Daniel Inouye

Mr. INOUYE

Mr. INOUYE. Madam President, I thank the chairman for his kind words. I yield the floor.

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, it is my great privilege to pay tribute to Alexander McGregor Dao Doane as he celebrates his first birthday on February 17, 2007, with his parents, W. Allen and Christina Doane. This is the couple's first child, born at 11:44 a.m. at the Queen's Medical Center in Honolulu. At birth, Alexander was 7 pounds 9\1/2\ ounces and 20 inches long. In addition to being happy and fulfilled parents, the Doanes are pillars in Hawaii's corporate leadership circle. Allen is chairman of the board and chief executive officer of Alexander and Baldwin. Founded in 1870, it is one of the oldest and most prestigious companies operating in Hawaii, with its primary focus in real estate development, ocean cargo carriage and sugar production. Christina was born in Saigon, Vietnam, and immigrated to Hawaii as a child where she would earn her bachelor's degree from the University of Hawaii, a master's in business administration from Hawaii Pacific University, and enter the field of corporate marketing. She is presently enjoying the full-time joys of motherhood. To give you some sense of the depth of the Doanes' commitment to our community, 8 days after Alex's birth, on February 25, 2006, as the event cochairs, Allen and Christina, hosted the American Heart Association's Heart Ball. With more than 1,200 guests in attendance, $792,000 was raised for this worthy charity. They never skipped a beat. I am very proud to call Allen and Christina, and now Alex, my constituents from the great State of Hawaii. Alexander is named for one of the founders of Alexander and Baldwin, Samuel Thomas Alexander. He was described as ``outgoing and adventurous, the idea man.'' Who knows what the future will hold for Alexander McGregor Dao Doane. It is no happenstance that Alexander and Baldwin's common stock is traded on the NASDAQ Stock Market under the symbol ALEX. Happy Birthday.

Mr. INOUYE

Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Aviation Security Improvement Act with Senators Stevens, Rockefeller, Lott, and Lautenberg, who are all original cosponsors of this legislation. When the 9/11 Commission released its report in 2004, the Commission 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. Congress responded then and enacted measures to address inefficiencies highlighted by the Commission. However, implementation through the rulemaking process was slow, and as a result, significant shortfalls in our security regime remain. In fact, a little more than year ago, the 9/11 Public Discourse project issued a scorecard that gave inadequate grades in those key areas where the Commission had advocated for improvements in aviation security. Checked Baggage and Cargo Screening received a ``D,'' Airline Passenger Explosive Screening received a ``C,'' and Airline Passenger Prescreenig received an ``F.'' Over the past year, the Transportation Security Administration, TSA, has continued working to significantly bolster air cargo security in the United States. While that is a good step in response to the report card, more must be done. The government must remain vigilant in its effort to provide security for our Nation, and the steps proposed in this bill will both improve our existing security system and give TSA the flexibility to combat new and emerging threats. The bill we are introducing today would require the screening of all cargo going on passenger aircraft within 3 years. We expect TSA to develop a robust screening program that improves upon current measures and ensures the security of all cargo transported in commercial passenger air carriers. To improve our ability to detect explosives in checked baggage and at passenger screening checkpoints, the bill extends the Aviation Security Capital Fund and promotes the purchase and installation of advanced baggage screening systems that can be integrated into the daily workings of our Nation's air transportation system. This capital investment will improve security screening by permitting TSA employees to better focus on potential threats while reducing the high workplace injury rates. The bill addresses airline passenger explosive screening in several ways: 1. By promoting advanced research and development for checkpoint technology; 2. By enhancing screener training to more clearly identify and address potential threats; and 3. By requiring the Administration to complete and implement a plan over the next year that thoroughly addresses the threat of and response to carry-on explosives. Airline passenger prescreening also remains a primary concern of the Congress. Not enough progress has been made by the TSA to develop an advanced passenger prescreening system since it took on this task nearly 4 years ago. Too many passengers are inconvenienced each year by false positives when matched against passenger watchlists. Our bill would ensure a system is in place to coordinate passenger redress matters, and that the TSA moves rapidly to develop a strategic plan to test and implement an advanced passenger prescreening system. Our bill also takes steps to improve general aviation security, airport access issues for airline employees, screener staffing issues, and other issues where there have been consistent shortcomings over the past several years. The 9/11 Commission's report and subsequent Public Discourse project helped keep Congress and the Administration focused on the need for aviation security. While they did not have all the answers for quick fixes, they did offer a vital blueprint, particularly in the areas of infrastructure and transportation system security. My colleagues and I used that guideline in drafting the legislation we are introducing today. We believe that once this bill is enacted, it will significantly improve aviation security in the specific areas I have highlighted, and the aviation system as a whole. I look forward to working with my colleagues to move this bill quickly. We have had 5 years to consider what does and does not work. Now it is time to implement what we have learned. I ask unanimous consent that this bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. INOUYE

Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce a bill to reauthorize the Native Hawaiian Health Care Improvement Act. Senator Akaka joins me in sponsoring this measure. The Native Hawaiian Health Care Improvement Act was enacted into law in 1988, and has been reauthorized several times throughout the years. The Act provides authority for a range of programs and services designed to improve the health care status of the native people of Hawaii. With the enactment of the Native Hawaiian Health Care Improvement Act and the establishment of Native Hawaiian health care systems on most of the islands that make up the State of Hawaii, we have witnessed significant improvements in the health status of Native Hawaiians, but as the findings of unmet needs and health disparities set forth in this bill make clear, we still have a long way to go. For instance, Native Hawaiians have the highest cancer mortality rates in the State of Hawaii--rates that are 22 percent higher than the rate for the total State male population and 64 percent higher than the rate for the total State female population. Nationally, Native Hawaiians have the third highest mortality rate as a result of breast cancer. With respect to diabetes, in 2004 Native Hawaiians had the highest mortality rate associated with diabetes in the State--a rate which is 119 percent higher than the statewide rate for all racial groups. When it comes to heart disease, the mortality rate of Native Hawaiians associated with heart disease is 86 percent higher than the rate for the entire State, and the mortality rate for hypertension is 46 percent higher than that for the entire State. These statistics on the health status of Native Hawaiians are but a small part of the long list of data that makes clear that our objective of assuring that the Native people of Hawaii attain some parity of good health comparable to that of the larger U.S. population has not yet been achieved. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. INOUYE

Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I am pleased to congratulate Commander Leda Mei Li Chong upon the completion of her career of service in the U.S. Navy. Throughout her 20-year military career, Commander Chong served with distinction and dedication. As the first member in her family to serve in the military, Commander Chong received her commission from the United States Navy in 1987. She went on to teach math, chemistry, materials, and radiological controls at the Naval Nuclear Power School in Orlando, FL. From there, Commander Chong served in various technical positions always providing vital operational and training support to the naval fleet. Highlights include having been the Department of Defense military satellite communications liaison to the U.S. Coast Guard where she provided expert technical and policy guidance on ultra high frequency satellite capabilities. She was also deputy J6 to the commander, Iceland Defense Force where she provided critical command, control, and communications in support of NATO defense. Commander Chong volunteered as a White House social aide where she provided support to the President of the United States during important State events. Her most recent assignments were as a Navy congressional liaison to the Senate and House Armed Services Committees as well as to the Senate and House Defense Appropriations subcommittees. As a congressional liaison, her straightforward approach and complete grasp of all facets concerning C4ISR, information technology, and space programs have been of great benefit to my staff, the U.S. Congress and our national security. Commander Chong ensured that the U.S. congress had the information necessary to determine how to best equip, maintain and support the U.S. Navy. Her family and her fellow shipmates can be proud of her distinguished service. Her parents Paul and Su and her husband Kevin have given her strong support during her naval career. As she departs the Pentagon to start her second career, I call upon my colleagues to wish Commander Chong and her family every success, and the traditional Navy ``fair winds and following seas.''

Mr. INOUYE

Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce a bill to reauthorize the Native Hawaiian Health Care Improvement Act. Senator Akaka joins me in sponsoring this measure. The Native Hawaiian Health Care Improvement Act was enacted into law in 1988, and has been reauthorized several times throughout the years. The Act provides authority for a range of programs and services designed to improve the health care status of the native people of Hawaii. With the enactment of the Native Hawaiian Health Care Improvement Act and the establishment of Native Hawaiian health care systems on most of the islands that make up the State of Hawaii, we have witnessed significant improvements in the health status of Native Hawaiians, but as the findings of unmet needs and health disparities set forth in this bill make clear, we still have a long way to go. For instance, Native Hawaiians have the highest cancer mortality rates in the State of Hawaii--rates that are 22 percent higher than the rate for the total State male population and 64 percent higher than the rate for the total State female population. Nationally, Native Hawaiians have the third highest mortality rate as a result of breast cancer. With respect to diabetes, in 2004 Native Hawaiians had the highest mortality rate associated with diabetes in the State--a rate which is 119 percent higher than the statewide rate for all racial groups. When it comes to heart disease, the mortality rate of Native Hawaiians associated with heart disease is 86 percent higher than the rate for the entire State, and the mortality rate for hypertension is 46 percent higher than that for the entire State. These statistics on the health status of Native Hawaiians are but a small part of the long list of data that makes clear that our objective of assuring that the Native people of Hawaii attain some parity of good health comparable to that of the larger U.S. population has not yet been achieved. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. INOUYE

Mr. INOUYE. Madam President, the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation adopted rules governing its procedures for the 110th Congress on January 24. Pursuant to rule XXVI, paragraph 2, of the Standing Rules of the Senate, on behalf of myself and Senator Stevens, I ask unanimous consent that the accompanying Rules from the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation be printed in the Record.

