Daniel Inouye

Mr. INOUYE

Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, recently, I was made aware of an extraordinary eulogy delivered on February 23, 2002, at the memorial services of an old and dear friend, Mr. Hung Wai Ching. It was delivered by a comrade-in-arms, Mr. Ted Tsukiyama. I urge my colleagues to read this inspiring eulogy. It describes an important chapter in the history of Our Nation. I ask that this eulogy be printed in the Record. The eulogy follows: Hung Wai Ching: A Eulogy Hung Wai Ching was a true and great hero of the Hawaii homefront during World War II. With his passing last February 9, 2002, Hawaii has lost the last survivor of those few wartime leaders who believed in the underlying loyalty of the Japanese in Hawaii, who courageously stood up and spoke up in the face of racial animosity and wartime hysteria to fight and win back for the Nisei the opportunity to demonstrate their loyalty to America. Hawaii was indeed fortunate that Hung Wai Ching was appointed to the key and critical Morale Section of the Military Governor's office which served as liaison between the Military Government and the civil population to maintain and preserve the morale, peace and stability of a community at war. One of the main jobs of the Morale Section was to stabilize and prevent possible explosive race situations. Reprisals against the Japanese people had to be prevented. Roughneck whites and blacks amongst the thousands of defense workers pouring into Hawaii had to be kept in line working in harmony. When news of the ``Bataan Death March'' reached Hawaii, Hung Wai rushed out to the plantations to find the Filipino workers sharpening their cane knives. He told them: ``Hey, you sharp da knife, eh? Good! You be ready. But no use da knife until I give you da signal, OK?'' Hung Wai's ``cane knife army'' had to wait patiently throughout the whole war, because Hung Wai never gave the signal. Hung Wai reported directly to FBI Chief Robert Shivers and to Army Intelligence Col. Kendall J. Fielder, who had unlimited authority to preserve the internal security of Hawaii, and to detain anyone deemed a security risk. There were any number of Japanese in Hawaii who, unbeknownst to them, were released early from detention or were never detained at all, because of Hung Wai's intervention. When General Emmons first arrived in Hawaii, he called in Fielder and asked him, ``Fielder, how many Japs did you take in today?'', but after consultation with Hung Wai, Fielder refused to make blanket quota arrests, even at the risk of court martial and his future military career. The tragic wartime mistake of mass evacuation and internment of Japanese was not repeated by Hawaii's military and intelligence leaders, largely because of calm and reasoned behind-the-scenes consultation from advisors like Hung Wai Ching. The Morale Section concentrated its efforts on the Japanese, because after the Japanese sneak attack on Pearl Harbor, Hung Wai knew that everyone who was of Japanese ancestry, alien or citizen alike, were ``behind the eight ball.'' Pearl Harbor was still in smoking ruins. A Japanese invasion of Hawaii was expected any day. Rumors of Japanese disloyalty was rampant. Nisei soldiers of the 298th Infantry had their guns taken away. The draft status of all Nisei was changed to ``enemy alien'', ineligible for military service. The President of Mutual Telephone Company proposed that all Japanese be evacuated to Molokai. There was widespread fear and distrust against the Japanese in Hawaii and grave questions as to their loyalty to country. But Hung Wai had no question or doubt whatever of these same people he grew up with, his classmates all the way up to the University, those that he lead in the YMCA programs. But he knew that people in Hawaii and the general American public at large would never be convinced of the loyalty of Japanese Americans until they could get back into the armed services, bear arms, fight, and even die for their country. So the most significant contribution Hung Wai Ching made during the war was the direct role he played in helping Japanese Americans regain the opportunity to bear arms and to prove their ultimate loyalty to country. This is that story. On December 7, 1941, the UH ROTC cadets which had been called to duty were converted into the Hawaii Territorial Guard, the HTG, and were assigned to guard vital buildings and installations on Oahu. Six weeks later, on January 19, 1942, the War Department had discovered to its horror that ``Honolulu was being guarded by hundreds of Japs in American uniforms,'' all HTG soldiers of Japanese ancestry were discharged. Most of them returned to the University where Hung Wai met, consoled, counseled and inspired a group of confused, bitter and disillusioned Nisei to offer themselves to the Military Governor as a labor battalion. I was one of them, I remember his key pitch was: ``So they don't trust you with rifles, maybe they'll trust you with picks and shovels.'' ``Picks and shovels???'' Here, Hung Wai was asking guys who were trying to get a college education to escape a future of plantation labor to volunteer to go back to manual labor! But considering the desperate situation they were in, Hung Wai made sense. So, in the end, 169 Nisei signed a petition to the Military Governor offering themselves as a labor battalion. Hung Wai took that Petition to Col. Fielder to assure that the Petition would be accepted by the Military Governor. The group was called the ``Varsity Victory Volunteers'' and were assigned to the 34th Construction Engineer Regiment at Schofield Barracks to perform essential defense construction work for the next 11 months. As the acknowledged ``Father of the VVV'' Hung Wai took a paternal interest in his VVV boys and showed them off at every chance. In December 1942, Col. Fielder asked Hung Wai to escort the Assistant Secretary of War, John J. McCloy, the most powerful man in the War Department, on a field inspection trip. Hung Wai made sure that McCloy saw the VVV Quarry Gang cracking rocks and operating the quarry up at Kolekole Pass and told him, ``those are all Nisei university boys who gave up their education to do their part for the war effort.'' Could it have been a mere coincidence that five-six weeks later, President Roosevelt announced the formation of an all Nisei combat unit and called for volunteers. This was exactly the ultimate objective of the VVV and the chance they had been working and waiting for, so the VVV voted to disband on January 25, 1943 so that they could volunteer for the 442nd. Thus, it was the VVV which had been inspired and initiated by Hung Wai Ching that proved one of the key factors leading to the decision to allow the Nisei to fight for country by the formation of the 442nd Regimental Combat Team, and the rest is well known to history. Hung Wai then adopted the 442nd in place of his disbanded VVV boys, and used his connections with War Department to assure that the 442nd be given every opportunity and fair treatment to succeed. When Hawaii's 442nd volunteers sailed out of Pier 11 on the Lurline troopship, Hung Wai was one of the few persons allowed on the Pier to see them off. Five days later when the Lurline sailed into San Francisco, there standing on the pier to greet the 442nd boys was Hung Wai Ching. He had flown up to California to meet and request that General DeWitt treat these volunteers with dignity and to withdraw any armed guards along the route because ``these were not Japanese POW's, they were American soldiers.'' Then Hung Wai asked the General if the 442nd could be given overnight passes so that they could eat chop suey in SF Chinatown. The General thought he was crazy. Imagine, Hung Wai was asking the very same man who had ordered 120,000 Japanese to be evacuated from the West Coast and imprisoned into American concentration camps to allow 2,452 ``buddahead soldiers'' to roam around the City of San Francisco. Crazy it was, but it shows how much Hung Wai tried ``to take care of his boys.'' When the troop trains bulled into Camp Shelby, Mississippi, the boys were greeted with the comforting sight of Hung Wai standing at the train station. He had just returned from a War Department visit where he tried to get the training site of the 442nd moved out of the South to a more racially tolerant Midwest. Secretary McCloy told him the decision was already made but authorized Hung Wai to travel to Camp Shelby to oversee the organization of the 442nd. At that time, the City of Hattiesburg, Mississippi was in uproar over the news, ``Jap regiment to train at Camp Shelby!''