSP. The Agency correctly perceives that, while sound soil management is critical to food security, sustainable natural resources management, and economic growth and progress in the developing world, soil resources must be managed in the context of all resources in the ecosystem. I support the establishment and operation of the Soil, Water, and Ecosystem Services CRSP. My concern is that the Agency does not plan to compete the new Soil, Water, and Ecosystem Services CRSP until 2009. With a likely 2-year interruption of research activity, the useful elements of expiring CRSPs are likely to be compromised and continuity of resource management research will not be forthcoming. To circumvent these problems, I ask your support in encouraging the Agency to accelerate a request for applications, RFA, for a Soil, Water, and Ecosystem Services CRSP through established competitive processes. Conducting the RFA in fiscal year 2008 will minimize the loss in program continuity associated with recently expired CRSPs such as the Soils Management CRSP. Acceleration will minimize risks to food security and protection of the environment in developing countries and in the United States. An earlier competition for the new CRSP will go a long way toward preserving the momentum and expertise of the collaborative network of researchers involved in recently completed CRSPs. I believe that the committee recommendation for funds for Collaborative Research Support Programs in 2008 is sufficient to accommodate a request for applications--RFA--for a Soil, Water, and Ecosystem Services CRSP in 2008. I also emphasize that my interest is in a more comprehensive resource management CRSP solicited through established competitive processes based solely on merit and abilities to deliver science-based recommendations.

Mr. INOUYE

Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, America's strength has always been in the innovation, technical skill, and education of its workforce. The economic growth and well-being of the nation relies on the technical innovations achieved by our workforce. To realize growth and success, the United States must continue to support the two critical components vital to the innovation process: education and basic research. Today, Congress takes a significant step toward this commitment. The National Academy of Sciences and the Council on Competitiveness have identified science and innovation as key drivers of economic growth. The United States has seen a sharp palpable decline in its scientific prowess. The United States is losing the educational battle with Germany, China, and Japan. In the United States, only 32 percent of graduates hold a degree in science and engineering, while Germany boasts 36 percent of graduates with degrees in science and engineering. Outpacing both the United States and Germany is China, with 59 percent of graduates with degrees in math and science, and Japan with 66 percent. The America COMPETES Act embodies bipartisan, bicameral multi- committee efforts in responding to the Nation's defining economic challenge of how to remain strong and competitive in the face of emerging challenges from India, China, and the rest of the world. The America COMPETES Act addresses programs within several scientific agencies of which the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation has jurisdiction. Within the Department of Commerce, the National Institutes of Standards and Technology, NIST, promotes U.S. innovation and industrial competitiveness by advancing measurement science, standards, and technology. The legislation before us would double the agency's funding over the next 10 years. We also create a new program, the Technology Innovation Program, which will support high-risk, high-reward research. This was one of the major recommendations of the National Academies report, ``Rising Above the Gathering Storm.'' Also within the Department of Commerce, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, NOAA, conducts significant basic atmospheric and oceanographic research, including climate change research. Some have argued that the ocean truly is the last frontier on Earth, and ocean research and technology may have broad impacts on improving health and understanding our environment. Toward this end, Congress included provisions on NOAA research and education, as well as, NOAA's continued participation in interagency innovation and competitiveness efforts. The bill also includes the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, NASA, in the competitiveness agenda. Like the oceans, space serves to inspire young students and attract them to studies in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. The need for additional research through the National Science Foundation, NSF, also is addressed in this bill with authorization for appropriations through fiscal year 2010. This bill places NSF on track to double in 7 years. While this is not as aggressive an approach as the Senate sought, it is clear that Congress is united in our belief that the NSF is indeed the Nation's premier scientific research enterprise. We need to support this enterprise to the best of our abilities, so that it can enable our scientists to continue their discovery. Within the NSF, I am proud that the conferees supported the creation of a mentoring program designed to recruit and train science, technology, and engineering professionals to mentor women, and other underrepresented minorities, in these fields. We need to ensure that we do not neglect a segment of the U.S. population, but rather maximize all of this country's great human resources. A strong national investment in science, education, and technology provides opportunities for Americans to succeed in a whole array of disciplines and professions. Technology and innovation influence many policy problems such as a changing telecommunications landscape, potential improvements to our transportation infrastructure, and the need for advanced technologies to increase our energy independence. The America COMPETES Act directs the Nation on the path to preserve and improve its workforce. This bill demonstrates that Americans are not taking their traditional technological and economic dominance for granted but are continually working to improve and lead

Mr. INOUYE

Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, for the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation I report favorably the following nomination list which was printed in the Record on the date indicated, and ask unanimous consent, to save the expense of reprinting on the Executive Calendar that this nomination lie at the Secretary's desk for the information of Senators.