Mr. INOUYE

Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I rise to speak in support of the Commission on Wartime Relocation and Internment of Latin Americans of Japanese Descent Act. The story of U.S. citizens taken from their homes on the west coast and confined in camps is a story that was made known after a fact- finding study by a Commission that Congress authorized in 1980. That study was followed by a formal apology by President Reagan and a bill for reparations. Far less known, and indeed, I myself did not initially know, is the story of Latin Americans of Japanese descent taken from their homes in Latin America, stripped of their passports, brought to the U.S., and interned in American camps. This is a story about the U.S. government's act of reaching its arm across international borders, into a community that did not pose an immediate threat to our Nation, in order to use them, devoid of passports or any other proof of citizenship, for hostage exchange with Japan. Between the years 1941 and 1945, our government, with the help of Latin American officials, arbitrarily arrested persons of Japanese descent from streets, homes, and workplaces. Approximately 2,300 undocumented persons were brought to camp sites in the U.S., where they were held under armed watch, and then held in reserve for prisoner exchange. Those used in an exchange were sent to Japan, a foreign country that many had never set foot on since their ancestors' immigration to Latin America. Despite their involuntary arrival, Latin American internees of Japanese descent were considered by the Immigration and Naturalization Service as illegal entrants. By the end of the war, some Japanese Latin Americans had been sent to Japan. Those who were not used in a prisoner exchange were cast out into a new and English-speaking country, and subject to deportation proceedings. Some returned to Latin America. Others remained in the U.S., where their Latin American country of origin refused their re-entry because they were unable to present a passport. When I first learned of the wartime experiences of Japanese Latin Americans, it seemed unbelievable, but indeed, it happened. It is a part of our national history, and it is a part of the living histories of the many families whose lives are forever tied to internment camps in our country. The outline of this story was sketched out in a book published by the Commission on Wartime Relocation and Internment of Civilians formed in 1980. This Commission had set out to learn about Japanese Americans. Towards the close of their investigations, the Commissioners stumbled upon this extraordinary effort by the U.S. government to relocate, intern, and deport Japanese persons formerly living in Latin America. Because this finding surfaced late in its study, the Commission was unable to fully uncover the facts, but found them significant enough to include in its published study, urging a deeper investigation. I rise today to introduce the Commission on Wartime Relocation and Internment of Latin Americans of Japanese Descent Act, which would establish a fact-finding Commission to extend the study of the 1980 Commission. This Commission's task would be to determine facts surrounding the U.S. government's actions in regards to Japanese Latin Americans subject to a program of relocation, interment, and deportation. I believe that examining this extraordinary program would give finality to, and complete the account of Federal actions to detain and intern civilians of Japanese ancestry. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of my bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I rise today to call attention to an important issue that the Congress has not adequately addressed since the painful events of September 11, 2001. That issue is the inability of our first responders to speak to each other, a problem especially troubling during an emergency, when the ability to quickly and effectively communicate saves lives. This is why I, with the cosponsorship of my colleagues, Senators Stevens, Kerry, Smith and Snowe, are introducing the Interoperable Emergency Communications Act. After September 11, 2001, we heard heartbreaking stories of firefighters and police officers who went into harm's way because they lacked adequate information. These brave men and women were unable to reach victims because their systems could not communicate with one another. At that time, the Congress began devoting greater attention to why many of our first responders lacked this ability to communicate with each other in the field. We asked what it would take to ensure communications equipment and facilities could withstand a natural disaster. We asked which equipment would be worthy of our investment. Then Hurricane Katrina struck in August, 2006, and we found that our first responders faced the same communications failures. This is an unnecessary frustration that prevents our first responders from effectively doing their jobs. Our bill provides needed direction to the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) regarding its administration of the $1 billion grant program for interoperable communications systems for first responders, which was created by the Senate Commerce Committee early last year. It will be funded by money from the Digital Transition and Public Safety Fund and administered by the NTIA. The bill designates grants for regional or statewide communications systems that will allow first responders to talk to one another during an emergency. It also sets aside funding for a technology reserve for immediate deployment of communications equipment in the event of an emergency or disaster. To ensure a fair distribution of funds, the money will be distributed in accordance with guidelines outlined in the Patriot Act to ensure a fair distribution of funds, and grant allocations will be prioritized based on an ``all hazards'' approach that will take into account threat and risk factors associated with natural disasters--such as hurricanes, tsunamis, earthquakes, and tornadoes--as well as risks associated with terrorist attacks. Every day we hear about potential threats against our Nation and it will not be long until we are again in the midst of hurricane season. I hope that history will not repeat itself and that the Congress can act quickly in directing the NTIA to give our first responders the tools they need to effectively do their jobs. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. INOUYE

Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I rise to speak in support of the Commission on Wartime Relocation and Internment of Latin Americans of Japanese Descent Act. The story of U.S. citizens taken from their homes on the west coast and confined in camps is a story that was made known after a fact- finding study by a Commission that Congress authorized in 1980. That study was followed by a formal apology by President Reagan and a bill for reparations. Far less known, and indeed, I myself did not initially know, is the story of Latin Americans of Japanese descent taken from their homes in Latin America, stripped of their passports, brought to the U.S., and interned in American camps. This is a story about the U.S. government's act of reaching its arm across international borders, into a community that did not pose an immediate threat to our Nation, in order to use them, devoid of passports or any other proof of citizenship, for hostage exchange with Japan. Between the years 1941 and 1945, our government, with the help of Latin American officials, arbitrarily arrested persons of Japanese descent from streets, homes, and workplaces. Approximately 2,300 undocumented persons were brought to camp sites in the U.S., where they were held under armed watch, and then held in reserve for prisoner exchange. Those used in an exchange were sent to Japan, a foreign country that many had never set foot on since their ancestors' immigration to Latin America. Despite their involuntary arrival, Latin American internees of Japanese descent were considered by the Immigration and Naturalization Service as illegal entrants. By the end of the war, some Japanese Latin Americans had been sent to Japan. Those who were not used in a prisoner exchange were cast out into a new and English-speaking country, and subject to deportation proceedings. Some returned to Latin America. Others remained in the U.S., where their Latin American country of origin refused their re-entry because they were unable to present a passport. When I first learned of the wartime experiences of Japanese Latin Americans, it seemed unbelievable, but indeed, it happened. It is a part of our national history, and it is a part of the living histories of the many families whose lives are forever tied to internment camps in our country. The outline of this story was sketched out in a book published by the Commission on Wartime Relocation and Internment of Civilians formed in 1980. This Commission had set out to learn about Japanese Americans. Towards the close of their investigations, the Commissioners stumbled upon this extraordinary effort by the U.S. government to relocate, intern, and deport Japanese persons formerly living in Latin America. Because this finding surfaced late in its study, the Commission was unable to fully uncover the facts, but found them significant enough to include in its published study, urging a deeper investigation. I rise today to introduce the Commission on Wartime Relocation and Internment of Latin Americans of Japanese Descent Act, which would establish a fact-finding Commission to extend the study of the 1980 Commission. This Commission's task would be to determine facts surrounding the U.S. government's actions in regards to Japanese Latin Americans subject to a program of relocation, interment, and deportation. I believe that examining this extraordinary program would give finality to, and complete the account of Federal actions to detain and intern civilians of Japanese ancestry. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of my bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. INOUYE

Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I rise today to call attention to an important issue that the Congress has not adequately addressed since the painful events of September 11, 2001. That issue is the inability of our first responders to speak to each other, a problem especially troubling during an emergency, when the ability to quickly and effectively communicate saves lives. This is why I, with the cosponsorship of my colleagues, Senators Stevens, Kerry, Smith and Snowe, are introducing the Interoperable Emergency Communications Act. After September 11, 2001, we heard heartbreaking stories of firefighters and police officers who went into harm's way because they lacked adequate information. These brave men and women were unable to reach victims because their systems could not communicate with one another. At that time, the Congress began devoting greater attention to why many of our first responders lacked this ability to communicate with each other in the field. We asked what it would take to ensure communications equipment and facilities could withstand a natural disaster. We asked which equipment would be worthy of our investment. Then Hurricane Katrina struck in August, 2006, and we found that our first responders faced the same communications failures. This is an unnecessary frustration that prevents our first responders from effectively doing their jobs. Our bill provides needed direction to the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) regarding its administration of the $1 billion grant program for interoperable communications systems for first responders, which was created by the Senate Commerce Committee early last year. It will be funded by money from the Digital Transition and Public Safety Fund and administered by the NTIA. The bill designates grants for regional or statewide communications systems that will allow first responders to talk to one another during an emergency. It also sets aside funding for a technology reserve for immediate deployment of communications equipment in the event of an emergency or disaster. To ensure a fair distribution of funds, the money will be distributed in accordance with guidelines outlined in the Patriot Act to ensure a fair distribution of funds, and grant allocations will be prioritized based on an ``all hazards'' approach that will take into account threat and risk factors associated with natural disasters--such as hurricanes, tsunamis, earthquakes, and tornadoes--as well as risks associated with terrorist attacks. Every day we hear about potential threats against our Nation and it will not be long until we are again in the midst of hurricane season. I hope that history will not repeat itself and that the Congress can act quickly in directing the NTIA to give our first responders the tools they need to effectively do their jobs. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. INOUYE

Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President: I rise today to join my colleague Senator Feinstein in introducing probably one of the most important bills we can consider this Congress in terms of energy, economic, and environmental security: the Ten-In-Ten Fuel Economy Act of 2007. Simply put, this bill would raise the average fuel economy standards for all passenger cars and light trucks from 25 miles per gallon to 35 miles per gallon by the year 2019. While Senator Feinstein and I have taken the lead on this issue, the bill we are introducing today is the product of considerable input and expertise provided by our colleagues Senators Snowe, Durbin, and Cantwell. I also want to thank Senators Kerry, Boxer, Bill Nelson, Lautenberg, Lieberman, Menendez, and Collins for joining us in this effort. This bill is a win-win for the American public. It will substantially reduce America's dependence on foreign oil from unstable governments, as well as decrease the amount of harmful emissions coming from our nation's passenger vehicles. At the same time, it will save American families money by reducing their fuel costs. According to the Union of Concerned Scientists, this bill, if enacted, would save 6 billion gallons of gas--equating to $12 billion in fuel cost savings for motorists in this country--within 6 years of the first model year requiring improvement. That $12 billion in fuel cost savings also translates into a reduction of 65 million metric tons of carbon dioxide emissions--one of the largest contributors to global warming. This level of savings after only 6 years would be accomplished before the full contribution of the bill is achieved. By 2025, assuming today's price for a gallon of gas, enactment of this bill would effectively reduce consumption of foreign oil by 2.1 million barrels a day by saving over 35 billion gallons of gasoline annually. It would provide motorists with $64 billion in fuel cost savings, and reduce emissions of carbon dioxide by 358 million metric tons. This decrease in carbon dioxide emissions would be the equivalent of taking 52 million cars and trucks off the road. This incredible savings is achieved by simply raising the fuel economy standard from 25 miles per gallon to 35 miles per gallon in a 10 year period. Some of our colleagues may question whether this proposed standard can be achieved. Let me just note that the Commerce Committee helped establish the first CAFE standards in 1975, against the cries of critics then. History, however, shows that Congress' action then was largely responsible for the Nation's decreased demand for oil during the 1980s necessitated by the Arab Oil Embargo. Since the 1980s, however, the fuel economy average for cars and light trucks combined has remained essentially flat even though advances in technology have continued. It is time to update CAFE standards. The benefits gained from undertaking this endeavor are many, and too long overdue.