. First thing, Hung Wai met with the editor of the Hattiesburg American and the Chief of Police to tell them that ``These were not Japs, these were American soldiers who had volunteered to fight for their country.'' Thereafter, the ``Go Home Japs'' editorials ceased and the ``Japs Not Wanted'' road signs disappeared. Hung Wai saw to it that the 442nd got its own USO and that it was located on the white side of the then still-segregated Hattiesburg. An old-fashioned Southern Baptist minister had been appointed as the first 442nd chaplain but Hung Wai got the Army Chaplain's Corp to replace that chaplain with Hawaii's own Reverends Masao Yamada and Hiro Higuchi. These are some of the reasons why Hung Wai Ching is one of the first to be named an Honorary Member of the 442nd Veterans Club. Earlier, in May, 1942, Col. Fielder had assigned Hung Wai to observe and monitor the formation of the Hawaiian Provisional Infantry Battalion, predecessor to the famed 100th Infantry Battalion. Hung Wai was instrumental in assuring that the 100th would be staffed and led into battle by Hawaii-born officers like Col. Turner, Maj. Lovell, Captain Johnson and Captain Kometani. Hung Wai monitored the progress of the 100th through its training, maneuvers and overseas Italian and French battlegrounds, and everywhere he went and spoke, he extolled the exploits and distinguished battle record of ``The Purple Heart Battalion.'' And this is why Hung Wai is named as one of the exclusive Honorary Members of the 100th Infantry Battalion Veterans Club. Back at Camp Shelby, Hung Wai tells us the high brass of the 442nd were going crazy trying to figure out who this ``Bossy Chinaman'' was, always accompanied by ranking officers and who could order all kinds of changes in the 442nd organization. Little did they realize that backing up his demands was the authority of General Emmons, Military Governor of Hawaii, Joe Farrington, Hawaii's Delegate to Congress, Secretary McCloy of the War Department, and eventually the White House itself. Early in the War, Hung Wai's influential Quaker friend had introduced him to Eleanor Roosevelt and they quickly became good friends. She gave Hung Wai an open invitation to visit the White House any time. On one of those visits, as Hung Wai was telling Mrs. Roosevelt about the ``Japanese situation in Hawaii,'' she said, ``The President should hear this,'' and took Hung Wai upstairs to talk to President Roosevelt. Hung Wai remembers they talked for 40 minutes but he was so nervous and excited that when the President offered to light his cigarette, he put it in his coat pocket as a souvenir and burnt a hole in his new suit. But he remembers the one thing he told the President was that General Emmons and FBI Chief Shivers were doing a great job, had the situation well in hand, and that there was no necessity for a mass evacuation of Japanese from Hawaii. As we all know, Hawaii never suffered the same tragedy of mass internment of Japanese as happened in the West Coast of America. After returning from Camp Shelby, Hung Wai went on speaking tours to countless business groups and civic organizations praising the military record and achievements of the 100th and 442nd. His constant message and plea was: When the boys come home from the wars, accept and treat them as full American citizens, open up greater job opportunities for them, and help them finish their education and vocational training. And after the war, Hung Wai led the way in helping the returning veterans rehabilitate back to civilian life, to go back to their old jobs or get placed into banks and Big Five jobs previously inaccessible to persons of Japanese ancestry. He headed the Veteran's Memorial Scholarship Fund and obtained scholarship aid to help needy veteran finish their schooling and vocational training. One of Hung Wai's favorite scholarship stories is about a veteran who needed help to go to journalism school, and Hung Wai tapped one of the Big Five businessmen for funds to finance this veteran's schooling. Hung Wai says that donor went to his grave never knowing or realizing that he had helped finance the education of Koji Ariyoshi who was to become publisher and editor of the Honolulu Record, the chief critic and anti-Big Five newspaper in Honolulu. Hung Wai told me of another of his VVV and 442nd boys who was attending Chicago Law School who called and asked Hung Wai if he could get a loan of $300 to finish law school, so Hung Wai sent him the $300. Hung Wai says, ``You know, after that guy came back to Hawaii he not only paid back the $300 but he contributed every year many many times over the $300 so that others could get the same breaks.'' That veteran became the leading labor lawyer in Hawaii and ended up as a Justice of the Hawaii Supreme Court. His name was Edward Nakamura. But one of the most notable persons he helped was not a veteran, but no less than the former FBI Chief Robert Shivers himself. One day Hung Wai got a call from Shivers who said he wanted to retire in Hawaii and asked Hung Wai to help him get the U.S. Collector of Customs job for Hawaii. The local Japanese community raised funds to send Hung Wai to Washington, D.C., to see Mrs. Eleanor Roosevelt, where he told her how much Shivers had done for the people of Hawaii during the War and was well deserving of the job. Mrs. Roosevelt said, ``All right, I'll go talk to Henry.'' Hung Wai asked, ``Who's Henry?'' ``Henry'' was none other than Henry Morganthau, Secretary of the Treasury and head of the U.S. Customs. A few days later, Mrs. Roosevelt called Hung Wai back and said, ``Tell Mr. Shivers everything is all arranged.'' Then Hung Wai tell me, ``You know, I really wanted that Customs job myself.'' He comes up close and gives me a jab with his bony elbow and says, ``Hey, as Collector of Customs, I could control the opium trade to Hawaii and become a millionaire.'' As we all know, Hung Wai ended his life far from being a millionaire. In fact, it has to be said that Hung Wai never used his wartime position of power nor his high placed contacts to gain benefit or profit for himself. It was always used for the good and benefit of others. Hung Wai Ching's place in Hawaii's wartime history is secure. At the Centennial celebration of Japanese immigration to Hawaii held in 1986, Hung Wai Ching was nominated as one of the 24 non-Japanese and the only one of Chinese ancestry who had made significant contributions and support to welfare and progress of Hawaii's Japanese during their 100 year history. Hung Wai has been recognized as a national historical figure. Hung Wai called me one day not too long ago and said, ``Say, my grandson, Christopher, called me from Los Angeles all excited and telling me, `Grandpa, Grandpa, I saw your picture in a museum.''' So Hung Wai asked me what kind of museum would be showing his picture, and I tell him, it's the National Japanese American Museum in Los Angeles and they have a photo and a story about you in the history of the Japanese American experience during World War II. Go see it when you go to LA. Next time I saw Hung Wai after a trip to Los Angeles, he reported that he did go to the Museum but they wanted him to pay admission to get in. He told them, ``You got my picture in there. I just want to go in to see my picture.'' The lady says, ``Five dollars please.'' So Hung Wai turned around and walked away. So I got after Hung Wai telling him, ``Hung Wai, you tight Pake, you. You don't want to shell out $5.00 to go in and see how much all the Japanese in the United States remember you, honor you, and want to thank you for all you did for them!'' And Hung Wai's place in history was revealed directly to his son, King Lit, one day in New York when he was introduced to a mainland-born 442nd Veteran who asked him ``If your name is Ching, do you know Hung Wai Ching?'' King Lit told this story to his father and said, ``When I told him Hung Wai Ching was my father, he really flipped. And as he told me all about you, he cried, Pop, the man cried! It was kind of embarrassing but then I was so proud.'' All of us 442nd veterans know exactly how that veteran felt. He shed tears of gratitude. He cried for all of us. It is time to say ``Goodbye'' to Hung Wai. So on behalf of all of ``his boys,'' I will simply say: ``So long, Hung Wai.'' ``You did one helluva job for us.'' ``Thanks for everything.'' ``Aloha.''