Mr. INOUYE

Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I am pleased we are considering the conference report to H.R. 1, the Improving America's Security Act of 2007. This legislation is particularly timely given the daily reports that the terrorist threat against our Nation is increasing. We must be proactive in defending the homeland and take particular care to protect the transportation systems which have so often been targeted. The conference report we are voting on today contains significant provisions to strengthen the security of the Nation's transportation system, including our surface, aviation and maritime networks. We also take action to improve the interoperability of public safety communications. For surface transportation security, we have worked with the relevant House conferees to reach consensus on provisions that would authorize new security assessments, grant programs, and security measures for the nation's major surface modes, including passenger and freight railroads, trucks, intercity buses, and pipelines. This bill will finally authorize adequate funding and a much needed statutory framework for the Transportation Security Administration's, TSA, surface transportation and rail security efforts. The conference report also takes critical steps to address the remaining recommendations of the 9/11 Commission on aviation security. The commission's report expressed continuing concern over the state of air cargo security, the screening of passengers and baggage, access controls at airports, and the security of general aviation. Under this bill, all cargo going on passenger aircraft must be screened within 3 years. Requirements will be put in place to plan and fund improvements for the detection of explosives in checked baggage and at passenger screening checkpoints. The TSA will also be required to ensure a system is in place to coordinate passenger redress matters and develop a strategic plan to test and implement an advanced passenger prescreening system. With respect to giving our Nation's first responders the necessary resources to communicate effectively during times of crisis, the bill will further bolster our previous efforts to improve interoperable, public safety communications by eliminating statutory ambiguities for eligibility and by directing specific funds in support of State Strategic Technology Reserves that can be tapped in times of crisis by State and local personnel, as proposed in S. 4. This conference report is an important step toward securing our Nation. The Commerce Committee worked for years to craft many of these provisions, and they reflect the expertise and dedication of our members. I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.

Mr. INOUYE

Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, today I honor, and pay tribute to LTC Jean M. McGinnis, who will retire from the U.S. Army on August 31, 2007, after 25 years of distinguished service. Lieutenant Colonel McGinnis is an outstanding American soldier who served in a succession of command and staff positions worldwide of increasing responsibility. In her last assignment in the U.S. Army as the Deputy Chief of the Army, Senate Liaison Division, Lieutenant Colonel McGinnis demonstrated the managerial and leadership skills that have characterized her career. She demonstrated Army values daily, supported her subordinates and chief tirelessly, and traveled extensively escorting Senators, their staffs, and Senate committee professional staff members on inspections and factfinding trips in the United States and overseas. Lieutenant Colonel McGinnis previously served as a Congressional Budget Liaison Officer in the Office of the Chief of Army Reserve and as an Operations Research Analyst in Programs, Analysis, and Evaluation in the Pentagon. From 1982 to 1994, she served as an Aviation Officer, in the positions of Platoon Leader, Detachment Commander, Company and Battalion Flight Operations Officer. During her aviation career Lieutenant Colonel McGinnis had many assignments ranging from humanitarian assistance missions in Guatemala and Honduras to piloting the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Chief of Staff of the U.S. Army in Egypt as part of Operation Bright Star. In 1997, Lieutenant Colonel McGinnis was assigned to the Office of the Chief of Army Reserve in Washington, DC, as an Operations Research Systems Analyst. During this assignment she reconciled Army Reserve resource requirements with Army program needs. She later served as a Budget Analyst in the Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel, Resource Division. While in this challenging assignment, she served again as an Operations Research Budget Analyst of Reserve personnel and was directly involved with complex Army training and Reserve personnel policy issues. She was then selected to represent the Army on Capitol Hill and served 4 years working for the Army Senate Liaison Division and the Office of the Chief of Army Reserve. Lieutenant Colonel McGinnis' expertise and knowledge of the Active Army and Reserve policies and procedures has been of great value to Senators and their staffs. Lieutenant Colonel McGinnis' leadership, resourcefulness, and professionalism made lasting contributions to Army readiness and mission accomplishments. Her service to our Nation has been exceptional, and Lieutenant Colonel McGinnis is more than deserving of this recognition.