Mr. INOUYE

Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President: I rise today to join my colleague Senator Feinstein in introducing probably one of the most important bills we can consider this Congress in terms of energy, economic, and environmental security: the Ten-In-Ten Fuel Economy Act of 2007. Simply put, this bill would raise the average fuel economy standards for all passenger cars and light trucks from 25 miles per gallon to 35 miles per gallon by the year 2019. While Senator Feinstein and I have taken the lead on this issue, the bill we are introducing today is the product of considerable input and expertise provided by our colleagues Senators Snowe, Durbin, and Cantwell. I also want to thank Senators Kerry, Boxer, Bill Nelson, Lautenberg, Lieberman, Menendez, and Collins for joining us in this effort. This bill is a win-win for the American public. It will substantially reduce America's dependence on foreign oil from unstable governments, as well as decrease the amount of harmful emissions coming from our nation's passenger vehicles. At the same time, it will save American families money by reducing their fuel costs. According to the Union of Concerned Scientists, this bill, if enacted, would save 6 billion gallons of gas--equating to $12 billion in fuel cost savings for motorists in this country--within 6 years of the first model year requiring improvement. That $12 billion in fuel cost savings also translates into a reduction of 65 million metric tons of carbon dioxide emissions--one of the largest contributors to global warming. This level of savings after only 6 years would be accomplished before the full contribution of the bill is achieved. By 2025, assuming today's price for a gallon of gas, enactment of this bill would effectively reduce consumption of foreign oil by 2.1 million barrels a day by saving over 35 billion gallons of gasoline annually. It would provide motorists with $64 billion in fuel cost savings, and reduce emissions of carbon dioxide by 358 million metric tons. This decrease in carbon dioxide emissions would be the equivalent of taking 52 million cars and trucks off the road. This incredible savings is achieved by simply raising the fuel economy standard from 25 miles per gallon to 35 miles per gallon in a 10 year period. Some of our colleagues may question whether this proposed standard can be achieved. Let me just note that the Commerce Committee helped establish the first CAFE standards in 1975, against the cries of critics then. History, however, shows that Congress' action then was largely responsible for the Nation's decreased demand for oil during the 1980s necessitated by the Arab Oil Embargo. Since the 1980s, however, the fuel economy average for cars and light trucks combined has remained essentially flat even though advances in technology have continued. It is time to update CAFE standards. The benefits gained from undertaking this endeavor are many, and too long overdue.

Mr. INOUYE

Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I am pleased to join my colleague, Senator Akaka, as a cosponsor of the Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act of 2007. During the 109th Congress, the Administration expressed concerns with this legislation that stem from its experience with Indian tribes. The history of the Native Hawaiians and their treatment by the United States is similar to that of Indian tribes and Alaska Natives. I want to commend the Administration for devoting staff to work with us to achieve consensus on mutually agreeable language. I am confident that this measure not only addresses the Administration's concerns but also the concerns of some of our colleagues. Having served on the Indian Affairs Committee for the past 28 years, I know that most of our colleagues are more familiar with conditions and circumstances in Indian country, and naturally, they bring their experience with Indian country to bear in considering this measure, which has been pending in the Senate for the past eight years. Accordingly, I believe it is important that our colleagues understand what this bill seeks to accomplish as well as how it differs from legislation affecting Indian country. It is a little known fact that beginning in 1910 and since that time, the Congress has passed and the President has signed into law over 160 Federal laws designed to address the conditions of Native Hawaiians. Thus, Federal laws which authorize the provision of health care, education, housing, and job training and employment services, as well as programs to provide for the preservation of the Native Hawaiian language, Native language immersion, Native cultural and grave protections and repatriation of Native sacred objects have been in place for decades. The Native Hawaiian programs do not draw upon funding that is appropriated for American Indians or Alaska Natives--there are separate authorizations for programs that are administered by different Federal agencies--not the Bureau of Indian Affairs or the Indian Health Service, for instance--and the Native Hawaiian program funds are not drawn from the Interior Appropriations Subcommittee account. Thus, they have no impact on the funding that is provided for the other indigenous, native people of the United States. However, unlike the native people residing on the mainland, Native Hawaiians have not been able to exercise their rights as Native people to self-determination or self-governance because their government was overthrown on January 17, 1893. This bill would provide a process for the reorganization of the Native Hawaiian government and the resumption of a political and legal relationship between that government and the government of the United States. Because the Native Hawaiian government is not an Indian tribe, the body of Federal Indian law that would otherwise customarily apply when the United States extends Federal recognition to an Indian tribal group does not apply. Thus, the bill provides authority for a process of negotiations amongst the United States, the State of Hawaii, and the reorganized Native Hawaiian government to address such matters as the exercise of civil and criminal jurisdiction by the respective governments, the transfer of land and natural resources and other assets, and the exercise of governmental authority over those lands, natural resources and other assets. Upon reaching agreement, the U.S. Congress and the legislature of the State of Hawaii would have to enact legislation implementing the agreements of the three governments, including amendments that will necessarily have to be made to existing Federal law, such as the Hawaii Admissions Act and the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act, and to State law, including amendments to the Hawaii State Constitution, before any of the new governmental relationships and authorities can take effect. That is why concerns which are premised on the manner in which Federal Indian law provides for the respective governmental authorities of the State governments and Indian tribal governments simply do not apply in Hawaii. We have every confidence that consistent with the Federal policy for over 35 years, the restoration of the rights to self-determination and self-governance will enable the Native Hawaiian people, as the direct, lineal descendants of the aboriginal, indigenous native people of what has become our nation's fiftieth state, to take their rightful place in the family of governments that makes up our constitutional system of governance.