Mr. INOUYE

Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I would like to announce that the Committee on Indian Affairs will meet on Wednesday, April 24, 2002, at 10 a.m., in room 485 of the Russell Senate Office Building to conduct a hearing on S. 2017, a bill to amend the Indian Financing Act of 1974 to improve the effectiveness of the Indian loan guarantee and insurance program. Those wishing additional information may contact the Indian Affairs Committee at 224-2251. committee on indian affairs

Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I would like to announce that the Committee on Indian Affairs will meet on Tuesday, April 30, 2002, at 9:30 a.m., in room 428A of the Russell Senate Office Building to conduct a joint hearing with the Senate Small Business Committee on ``Small Business Development in Native American Communities: Is the Federal Government Meeting Its Obligations?'' Those wishing additional information may contact the Indian Affairs Committee at 224-2251.

Mr. INOUYE

Mr. INOUYE. Madam President, almost seven years ago, I stood before you to submit a resolution ``to provide an opportunity for the Pottawatomi Nation in Canada to have the merits of their claims against the United States determined by the United States Court of Federal Claims.'' That bill was submitted as Senate Resolution 223, which referred the Pottawatomi's claim to the Chief Judge of the U.S. Court of Federal Claims and required the Chief Judge to report back to the Senate and provide sufficient findings of fact and conclusions of law to enable the Congress to determine whether the claim of the Pottawatomi Nation in Canada is legal or equitable in nature, and the amount of damages, if any, which may be legally or equitably due from the United States. Earlier this year, the Chief Judge of the Court of Federal Claims reported back that the Pottawatomi Nation in Canada has a legitimate and credible legal claim. Thereafter, by settlement stipulation, the United States has taken the position that it would be ``fair, just and equitable'' to settle the claims of the Pottawatomi Nation in Canada for the sum of $1,830,000. This settlement amount was reached by the parties after seven years of extensive, fact-intensive litigation. Independently, the court concluded that the settlement amount is ``not a gratuity'' and that the ``settlement was predicated on a credible legal claim.'' Pottawatomi Nation in Canada, et al. v. United States, Cong. Ref. 94-1037X at 28 (Ct. Fed. Cl., September 15, 2000) (Report of Hearing Officer). The bill I introduce today is to authorize the appropriation of those funds that the United States has concluded would be ``fair, just and equitable'' to satisfy this legal claim. If enacted, this bill will finally achieve a measure of justice for a tribal nation that has for far too long been denied. For the information of our colleagues, this is the historical background that informs the underlying legal claim of the Canadian Pottawatomi. The members of the Pottawatomi Nation in Canada are one of the descendant groups, successors-in-interest, of the historical Pottawatomi Nation and their claim originates in the latter part of the 18th Century. The historical Pottawatomi Nation was aboriginal to the United States. They occupied and possessed a vast expanse in what is now the States of Ohio, Michigan, Indiana, Illinois, and Wisconsin. From 1795 to 1833, the United States annexed most of the traditional land of the Pottawatomi Nation through a series of treaties of cession, many of these cessions were made under extreme duress and the threat of military action. In exchange, the Pottawatomis were repeatedly made promises that the remainder of their lands would be secure and, in addition, that the United States would pay certain annuities to the Pottawatomi. In 1829, the United States formally adopted a Federal policy of removal, an effort to remove all Indian tribes from their traditional lands east of the Mississippi River to the west. As part of that effort, the government increasingly pressured the Pottawatomis to cede the remainder of their traditional lands, some five millions acres in and around the city of Chicago and remove themselves west. For years, the Pottawatomis steadfastly refused to cede the remainder of their tribal territory. Then in 1833, the United States, pressed by settlers seeking more land, sent a Treaty Commission to the Pottawatomi with orders to extract a cession of the remaining lands. The Treaty Commissioners spent two weeks using extraordinarily coercive tactics, including threats of war, in an attempt to get the Pottawatomis to agree to cede their territory. Finally, those Pottawatomis who were present relented and on September 26, 1993, they ceded their remaining tribal estate through what would be known as the Treaty of Chicago. Seventy-seven members of the Pottawatomi Nation signed the Treaty of Chicago. Members of the ``Wisconsin Band'' were not present and did not assent to the cession. In exchange for their land, the Treaty of Chicago provided that the United States would give to the Pottawatomis five million acres of comparable land in what is now Missouri. The Pottawatomi were familiar with the Missouri land, aware that it was similar to their homeland. But the Senate refused to ratify that negotiated agreement and unilaterally switched the land to five million acres in Iowa. The Treaty Commissioners were sent back to acquire Pottawatomi assent to the Iowa land. All but seven of the original 77 signatories refused to accept the change even with promises that if they were dissatisfied ``justice would be done. Nevertheless, the Treaty of Chicago was ratified as amended by the Senate in 1834. Subsequently, the Pottawatomis sent a delegation to evaluate the land in Iowa. The delegation reported back that the land was ``not fit for snakes to live on.'' While some Pottawatomis removed westward, many of the Pottawatomis particularly the Wisconsin Band, whose leaders never agreed to the Treaty, refused to do so. By 1836, the United States began to forcefully remove Pottawatomis who remained in the east with devastating consequences. As is true with many other American Indian tribes, the forced removal westward came at great human cost. Many of the Pottawatomi were forcefully removed by mercenaries who were paid on a per capita basis government contract. Over one-half of the Indians removed by these means died en route. Those who reached Iowa were almost immediately removed further to inhospitable parts of Kansas against their will and without their consent. Knowing of these conditions, many of the Pottawatomis