Mr. INOUYE

Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce a bill that would designate the Friday following Thanksgiving of each year as Native American Heritage Day. I believe that it is well known to most Members of this body that the original inhabitants of the lands that now constitute the U.S.--the aboriginal, indigenous, native people of America--occupied and exercised sovereignty over more than 550 million acres of land prior to the first European contact. In the early days of our history, well before our Nation was formed, the native people fought alongside our soldiers in the Revolutionary War. The Indian tribes enabled the survival of General George Washington and his troops during the harsh winter at Valley Forge by providing food to the troops. A few years later, as our Founding Fathers were engaged in the challenge of forming a new Nation, they drew upon the democratic model of government that they learned from the Six Nations of the Iroquois Confederacy. There they found the well-institutionalized practice of the fundamental principles of freedom of speech and a system of governmental checks and balances provided through the separation of governmental powers. In our early days as a Nation, we entered into treaties with Native Americans pursuant to the provisions of the U.S. Constitution that recognize them as sovereigns. But later, we abandoned the path of an honorable course of dealings, and turned to war. Thousands lost their lives through these battles and horrific massacres. The native population everywhere was decimated. Forced marches to relocate the native people from their traditional homelands to areas west of the Mississippi in the dead of winter cost thousands of more lives. Few Americans know that there was not one Trail of Tears, but many. The Treaties could have signaled a return to a course of honorable dealings with the native people had the U.S. not proceeded to break provisions in every single one of the treaties that were ratified by the U.S. Senate. Amazingly, notwithstanding these appalling deeds, the native people of the U.S. have always been and continue to be staunchly patriotic and loyal to this country. They have volunteered to serve in the defense of our nation in every military action and war in which we have been engaged, and on a per capita basis, more Native Americans have put themselves in harm's way and given their lives to protect the U.S. than any other group of Americans. They have made the greatest sacrifice, but their contributions do not end there. We have only to look to the history that is sadly not found in the public school textbooks of America's schools, but has been recorded by historians and anthropologists and through direct, eye-witness accounts, we know that the native people of the U.S. have made significant contributions to our society in every walk of life, in every profession, in medicine and agriculture and as stewards of the lands and resources we all hold dear. There have been great men and women who have led their native nations out of war, poverty, and despair. Throughout the generations, they have shown us the true meaning of courage in the face of the greatest odds, and the quiet strength to persevere. A recent nationwide poll of Americans conducted in March of this year reveals that 85 percent of those polled strongly support the setting aside of a day each year to honor the contributions that native people of this land have made to the fabric of American society. Such a day would provide an opportunity for all Americans to learn more about the rich cultural legacy that this Nation's native people have given to us. I believe the time has come to honor the first Americans of the country in this manner, and I urge my colleagues to join me in this endeavor.

Mr. INOUYE

Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce a bill that would designate the Friday following Thanksgiving of each year as Native American Heritage Day. I believe that it is well known to most Members of this body that the original inhabitants of the lands that now constitute the U.S.--the aboriginal, indigenous, native people of America--occupied and exercised sovereignty over more than 550 million acres of land prior to the first European contact. In the early days of our history, well before our Nation was formed, the native people fought alongside our soldiers in the Revolutionary War. The Indian tribes enabled the survival of General George Washington and his troops during the harsh winter at Valley Forge by providing food to the troops. A few years later, as our Founding Fathers were engaged in the challenge of forming a new Nation, they drew upon the democratic model of government that they learned from the Six Nations of the Iroquois Confederacy. There they found the well-institutionalized practice of the fundamental principles of freedom of speech and a system of governmental checks and balances provided through the separation of governmental powers. In our early days as a Nation, we entered into treaties with Native Americans pursuant to the provisions of the U.S. Constitution that recognize them as sovereigns. But later, we abandoned the path of an honorable course of dealings, and turned to war. Thousands lost their lives through these battles and horrific massacres. The native population everywhere was decimated. Forced marches to relocate the native people from their traditional homelands to areas west of the Mississippi in the dead of winter cost thousands of more lives. Few Americans know that there was not one Trail of Tears, but many. The Treaties could have signaled a return to a course of honorable dealings with the native people had the U.S. not proceeded to break provisions in every single one of the treaties that were ratified by the U.S. Senate. Amazingly, notwithstanding these appalling deeds, the native people of the U.S. have always been and continue to be staunchly patriotic and loyal to this country. They have volunteered to serve in the defense of our nation in every military action and war in which we have been engaged, and on a per capita basis, more Native Americans have put themselves in harm's way and given their lives to protect the U.S. than any other group of Americans. They have made the greatest sacrifice, but their contributions do not end there. We have only to look to the history that is sadly not found in the public school textbooks of America's schools, but has been recorded by historians and anthropologists and through direct, eye-witness accounts, we know that the native people of the U.S. have made significant contributions to our society in every walk of life, in every profession, in medicine and agriculture and as stewards of the lands and resources we all hold dear. There have been great men and women who have led their native nations out of war, poverty, and despair. Throughout the generations, they have shown us the true meaning of courage in the face of the greatest odds, and the quiet strength to persevere. A recent nationwide poll of Americans conducted in March of this year reveals that 85 percent of those polled strongly support the setting aside of a day each year to honor the contributions that native people of this land have made to the fabric of American society. Such a day would provide an opportunity for all Americans to learn more about the rich cultural legacy that this Nation's native people have given to us. I believe the time has come to honor the first Americans of the country in this manner, and I urge my colleagues to join me in this endeavor.