Mr. INOUYE

Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I am pleased to join my colleague, Senator Akaka, as a cosponsor of the Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act of 2007. During the 109th Congress, the Administration expressed concerns with this legislation that stem from its experience with Indian tribes. The history of the Native Hawaiians and their treatment by the United States is similar to that of Indian tribes and Alaska Natives. I want to commend the Administration for devoting staff to work with us to achieve consensus on mutually agreeable language. I am confident that this measure not only addresses the Administration's concerns but also the concerns of some of our colleagues. Having served on the Indian Affairs Committee for the past 28 years, I know that most of our colleagues are more familiar with conditions and circumstances in Indian country, and naturally, they bring their experience with Indian country to bear in considering this measure, which has been pending in the Senate for the past eight years. Accordingly, I believe it is important that our colleagues understand what this bill seeks to accomplish as well as how it differs from legislation affecting Indian country. It is a little known fact that beginning in 1910 and since that time, the Congress has passed and the President has signed into law over 160 Federal laws designed to address the conditions of Native Hawaiians. Thus, Federal laws which authorize the provision of health care, education, housing, and job training and employment services, as well as programs to provide for the preservation of the Native Hawaiian language, Native language immersion, Native cultural and grave protections and repatriation of Native sacred objects have been in place for decades. The Native Hawaiian programs do not draw upon funding that is appropriated for American Indians or Alaska Natives--there are separate authorizations for programs that are administered by different Federal agencies--not the Bureau of Indian Affairs or the Indian Health Service, for instance--and the Native Hawaiian program funds are not drawn from the Interior Appropriations Subcommittee account. Thus, they have no impact on the funding that is provided for the other indigenous, native people of the United States. However, unlike the native people residing on the mainland, Native Hawaiians have not been able to exercise their rights as Native people to self-determination or self-governance because their government was overthrown on January 17, 1893. This bill would provide a process for the reorganization of the Native Hawaiian government and the resumption of a political and legal relationship between that government and the government of the United States. Because the Native Hawaiian government is not an Indian tribe, the body of Federal Indian law that would otherwise customarily apply when the United States extends Federal recognition to an Indian tribal group does not apply. Thus, the bill provides authority for a process of negotiations amongst the United States, the State of Hawaii, and the reorganized Native Hawaiian government to address such matters as the exercise of civil and criminal jurisdiction by the respective governments, the transfer of land and natural resources and other assets, and the exercise of governmental authority over those lands, natural resources and other assets. Upon reaching agreement, the U.S. Congress and the legislature of the State of Hawaii would have to enact legislation implementing the agreements of the three governments, including amendments that will necessarily have to be made to existing Federal law, such as the Hawaii Admissions Act and the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act, and to State law, including amendments to the Hawaii State Constitution, before any of the new governmental relationships and authorities can take effect. That is why concerns which are premised on the manner in which Federal Indian law provides for the respective governmental authorities of the State governments and Indian tribal governments simply do not apply in Hawaii. We have every confidence that consistent with the Federal policy for over 35 years, the restoration of the rights to self-determination and self-governance will enable the Native Hawaiian people, as the direct, lineal descendants of the aboriginal, indigenous native people of what has become our nation's fiftieth state, to take their rightful place in the family of governments that makes up our constitutional system of governance.

Mr. INOUYE

Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, today I join my partner from Hawaii, Senator Akaka, and other esteemed colleagues, in lending my support to the Henry Kuualoha Giugni Kupuna Memorial Archives Bill. I offer my support today, on this, the eleventh day of January, Henry's birthday, to herald the significant role that the establishment of these archives will play in shaping the future of a new generation of Americans, just as Henry did during his remarkable tenure as the 30th Sergeant-at-Arms of the United States Senate. In addition to creating a digital archive and preserving the traditions and culture of Native Hawaiians, this bill will support initiatives critical to the development of Web-based media projects and the creation of educational materials that will richly enhance the educational experience for countless students. It is my hope that the establishment of these archives will inspire greater academic achievement of indigenous students by sharing with them the stories and histories of accomplished individuals with indigenous backgrounds, such as Henry.

Mr. INOUYE

Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, today I join my partner from Hawaii, Senator Akaka, and other esteemed colleagues, in lending my support to the Henry Kuualoha Giugni Kupuna Memorial Archives Bill. I offer my support today, on this, the eleventh day of January, Henry's birthday, to herald the significant role that the establishment of these archives will play in shaping the future of a new generation of Americans, just as Henry did during his remarkable tenure as the 30th Sergeant-at-Arms of the United States Senate. In addition to creating a digital archive and preserving the traditions and culture of Native Hawaiians, this bill will support initiatives critical to the development of Web-based media projects and the creation of educational materials that will richly enhance the educational experience for countless students. It is my hope that the establishment of these archives will inspire greater academic achievement of indigenous students by sharing with them the stories and histories of accomplished individuals with indigenous backgrounds, such as Henry.

Mr. INOUYE

Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I rise today to express my strong opposition to an amendment to S.1, the Legislative Transparency Act of 2007, which is proposed by my colleague, Senator David Vitter of Louisiana. This amendment amends the Federal Election Campaign Act, FECA, so that Indian tribes would be singled out for the purposes of campaign finance law. In effect, this proposal would prohibit tribal campaign contributions by defining tribes as corporations under our Nation's campaign finance laws. Indian tribes are constitutionally recognized sovereign governments, with whom the Federal Government has a trust relationship. The primary purpose of Indian tribes is to provide governmental services to their members. Corporations are for-profit entities whose primary goal is to maximize profits for its shareholders. Treating Indian tribes as corporations for the purposes of campaign finance sets a dangerous precedent for their treatment in other areas of the law. In addition, I do not support this measure because it would treat Indian tribes differently from other similarly situated entities regarding their campaign contributions. Indian tribes are exempt from the aggregate limit and the reporting requirements on their campaign contributions in the same manner as other unincorporated associations are exempt. While I support efforts to require more transparency with respect to the reporting of all contributions, I do so with the caveat that all similarly situated entities should be subject to the same reporting requirements. If enacted this amendment would limit the ability of tribes to participate fully in the political process by preventing them from making campaign contributions. Even though tribes are acknowledged as sovereigns, they have not been granted seats in the U.S. Congress. Instead, they must rely on the Congress to represent them. Having served in the United States Senate for 45 years and on the Indian Affairs Committee for the past 28 years, I have seen how the Congress has taken actions without considering their effects on tribes and individual Indians. At times, it even seemed that the Congress took action only to appease non-Indians. It causes one to wonder whether the Congress would have taken those actions if tribes had been consulted and been allowed to actively participate in the political process. Due to some bad actions taken by non-Indians, some are calling to prevent tribes from fully participating in the electoral process. We must pause and reflect upon the impact that this proposal will have now and in the long term. We must ensure that the tribes, who were the victims of illegal acts, are not penalized in the name of reform. To do this, we must fully consider the unique nature of Indian tribes. Tribes need a voice to reflect their unique legal status. Without a seat in the U.S. Congress they must be allowed to use other means to participate in this process. And once again, we must ensure that Indian gaming is not unfairly blamed. Some believe that Indian gaming is providing an improper tribal advantage in the political process. During the 2004 election cycle, tribal contributions comprised one-third of 1 percent of total contributions nationwide. Given the facts, it is hard to conceive of an unfair tribal advantage. I believe that many critics of full tribal participation in the election process do not understand the unique history, status, and relationship that Indian tribes have with the Federal Government. Indian tribes have much to lose in the Federal process. The U.S. government has a history of taking from Indian tribes, and taking without fulfilling our obligations. We must fully consider the tribal role in the Federal process before determining that gaming revenues cannot be used in the Federal process or that tribes should not be allowed to fully participate. The U.S. Senate committees of jurisdiction should have the opportunity to hold hearings and fully explore this issue. Therefore, for these reasons I urge my colleagues to join me in opposing this proposed measure, and preserving the rights of Indian tribes to participate in the political process.