including most of those in the Wisconsin Band vigorously resisted forced removal. To avoid Federal troops and mercenaries, much of the Wisconsin Band ultimately found it necessary to flee to Canada. They were often pursued to the border by government troops, government-paid mercenaries or both. Official files of the Canadian and United States governments disclose that many Pottawatomis were forced to leave their homes without their horses or any of their possessions other than the clothes on their backs. By the late 1830s, the government refused payment of annuities to any Pottawatomi groups that had not removed west. In the 1860s, members of the Wisconsin Band, those still in their traditional territory and those forced to flee to Canada, petitioned Congress for the payment of their treaty annuities promised under the Treaty of Chicago and all other cession treaties. By the Act of June 25, 1864 (13 Stat. 172) the Congress declared that the Wisconsin Band did not forfeit the annuities by not removing and directed that the share of the Pottawatomi Indians who had refused to relocate to the west should be retained for their use in the United States Treasury. (H.R. Rep. No. 470, 64th Cong., p. 5, as quoted on page 3 of memo dated October 7, 1949). Nevertheless, much of the money was never paid to the Wisconsin Band. In 1903, the Wisconsin Band, most of whom now resided in three areas, the States of Michigan and Wisconsin and the Province of Ontario, petitioned the Senate once again to pay them their fair portion of annuities as required by the law and treaties. (Sen. Doc. No. 185, 57th Cong., 2d Sess.) By the Act of June 21, 1906 (34 Stat. 380), the Congress directed the Secretary of the Interior to investigate claims made by the Wisconsin Band and estabish a role of the Wisconsin Band Pottawatomis that still remained in the East. In addition, the Congress ordered the Secretary to determine ``the [Wisconsin Bands] proportionate shares of the annuities, trust funds, and other moneys paid to or expended for the tribe to which they belong in which the claimant Indians have not shared, [and] the amount of such monies retained in the Treasury of the United States to the credit of the clamant Indians as directed the provision of the Act of June 25, 1864.'' In order to carry out the 1906 Act, the Secretary of Interior directed Dr. W.M. Wooster to conduct an enumeration of Wisconsin Band Pottawatomi in both the United States and Canada. Dr. Wooster documented 2007 Wisconsin Pottawatomis: 457 in Wisconsin and Michigan and 1550 in Canada. He also concluded that the proportionate share of annuities for the Pottawatomis in Wisconsin and Michigan was $477,339 and that the proportionate share of annuities due the Pottawatomi Nation in Canada was $1,517,226. The Congress thereafter enacted a series of appropriation Acts from June 30, 1913 to May 29, 1928 to satisfy most of money owed to those Wisconsin Band Pottawatomis residing in the United States. However, the Wisconsin Band Pottawatomis who resided in Canada were never paid their share of the tribal funds. Since that time, the Pottawatomi Nation in Canada has diligently and continuously sought to enforce their treaty rights, although until this congressional reference, they had never been provided their day in court. In 1910, the United States and Great Britain entered into an agreement for the purpose of dealing with claims between both countries, including claims of Indian tribes within their respective jurisdictions, by creating the Pecuniary Claims Tribunal. From 1910 to 1938, the Pottawatomi Nation in Canada diligently sought to have their claim heard in this international forum. Overlooked for more pressing international matters of the period, including the intervention of World War I, the Pottawatomis then came to the U.S. Congress for redress of their claim. In 1946, the Congress waived its sovereign immunity and established the Indian Claims Commission for the purpose of granting tribes their long-delayed day in court. The Indian Claims Commission Act (ICCA) granted the Commission jurisdiction over claims such as the type involved here. In 1948, the Wisconsin Band Pottawatomis from both sides of the border, brought suit together in the Indian Claims Commission for recovery of damages. Hannahville Indian Community v. U.S., No. 28 (Ind. Cl. Comm. Filed May 4, 1948). Unfortunately, the Indian Claims Commission dismissed Pottawatomi Nation in Canada's part of the claim ruling that the Commission had no jurisdiction to consider claims of Indians living outside territorial limits of the United States. Hannahville Indian Community v. U.S., 115 Ct. Cl. 823 (1950). The claim of the Wisconsin Band residing in the United States that was filed in the Indian Claims Commission was finally decided in favor of the Wisconsin Band by the U.S. Claims Court in 1983. Hannahville Indian Community v. United States, 4 Ct. Cl. 445 (1983). The Court of Claims concluded that the Wisconsin Band was owed a member's proportionate share of unpaid annuities from 1838 through 1907 due under various treaties, including the Treaty of Chicago and entered judgment for the American Wisconsin Band Pottawatomis for any monies not paid. Still the Pottawatomi Nation in Canada was excluded because of the jurisdictional limits of the ICCA. Undaunted, the Pottawatomi Nation in Canada came to the Senate and after careful consideration, we finally gave them their long-awaited day in court through the congressional reference process. The court has not reported back to us that their claim is meritorious and that the payment that this bill would make constitutes a ``fair, just and equitable'' resolution to this claim. The Pottawatomi Nation in Canada has sought justice for over 150 years. They have done all that we asked in order to establish their claim. Now it is time for us to finally live up to the promise our government made so many years ago. It will not correct all the wrongs of the past, but it is a demonstration that this government is willing to admit when it has left unfulfilled an obligation and that the United States is willing to do what we can to see that justice, so long delayed, is not now denied. Finally, I would just note that the claim of the Pottawatomi Nation in Canada is supported through specific resolutions by the National Congress of American Indians, the oldest, largest and most- representative tribal organization here in the United States, the Assembly of First Nations, which includes all recognized tribal entities in Canada, and each and every of the Pottawatomi tribal groups that remain in the United States today.