Mr. INOUYE

Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Dane Balker, Senator Webb's national security detainee, be given floor privileges for the duration of this bill.

Mr. INOUYE

Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, for the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation I report favorably the following nomination lists which were printed in the Records on the dates indicated, and ask unanimous consent, to save the expense of reprinting on the Executive Calendar that these nominations lie at the Secretary's desk for the information of Senators.

Mr. INOUYE

Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President. On June 26, 2007, the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the U.S. House of Representatives met to consider and adopt H. Res. 121. This resolution was authored by Congressman Michael Honda of San Jose, CA. H. Res. 121 expresses the sense of the U.S. House of Representatives that the Government of Japan should formally acknowledge, apologize, and accept historical responsibility in a clear and unequivocal manner for its Imperial Armed Force's coercion of young women into sexual slavery, known to the world as ``comfort women,'' during its colonial and wartime occupation of Asia and the Pacific Islands from the 1930s through the duration of World War II. There is no doubt in my mind that during the war period the men in the Imperial Armed Forces of the Government of Japan did abuse, assault, and forcibly impose their wills upon women for sexual purposes. This was conduct and behavior that cannot in any way be condoned or justified. These events, according to H. Res. 121, occurred during the war period of the 1930s and 1940s. Records indicate that on August 31, 1994, as the 50th anniversary of the end of World War II was approaching, then Prime Minister Tomiichi Murayama issued a statement articulating Japan's remorse and apology to comfort women. His statement says in part, ``on the issue of wartime `comfort women,' which seriously stained the honor and dignity of many women, I would like to take this opportunity once again to express my profound and sincere remorse and apologies.'' This statement was made in his official capacity as Prime Minister of Japan. Subsequently, every successive Prime Minister since 1996--Prime Ministers Hashimoto, Obuchi, Mori, and Koizumi--have all issued letters of apologies to individual former comfort women, who have accepted an apology letter along with atonement money offered to her by the Asian Woman's Fund. It should be noted that some former comfort women refused to accept the atonement money. The Asian Women's Fund was established, sanctioned, and approved by the Government of Japan. The letters addressed to former comfort women were issued by the Prime Ministers of Japan in their official capacity, and recite, ``as Prime Minister of Japan, I thus extend anew my most sincere apologies and remorse to all the women who underwent immeasurable and painful experiences and suffered incurable physical and psychological wounds as comfort women. I believe that our country, painfully aware of its moral responsibilities, with feelings of apology and remorse, should face up squarely to its past history and accurately convey it to future generations.'' Japan's present Prime Minister, Shinzo Abe, in a March 1, 2007, news conference clearly indicated that Japan accepts responsibility and expressly apologized to all its victims. On March 11, 2007, Prime Minister Abe made the following statement: I will stand by the Kono Statement. This is our consistent position. Further, we have been apologizing to those who suffered immeasurable pain and incurable psychological wounds as comfort women. Former Prime Ministers, including Prime Ministers Koizumi and Hashimoto have issued letters to the comfort women. I would like to be clear that I carry the same feeling. The 1993 Kono statement made by the Chief Cabinet Secretary Yohei Kono stated in part: The then Japanese military was, directly or indirectly, involved in the establishment and management of the comfort stations and the transfer of comfort women. . . . The Government of Japan would like to take this opportunity once again to extend its sincere apologies and remorse to all those, irrespective of place of origin, who suffered immeasurable pain and incurable physical and psychological wounds as comfort women. During his visit to our Nation's Capitol in April 2007, Prime Minister Abe reconfirmed these sentiments in a meeting with bipartisan leaders of the House and Senate. Prime Minister Abe also expressed similar statements in a meeting with President Bush. At a joint press conference at Camp David, Abe, when describing his meeting with congressional leaders, said: I, as Prime Minister of Japan, expressed my apologies, and also expressed my apologies for the fact that they [comfort women] were placed in that sort of circumstance. In 1995 and 2005, the Japanese House of Representatives considered and adopted resolutions related to Japan's actions in World War II, including the comfort women issue. The 1995 resolution adopted by Japan's House of Representatives provides in part: Solemnly reflecting upon the many instances of colonial rule and acts of aggression that occurred in modern world history, and recognizing that Japan carried out such acts in the past and inflicted suffering on the people of other countries especially in Asia, the Members of this House hereby express deep remorse. The Asian Women's Fund was established in 1995 with the cooperation of the Government of Japan and the Japanese people. The fund has extended letters of apology and payments, donated by the Japanese people, to 285 former comfort women in the Philippines, the Republic of Korea, and Taiwan. Each of the 285 individuals received 2 million yen, or $17,000. The fund has also implemented medical and welfare projects. I have taken the time to cite the above because of my concern