Mr. INOUYE

Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, it is my pleasure to welcome the newest member of the Hawaii Congressional Delegation, Representative Mazie Hirono, to the 110th Congress. Representative Hirono has previously served the State of Hawaii as Lieutenant Governor, Hawaii State Representative, and deputy state attorney general, and I am confident she will continue her distinguished record as a compassionate, tireless, and courageous public servant through her service in Washington as a Member of the U.S. House of Representatives. She embodies the best of Hawaii and our Nation. As a young girl, she and her mother and two brothers emmigrated from Japan in search of a better life. The life they found in Hawaii was marked by struggle and hard work. But, more importantly, Mazie Hirono found hope and self-reliance. She also learned an important lesson that still guides her today. ``My mother taught me that no circumstance is beyond the power of courage, and that when you know what is right you must find the will to act, even against the greatest of odds,'' she says. That uncommon spirit, from an uncommon mother, defines Mazie Hirono. I kindly ask you and my colleagues to join me in welcoming Representative Hirono to the 110th Congress of the United States.

Mr. INOUYE

Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I am introducing legislation today to amend Title VII of the Public Health Service Act to establish a psychology post-doctoral program. Psychologists have made a unique contribution in reaching out to the Nation's medically underserved populations. Expertise in behavioral science is useful in addressing grave concerns such as violence, addiction, mental illness, adolescent and child behavioral disorders, and family disruption. Establishment of a psychology post-doctoral program could be an effective way to find solutions to these issues. Similar programs supporting additional, specialized training in traditionally underserved settings have been successful in retaining participants to serve the same populations. For example, mental health professionals who have participated in these specialized federally funded programs have tended not only to meet their repayment obligations, but have continued to work in the public sector or with the underserved. While a doctorate in psychology provides broad-based knowledge and mastery in a wide variety of clinical skills, specialized post-doctoral fellowship programs help to develop particular diagnostic and treatment skills required to respond effectively to underserved populations. For example, what appears to be poor academic motivation in a child recently relocated from Southeast Asia might actually reflect a cultural value of reserve rather than a disinterest in academic learning. Specialized assessment skills enable the clinician to initiate effective treatment. Domestic violence poses a significant public health problem and is not just a problem for the criminal justice system. Violence against women results in thousands of hospitalizations a year. Rates of child and spouse abuse in rural areas are particularly high, as are the rates of alcohol abuse and depression in adolescents. A post-doctoral fellowship program in the psychology of the rural populations could be of special benefit in addressing these problems. Given the demonstrated success and effectiveness of specialized training programs, it is incumbent upon us to encourage participation in post-doctoral fellowships that respond to the needs of the nation's underserved. I ask unanimous consent that the text of this bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. INOUYE

Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I rise to introduce legislation today to modify Title VII of the U.S. Public Health Service Act in order to provide students enrolled in graduate psychology programs with the opportunity to participate in various health professions loan programs. Providing students enrolled in graduate psychology programs with eligibility for financial assistance in the form of loans, loan guarantees, and scholarships will facilitate a much-needed infusion of behavioral science expertise into our community of public health providers. There is a growing recognition of the valuable contribution being made by psychologists toward solving some of our Nation's most distressing problems. The participation of students from all backgrounds and clinical disciplines is vital to the success of health care training. The Title VII programs play a significant role in providing financial support for the recruitment of minorities, women, and individuals from economically disadvantaged backgrounds. Minority therapists have an advantage in the provision of critical services to minority populations because often they can communicate with clients in their own language and cultural framework. Minority therapists are more likely to work in community settings where ethnic minority and economically disadvantaged individuals are most likely to seek care. It is critical that continued support be provided for the training of individuals who provide health care services to underserved communities. I ask unanimous consent that the text of this bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. INOUYE

Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation to amend the Public Health Service Act for the establishment of a National Center for Social Work Research. Social workers provide a multitude of health care delivery services throughout America to our children, families, the elderly, and persons suffering from various forms of abuse and neglect. The purpose of this center is to support and disseminate information about basic and clinical social work research, and training, with emphasis on service to underserved and rural populations. While the Federal Government provides funding for various social work research activities through the National Institutes of Health and other Federal agencies, there presently is no coordination or direction of these critical activities and no overall assessment of needs and opportunities for empirical knowledge development. The establishment of a Center for Social Work Research would result in improved behavioral and mental health care outcomes for our nation's children, families, the elderly, and others. In order to meet the increasing challenges of bringing cost- effective, research-based, quality health care to all Americans, we must recognize the important contributions of social work researchers to health care delivery and the central role that the Center for Social Work can provide in facilitating their work. I ask unanimous consent that the text of this bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. INOUYE

Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, the legislation I have introduced will extend to qualified teaching hospital support organizations the existing debt-financed safe harbor rule. Congress enacted that rule to support the public service activities of tax-exempt schools, universities, pension funds, and consortia of such institutions. Our teaching hospitals require similar support. A New York Times article on June 21, 2002, described the financial problems which nonprofit hospitals are facing to modernize their facilities and meet the growing demand for charitable medical care. The problems have grown more urgent since that article appeared. On November 22, 2006, the Wall Street Journal noted the rising numbers of uninsured patients who fill hospital emergency rooms without paying their bills. In 2005, 46.6 million Americans had no health insurance. Compounding the growing demand for charitable care, new safety and infection-prevention standards require hospitals to undertake massive improvements. As a result, the article stated, for-profit hospitals are moving from older areas to affluent locations where residents can afford to pay for treatment. These private hospitals, the reporter pointed out, typically have no mandate for community service. In contrast, nonprofit hospitals must fulfill a community service requirement. They must stretch their resources to provide increased charitable care, update their facilities, and maintain skilled staffing. Both the Wall Street Journal and the New York Times noted the resulting closures of nonprofit hospitals due to this financial strain. The problem is particularly severe for teaching hospitals. As the Times article said, nonprofit hospitals provide nearly all the postgraduate medical education in the United States. Post-graduate medical instruction is by nature not profitable. Instruction in the treatment of mental disorders and trauma is especially costly. Despite their financial problem the nation's nonprofit hospitals strive to deliver a very high level of service. A study in the December 2006 issue of Archives of Internal Medicine had surveyed hospitals' qualify of care in four areas of treatment. It found that nonprofit hospitals consistently outperformed for-profit hospitals. It also found that teaching hospitals had a higher level of performance in treatment and diagnosis. It said that investment in technology and staffing leads to better care. And it recommended that alternative payments and sources of payments be considered to finance these improvements. The success and financial constraints of nonprofit teaching hospitals is evident in the work of the Queen's Health Systems in my State. This 146-year-old organization maintains the largest, private, nonprofit hospital in Hawaii. It serves as the primary clinical teaching facility for the University of Hawaii's medical residency programs in medicine, general surgery, orthopedic surgery, obstetrics-gynecology, pathology, and psychiatry. It conducts educational and training programs for nurses and allied health personnel. It operates the only trauma unit as well as the chief behavioral health program in the State. It maintains clinics throughout Hawaii, health programs for Native Hawaiians, and a small hospital on a rural, economically depressed island. Its medical reference library is the largest in the State. Not the least, it annually provides millions of dollars in uncompensated health services. To help pay for these community benefits, the Queen's Health Systems, as other nonprofit teaching hospitals, relies significantly on income from its endowment. In the past, the Congress has allowed tax-exempt schools, colleges, universities, and pension funds to invest their endowment in real estate so as to better meet their financial needs. Under the tax code these organizations can incur debt for real estate investments without triggering the tax on unrelated business activities. If the Queen's Health Systems were part of a university, it could borrow without incurring an unrelated business income tax. Not being part of a university, however, a teaching hospital and its support organization run into the tax code's debt financing prohibition. Nonprofit teaching hospitals have the same if not more pressing needs as universities, school, and pension trusts. The same safe harbor rule should be extended to teaching hospitals. My bill would allow the support organizations for qualified teaching hospitals to engage in limited borrowing to enhance their endowment income. The proposal for teaching hospitals is actually more restricted than current law for schools, universities, and pension trusts. Under safeguards developed by the Joint Committee on Taxation staff, a support organization for a teaching hospital can not buy and develop land on a commercial basis. The proposal is tied directly to the organization endowment. The staff's revenue estimate show that the provision with its general application will help a number a teaching hospitals. The U.S. Senate several times has acted favorably on this proposal. The Senate adopted a similar provision in H.R. 1836 the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Act of 2001. The House conferees on that bill, however, objected that the provision was unrelated to the bill's focus on individual tax relief and the conference deleted the provision from the final legislation. Subsequently, the Finance Committee included the provision in H.R. 7 the CARE Act of 2002 and in S. 476 the CARE Act of 2003 which the Senate passed. In the last Congress S. 6 the Marriage, Opportunity, Relief, and Empowerment Act of 2005, which the Senate leadership introduced, also included the proposal. As the Senate Finance Committee's recent hearings show, substantial health needs would go unmet if not for our charitable hospitals. It is time for the Congress to assist the nation's teaching hospitals in their charitable, educational service. I ask unanimous consent that the text of my bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, today I introduce legislation to authorize the autonomous functioning of clinical psychologists and clinical social workers within the Medicare comprehensive outpatient rehabilitation facility program. In my judgment, it is unfortunate that Medicare requires clinical supervision of the services provided by certain health professionals and does not allow them to function to the full extent of their state practice licenses. Those who need the services of outpatient rehabilitation facilities should have access to a wide range of social and behavioral science expertise. Clinical psychologists and clinical social workers are recognized as independent providers of mental health care services under the Federal Employee Health Benefits Program, the TRICARE Military Health Program of the Uniformed Services, the Medicare (Part B) Program, and numerous private insurance plans. This legislation will ensure that these qualified professionals achieve the same recognition under the Medicare comprehensive outpatient rehabilitation facility program. I ask unanimous consent that the text of this bill be printed in the Record.