Mr. INOUYE

Mr. INOUYE. Madam President, almost seven years ago, I stood before you to submit a resolution ``to provide an opportunity for the Pottawatomi Nation in Canada to have the merits of their claims against the United States determined by the United States Court of Federal Claims.'' That bill was submitted as Senate Resolution 223, which referred the Pottawatomi's claim to the Chief Judge of the U.S. Court of Federal Claims and required the Chief Judge to report back to the Senate and provide sufficient findings of fact and conclusions of law to enable the Congress to determine whether the claim of the Pottawatomi Nation in Canada is legal or equitable in nature, and the amount of damages, if any, which may be legally or equitably due from the United States. Earlier this year, the Chief Judge of the Court of Federal Claims reported back that the Pottawatomi Nation in Canada has a legitimate and credible legal claim. Thereafter, by settlement stipulation, the United States has taken the position that it would be ``fair, just and equitable'' to settle the claims of the Pottawatomi Nation in Canada for the sum of $1,830,000. This settlement amount was reached by the parties after seven years of extensive, fact-intensive litigation. Independently, the court concluded that the settlement amount is ``not a gratuity'' and that the ``settlement was predicated on a credible legal claim.'' Pottawatomi Nation in Canada, et al. v. United States, Cong. Ref. 94-1037X at 28 (Ct. Fed. Cl., September 15, 2000) (Report of Hearing Officer). The bill I introduce today is to authorize the appropriation of those funds that the United States has concluded would be ``fair, just and equitable'' to satisfy this legal claim. If enacted, this bill will finally achieve a measure of justice for a tribal nation that has for far too long been denied. For the information of our colleagues, this is the historical background that informs the underlying legal claim of the Canadian Pottawatomi. The members of the Pottawatomi Nation in Canada are one of the descendant groups, successors-in-interest, of the historical Pottawatomi Nation and their claim originates in the latter part of the 18th Century. The historical Pottawatomi Nation was aboriginal to the United States. They occupied and possessed a vast expanse in what is now the States of Ohio, Michigan, Indiana, Illinois, and Wisconsin. From 1795 to 1833, the United States annexed most of the traditional land of the Pottawatomi Nation through a series of treaties of cession, many of these cessions were made under extreme duress and the threat of military action. In exchange, the Pottawatomis were repeatedly made promises that the remainder of their lands would be secure and, in addition, that the United States would pay certain annuities to the Pottawatomi. In 1829, the United States formally adopted a Federal policy of removal, an effort to remove all Indian tribes from their traditional lands east of the Mississippi River to the west. As part of that effort, the government increasingly pressured the Pottawatomis to cede the remainder of their traditional lands, some five millions acres in and around the city of Chicago and remove themselves west. For years, the Pottawatomis steadfastly refused to cede the remainder of their tribal territory. Then in 1833, the United States, pressed by settlers seeking more land, sent a Treaty Commission to the Pottawatomi with orders to extract a cession of the remaining lands. The Treaty Commissioners spent two weeks using extraordinarily coercive tactics, including threats of war, in an attempt to get the Pottawatomis to agree to cede their territory. Finally, those Pottawatomis who were present relented and on September 26, 1993, they ceded their remaining tribal estate through what would be known as the Treaty of Chicago. Seventy-seven members of the Pottawatomi Nation signed the Treaty of Chicago. Members of the ``Wisconsin Band'' were not present and did not assent to the cession. In exchange for their land, the Treaty of Chicago provided that the United States would give to the Pottawatomis five million acres of comparable land in what is now Missouri. The Pottawatomi were familiar with the Missouri land, aware that it was similar to their homeland. But the Senate refused to ratify that negotiated agreement and unilaterally switched the land to five million acres in Iowa. The Treaty Commissioners were sent back to acquire Pottawatomi assent to the Iowa land. All but seven of the original 77 signatories refused to accept the change even with promises that if they were dissatisfied ``justice would be done. Nevertheless, the Treaty of Chicago was ratified as amended by the Senate in 1834. Subsequently, the Pottawatomis sent a delegation to evaluate the land in Iowa. The delegation reported back that the land was ``not fit for snakes to live on.'' While some Pottawatomis removed westward, many of the Pottawatomis particularly the Wisconsin Band, whose leaders never agreed to the Treaty, refused to do so. By 1836, the United States began to forcefully remove Pottawatomis who remained in the east with devastating consequences. As is true with many other American Indian tribes, the forced removal westward came at great human cost. Many of the Pottawatomi were forcefully removed by mercenaries who were paid on a per capita basis government contract. Over one-half of the Indians removed by these means died en route. Those who reached Iowa were almost immediately removed further to inhospitable parts of Kansas against their will and without their consent. Knowing of these conditions, many of the Pottawatomis including most of those in the Wisconsin Band vigorously resisted forced removal. To avoid Federal troops and mercenaries, much of the Wisconsin Band ultimately found it necessary to flee to Canada. They were often pursued to the border by government troops, government-paid mercenaries or both. Official files of the Canadian and United States governments disclose that many Pottawatomis were forced to leave their homes without their horses or any of their possessions other than the clothes on