over the adoption of H. Res. 121, the Honda Resolution. It should be noted that after World War II, the issue of compensation for Japan's wartime crimes was settled, country by country, by the Treaty of San Francisco with the U.S. and by the relevant peace treaties with other countries. Thus, from a purely legal standpoint, the issue of the comfort women has been settled by treaties of peace. Several questions come to mind as I read the text of statements made on this matter, and the text of H. Res. 121. For example, what would be required of Japan under H. Res. 121 to ``formally acknowledge, apologize, and accept historical responsibility in a clear and unequivocal manner''? The statements of apology that I quoted earlier were issued by six Prime Ministers of Japan, each acting and speaking in his official capacity. I would think that in the world of diplomacy, these words would suffice as official statements. Another matter that should be noted is that these events occurred in the 1930s and 1940s, and the acknowledgment and apology over the abuse of the comfort women have been made by successive Prime Ministers since 1994. I can think of many events in our own historic past that deserve an acknowledgement and apology issued by the United States. Nonetheless, our Government has not acknowledged these actions and other countries have not officially reprimanded us because of it. For example, soon after December 7, 1941, the United States contacted the Governments of Chile and other South American countries and requested that they round up their residents of Japanese ancestry and send them to the United States to be used by the United States in negotiations for the return of American prisoners of war held by Japan. Many Latin Americans of Japanese descent were arrested, stripped of their passports or visas, and shipped to the United States. Once in the United States, they were treated as illegal aliens, subject to deportation and repatriation. The internees' vulnerable position under the law basically left their fate in the hands of the State Department and Department of Justice. Those caught in this situation were considered repatriable and thus available for use in hostage exchanges with Japan. I am happy to report to you that after many years of concern, the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs has considered this matter and reported favorably on a measure to study this matter. However, the bill still faces consideration by the full Senate, the House of Representatives, and the White House. And yet has any country suggested we should ``formally acknowledge, apologize, and accept historical responsibility in a clear and unequivocal manner'' for this matter? Nor have the legislatures of other nations criticized and accused us for Executive Order 9066, which directed the United States Army to establish 10 concentration camps in various parts of the United States to intern residents of Japanese ancestry. The majority of them were American citizens. As investigations disclosed in later years, their incarceration or internment was based only upon race. No crime had been committed, no act of treason, no act of sabotage. Consequently, four decades later, the Congress finally acknowledged and apologized for the actions of the U.S. Government in the Civil Rights Act of 1988. There exist many other such events in our history that could be discussed, but these incidents in particular are of interest because they involve the men and women whose ancestry lies in the nation of Japan. Regardless of the historical example, the question remains the same: how would the U.S. Government have reacted if the legislature of some other nation had condemned our historical actions in World War II? Diplomatic protocol among friendly nations and allies calls for consideration and sensitive handling of such matters. In the case at hand, I respectfully suggest that the Government of Japan, through six of its Prime Ministers, and through two acts considered by its House of Representatives, has issued statements of acknowledgement and apology since 1994. I would suggest that so many apologies should suffice. The payment of $17,000 to each survivor may not suffice because no amount of monetary compensation would be sufficient to clear away such memories just as much as the payment of $20,000 to each internee of Japanese ancestry in the United States for years of incarceration by the United States in the concentration camps was not sufficient to wipe away that memory either. Nevertheless, payments have been made and accepted. As a final matter, it may be interesting to note that a Gallup Poll conducted in February and March 2007 sets forth the following: 74 percent of the general public, and 91 percent of opinion leaders thought of Japan as a dependable ally or friend. 48 percent of the general public, and 53 percent of opinion leaders considered Japan to be the most important U.S. partner in the Asia region, followed by China, which scored 34 percent among the general public, and 38 percent among opinion leaders. 67 percent of the general public, and 86 percent of opinion leaders described U.S. relations with Japan as ``good'' or ``excellent.'' 87 percent of the general public, and 88 percent of opinion leaders supported the maintenance of the Japan-U.S. Security Treaty. Finally, when asked whether Japan shared common values with the United States, 83 percent of the general public, and 94 percent of opinion leaders agreed. The only country that received a higher score was the United Kingdom, by only 2 percent for each group. These numbers and responses to the Gallup Poll should suggest our relationship with Japan is excellent. The general public believes it, and our Government has said so as well. Why should we involve ourselves in a legislative act that would jeopardize a relationship as good as we share with Japan? Is this how we Americans should conduct ourselves with the Japanese, our friends and allies?