their backs. By the late 1830s, the government refused payment of annuities to any Pottawatomi groups that had not removed west. In the 1860s, members of the Wisconsin Band, those still in their traditional territory and those forced to flee to Canada, petitioned Congress for the payment of their treaty annuities promised under the Treaty of Chicago and all other cession treaties. By the Act of June 25, 1864 (13 Stat. 172) the Congress declared that the Wisconsin Band did not forfeit the annuities by not removing and directed that the share of the Pottawatomi Indians who had refused to relocate to the west should be retained for their use in the United States Treasury. (H.R. Rep. No. 470, 64th Cong., p. 5, as quoted on page 3 of memo dated October 7, 1949). Nevertheless, much of the money was never paid to the Wisconsin Band. In 1903, the Wisconsin Band, most of whom now resided in three areas, the States of Michigan and Wisconsin and the Province of Ontario, petitioned the Senate once again to pay them their fair portion of annuities as required by the law and treaties. (Sen. Doc. No. 185, 57th Cong., 2d Sess.) By the Act of June 21, 1906 (34 Stat. 380), the Congress directed the Secretary of the Interior to investigate claims made by the Wisconsin Band and estabish a role of the Wisconsin Band Pottawatomis that still remained in the East. In addition, the Congress ordered the Secretary to determine ``the [Wisconsin Bands] proportionate shares of the annuities, trust funds, and other moneys paid to or expended for the tribe to which they belong in which the claimant Indians have not shared, [and] the amount of such monies retained in the Treasury of the United States to the credit of the clamant Indians as directed the provision of the Act of June 25, 1864.'' In order to carry out the 1906 Act, the Secretary of Interior directed Dr. W.M. Wooster to conduct an enumeration of Wisconsin Band Pottawatomi in both the United States and Canada. Dr. Wooster documented 2007 Wisconsin Pottawatomis: 457 in Wisconsin and Michigan and 1550 in Canada. He also concluded that the proportionate share of annuities for the Pottawatomis in Wisconsin and Michigan was $477,339 and that the proportionate share of annuities due the Pottawatomi Nation in Canada was $1,517,226. The Congress thereafter enacted a series of appropriation Acts from June 30, 1913 to May 29, 1928 to satisfy most of money owed to those Wisconsin Band Pottawatomis residing in the United States. However, the Wisconsin Band Pottawatomis who resided in Canada were never paid their share of the tribal funds. Since that time, the Pottawatomi Nation in Canada has diligently and continuously sought to enforce their treaty rights, although until this congressional reference, they had never been provided their day in court. In 1910, the United States and Great Britain entered into an agreement for the purpose of dealing with claims between both countries, including claims of Indian tribes within their respective jurisdictions, by creating the Pecuniary Claims Tribunal. From 1910 to 1938, the Pottawatomi Nation in Canada diligently sought to have their claim heard in this international forum. Overlooked for more pressing international matters of the period, including the intervention of World War I, the Pottawatomis then came to the U.S. Congress for redress of their claim. In 1946, the Congress waived its sovereign immunity and established the Indian Claims Commission for the purpose of granting tribes their long-delayed day in court. The Indian Claims Commission Act (ICCA) granted the Commission jurisdiction over claims such as the type involved here. In 1948, the Wisconsin Band Pottawatomis from both sides of the border, brought suit together in the Indian Claims Commission for recovery of damages. Hannahville Indian Community v. U.S., No. 28 (Ind. Cl. Comm. Filed May 4, 1948). Unfortunately, the Indian Claims Commission dismissed Pottawatomi Nation in Canada's part of the claim ruling that the Commission had no jurisdiction to consider claims of Indians living outside territorial limits of the United States. Hannahville Indian Community v. U.S., 115 Ct. Cl. 823 (1950). The claim of the Wisconsin Band residing in the United States that was filed in the Indian Claims Commission was finally decided in favor of the Wisconsin Band by the U.S. Claims Court in 1983. Hannahville Indian Community v. United States, 4 Ct. Cl. 445 (1983). The Court of Claims concluded that the Wisconsin Band was owed a member's proportionate share of unpaid annuities from 1838 through 1907 due under various treaties, including the Treaty of Chicago and entered judgment for the American Wisconsin Band Pottawatomis for any monies not paid. Still the Pottawatomi Nation in Canada was excluded because of the jurisdictional limits of the ICCA. Undaunted, the Pottawatomi Nation in Canada came to the Senate and after careful consideration, we finally gave them their long-awaited day in court through the congressional reference process. The court has not reported back to us that their claim is meritorious and that the payment that this bill would make constitutes a ``fair, just and equitable'' resolution to this claim. The Pottawatomi Nation in Canada has sought justice for over 150 years. They have done all that we asked in order to establish their claim. Now it is time for us to finally live up to the promise our government made so many years ago. It will not correct all the wrongs of the past, but it is a demonstration that this government is willing to admit when it has left unfulfilled an obligation and that the United States is willing to do what we can to see that justice, so long delayed, is not now denied. Finally, I would just note that the claim of the Pottawatomi Nation in Canada is supported through specific resolutions by the National Congress of American Indians, the oldest, largest and most- representative tribal organization here in the United States, the Assembly of First Nations, which includes all recognized tribal entities in Canada, and each and every of the Pottawatomi tribal groups that remain in the United States today.