Mr. INOUYE

Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I rise today to join Senator Bond in submitting a resolution, which recognizes the mutually beneficial relationship between the United States and the Republic of Indonesia. Indonesia is the world's fourth most populous country, the third largest democracy, and the most populous Muslim nation. It possesses extensive natural resources, and a considerable amount of trade passes through the straits of Malacca. Without question, Indonesia is a valuable partner to the United States in the global war on terror. Indonesia has made great strides in continuing to democratize and develop its civil society as well as rule of law, particularly under the leadership of President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono. This resolution acknowledges many of the Government's positive reforms and encourages the Republic of Indonesia to continue its commitment to human rights, democratic principles, and good governance. Mr. President, it is my hope that my colleagues will join me in recognizing this very important nation in Southeast Asia.

Mr. INOUYE

Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I rise in support of amendment No. 1792, filed by Senators Stevens, Snowe, Alexander, and Carper, and cosponsored by Senators Feinstein and Kerry, among others. This bipartisan compromise reflects the input of Members, industry, and consumers, and is good policy for our Nation. I particularly wish to congratulate Senator Dianne Feinstein for her dedicated efforts over the years to update our Nation's fuel economy standards. The success of the amendment today is a tribute to her tenacious and skilled advocacy. At every step of the legislative process following the introduction of S. 357, the Ten in Ten Fuel Economy Act, by Senators Feinstein and Olympia Snowe, the authors and cosponsors of S. 357 and members of the Senate Commerce Committee have worked together in a bipartisan manner to address the concerns of the automotive industry. In particular, this group worked hard to ensure that automakers will not face a significant burden when meeting the first improvements to fuel economy standards in more than 30 years. I am pleased that Members from both sides of the aisle continued to work together to produce the amendment adopted today. While addressing a number of the concerns raised by automakers regarding the Feinstein- Snowe Ten in Ten Fuel Economy Act as reported by the Commerce Committee, the amendment preserves the core goals and fuel savings of Ten in Ten. The amendment directs the Secretary of Transportation to increase fuel economy for automobiles to 35 miles per gallon by 2020, as in Ten in Ten. But in the years that follow from 2021 to 2030, the Secretary shall increase fuel economy at a maximum feasible rate instead of at a pace of 4 percent per annum. If we have a breakthrough in battery technology, then 4 percent per year may well be too low. If there are unforeseen problems, 4 percent may be too high. The amendment will allow the Secretary to set an appropriate standard in the future. The Kerry-Cantwell second degree amendment to the Stevens-Carper- Feinstein-Snowe-Kerry amendment also directs the Secretary to establish and implement an action plan to ensure that 50 percent of the vehicles for sale in 2015 are alternative fuel automobiles. We must encourage manufacturers to improve their fleets' fuel economy by exploring new technologies and producing alternative fuel vehicles. I commend Senators Kerry and Cantwell for developing this compromise amendment that addresses this important goal. By adopting the bipartisan compromise amendment and H.R. 6 as amended, we will place the country on a path toward reducing our Nation's dependence on foreign oil, protecting the environment, and helping consumers deal with rising gas prices. Finally, I wish to express my appreciation for the excellent efforts of the dedicated staff on the Senate Commerce Committee including David Strickland, Alex Hoehn-Saric, Ken Nahigian, Mia Petrini, and Jason Bomberg.