Mr. INOUYE

Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I would like to announce that the Committee on Indian Affairs will meet on Wednesday, April 17, 2002, at 2:00 p.m. in Room 485 of the Russell Senate Office Building to conduct an oversight hearing on subsistence hunting and fishing issues in the State of Alaska. Those wishing additional information may contact the Indian Affairs Committee at 224-2251.

Mr. INOUYE

Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I wasn't prepared to present a lengthy argument in favor of or against it, but I must tell you that I support you fully, sir. I support your proposal on ANWR. I did so when the pipeline was proposed many years ago. I still recall that at that time the opponents of the pipeline predicted the caribou herd in Alaska would be decimated. I am a lover of animals. I was concerned. But today I am happy to tell you that instead of being decimated, the herd has increased tenfold. There are more caribou than we ever had in our lifetimes. The opposition to the use of ANWR at this time comes from many sources. These sources are my friends. As you may know, Mr. President, I have the privilege of serving at this moment as chairman of the Committee on Indian Affairs. I am concerned about the plight of the Native Americans. Yes, it is true that there is a tribe--a nation--in Alaska opposed to the use of ANWR for drilling of oil--one tribe. I am pleased to advise you, Mr. President, that the Federation of Alaskan Natives, representing all the other tribes, favors your measure. As chairman of the Committee on Indian Affairs, I feel almost compelled to support you if only on that basis. But there are other reasons for my support. The next reason was given to me just a few days ago when the dictator of Iraq stated: Why don't we use the oil weapon against the United States? As long as the present condition continues, we will be hostage to oil, we will be captives to oil. We may find ourselves, once again, going out into the desert to fight for oil, risking and sacrificing American lives. And as chairman of the Defense Appropriations Committee, I am not in favor of that, sir. So when the time comes, I will be answering ``aye'' on your measure. I yield the floor.

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

Mr. INOUYE

Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I wish to express my sincere congratulations to the Girl Scouts of the USA as it celebrates its 90th anniversary. Founded on March 12, 1912, in Savannah, GA, the organization has grown to 3.7 million girls and women in the United States and a total of 8.5 million people in 140 countries. The longevity and strength of Girl Scouts is a testament to the commitment of its members and volunteers to uphold the highest standards of leadership, social conscience, and civic duty. I thank the thousands of adult volunteers who devote their time and resources to this worthy cause. I also wish to extend my commendation to Ms. Gladys A. Brandt, a Hawaii resident who is being honored as one of the first-ever National Women of Distinction by the Girl Scouts of the USA. This award was created in conjunction with the Girl Scouts' 90th anniversary celebration, and it pays tribute to women who have demonstrated outstanding service to girl scouting. Hawaii is truly proud of Ms. Brandt and grateful for her diligence in educating and serving young people. Once again, I express my best wishes to Girl Scouts of the USA for continued success, and I encourage the members of this organization to always live up to the Girl Scout Promise and Girl Scout Law in every facet of their lives.

Mr. INOUYE

Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I wish to recognize the country of Tunisia, which is celebrating the 46th anniversary of its independence from France. I appreciate Tunisia's economic achievements. Tunisia's Gross Domestic Product has increased an average of 5.5 percent in the past 4 years, and inflation is slowing. The government has worked to increase privatization, and its prudent approach toward debt is commendable. The United States in 2000 exported approximately $350 million in goods to Tunisia, and I believe our diplomatic ties will strengthen as our trading activities increase. Stability in the Middle East is of paramount importance to both our countries, and I thank Tunisia for its past efforts to work toward peace. Tunisia's policies toward women's rights and non-Muslims' religious freedoms are exemplary in the Arab world, and I hope the nation's leaders will continue to work toward promoting greater political freedom and respect for human rights throughout the region. More than 200 years ago, the United States and Tunisia signed a Treaty of Peace and Friendship, and I look forward to many more years of cooperation between our nations.

Mr. INOUYE

Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I would like to announce that the Committee on Indian Affairs will meet on Thursday, March 21, 2002, at 9:45 a.m., in room 485 of the Russell Senate Office Building to conduct a business meeting to be followed immediately by a hearing on S. 958, a bill to provide for the use and distribution of the funds awarded to the Western Shoshone identifiable group under Indian Claims Commission Docket Numbers 326-A-1, 326-A-3, and 326-K. Those wishing additional information may contact the Indian Affairs Committee at 224-2251.

Mr. INOUYE

Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I would like to announce that the Committee on Indian Affairs will meet on Thursday, March 14, 2002, at 10 a.m. in Room 485 of the Russell Senate Office Building to conduct an oversight hearing on the President's budget request for Indian programs for fiscal year 2003. Those wishing additional information may contact the Indian Affairs Committee at 224-2251.

Mr. INOUYE

Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I am most honored to express my congratulations to my dear friend, Senator Ted Kennedy, as he celebrates his 70th birthday. He and I joined the Senate chamber 40 years ago, and it has been my privilege to serve alongside this great man over the years. Senator Kennedy has championed health insurance and education reform, defended the rights of the elderly and workers, strengthened civil rights, and protected our natural resources. He has proudly and ably carried on his family's legacy of public service. I wish to thank Senator Kennedy for his outstanding service to his home State of Massachusetts and to our Nation. I extend my best wishes to him for many more years of good health, memorable experiences, and continued success.

Mr. INOUYE

Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I would like to announce that the Committee on Indian Affairs will meet on Tuesday, March 5, 2002, at 10 a.m. in room 485 of the Russell Senate Office Building to conduct an oversight hearing on the President's budget request for Indian programs for fiscal year 2003. Those wishing additional information may contact the Indian Affairs Committee at 224-2251. committee on indian affairs

Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I would like to announce that the Committee on Indian Affairs will meet on Thursday, March 7, 2002, at 10 a.m. in room 485 of the Russell Senate Office Building to conduct an oversight hearing on the President's budget request for Indian programs for fiscal year 2003. Those wishing additional information may contact the Indian Affairs Committee at 224-2251.

Mr. INOUYE

Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I would like to announce that the Committee on Indian Affairs will meet on Tuesday, February 26, 2002, at 10 a.m. in room 106 of the Dirksen Senate Building to conduct an oversight hearing on the management of Indian trust funds. Those wishing additional information may contact the Indian Affairs Committee at (202) 224-2251. committee on indian affairs

Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I would like to announce that the Committee on Indian Affairs will meet on Wednesday, February 27, 2002, at 2 p.m. in room 106 of the Dirksen Senate Building to conduct a hearing on rulings of the United States Supreme Court affecting tribal governments powers and authorities. Those wishing additional information may contact the Indian Affairs Committee at (202) 224-2251.

Mr. INOUYE

Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I would like to announce that the Committee on Indian Affairs will meet on Thursday, February 7, 2002, at 10 a.m. in room 485 Russell Senate Building to conduct an oversight hearing on Legislative Proposals relating to the statute of limitations on claims against the United States related to the management of Indian tribal trust fund accounts. Those wishing additional information may contact the Indian Affairs Committee at (202) 224-2251.

Mr. INOUYE

Mr. INOUYE. On behalf of Senator Stevens and I, I express our gratitude to the Senator from Texas for her kind remarks. Unanimous Consent Agreement--S. 1214

Mr. INOUYE. I would be pleased to discuss this matter with the Senators.

Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I am pleased to rise today to offer my unqualified support for the conference agreement that was just reported. I am pleased to present the recommendations to the Senate today as division A of this measure. The recommendations contain the result of lengthy negotiations between the House and Senate managers and countless hours of work by our staffs acting on behalf of all Members. The agreement provides $317.2 billion, the same as the House and Senate levels, consistent with our 302(b) allocations. In order to accommodate Members of the Senate, may I request that I be given the opportunity to now set aside my statement and yield to the Senator from Arizona for his statement. Upon his conclusion, I will resume my statement.

Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, pursuant to the agreement, will the Chair recognize the Senator from Arizona?

Mr. INOUYE. I join with my friend, the Senator from Alaska, to thank you for your remarks and let you know that Senator Stevens and I will closely follow the progress of this new program.

Mr. INOUYE

Mr. INOUYE. Madam President, I am happy to rise today to offer my unqualified support for the conference agreement on H.R. 3338, the Department of Defense Appropriations Bill for Fiscal Year 2002. I am pleased to present the recommendations to the Senate today, as division A of this bill. The recommendations contained herein are the result of lengthy negotiations between the House and Senate managers and countless hours of work by our staffs acting on behalf of all members. The agreement provides $317.2 billion, the same as the House and Senate levels, consistent with our 302b allocations. As in all conference agreements, neither side, nor any individual member had every issue go his or her way. It represents a compromise. It is one that protects the interests of both houses while clearly meeting our national defense reponsibilities. For the information of all Senators, I should point out that the bill provides more funding for our men and women in uniform than was recommended by either body. I want to note to all my collegues that this would not have been possible without the tremendous cooperation that I have received from Senator Stevens and his able staff led by Steve Cortese with Ms. Margaret Ashworth, Kraig Siracuse, Alycia Farrell, and Mr. John Kem, on detail from DOD. The Senate owes all of them a debt of gratitude. I want to also note the efforts of my staff, Charlie Houy, David Morrison, Gary Reese, Susan Hogan, Tom Hawkins, Bob Henke, Lesley Kalan, and Mazie Mattson who have devoted so much time to preparing the committee's recommendations for this bill. The Defense appropriations bill as recommended by the conference committee provides a total of $317,623,747,000 in budget authority for mandatory and discretionary programs for the Department of Defense. This amount is $1,923,633,000 below the President's request. The recommended funding is below the President's request by nearly $2 billion because the Congress has already acted to reallocate $500 million for military construction and $1.2 billion for nuclear energy programs under the jurisdiction of the Energy Water Subcommittee. The total discretionary funding recommended in division A of this bill is $317,206,747,000. This is less than $2 million below the subcommittee's 302B allocation. This measure is consistent with the objectives of this administration and the Defense Authorization Conference Report which passed the Senate. In addition, we believe we have accommodated those issues identified by the Senate which would enhance our nation's defense while allowing us to stay within the limits of the budget resolution. Our first priority in this bill is to provide for the quality of life of our men and women in uniform. In that vein, we have fully funded a five percent pay raise for every military member as authorized. We recommend additional funding for targeted pay raises for those grades and particular skills which are hard to fill. We believe these increases will significantly aid our ability to recruit, and perhaps more importantly, retain much needed military personnel. We have also provided $18.4 billion for health care costs. This is 46.3 billion more than appropriated in FY 2001 and nearly $500 million more than requested by the president. This funding will ensure that tricare costs are fully covered. It will also increase our military hospital funding to better provide for their patients and, by providing funding for ``TRICARE FOR LIFE'', we fulfill a commitment made to our retirees over 65. This will ensure that those Americans who were willing to dedicate their lives to the military will have quality health care in their older years. This is most importantly an issue of fairness. It fulfills the guarantee our nation made to the men and women of our military when they were on active duty. We also believe it will signal to those willing to serve today that we will keep our promises. In no small part we see this as another recruiting and retention program. In title two, the bill provides $105 billion for readiness and related programs. This is $8.2 billion more than appropriated for fiscal year 2001. The bill reallocates funding from the Secretary of Defense to the military services for the costs of overseas deployments in the Balkans. This is the way the Pentagon funds the Middle East deployments. The conferees have agreed to leave a small amount in the appropriation for unforeseen emergencies. For our investment in weapons and other equipment, the recommendation includes $60.9 billion for procurement, nearly $500 million more than requested by the President. The funding here will continue our efforts to recapitalize our forces. The agreement fully supports the Army's transformation goals and purchases much needed aircraft, missiles and space platforms for the Air Force. For the Navy, the bill provides full funding for those programs that are on track and ready to move forward. In the case of shipbuilding, the conferees strongly support the need to address our growing shortfalls in ship construction. The agreement provides more funding that in either House or Senate bill and $150 more than requested. In some cases, contract delays have allowed the conferees to recommend reallocating funds for other critical requirements. Included in that, the committee has recommended $700 million for procurement to support our national guard and reserve forces. The conference funds 10 UH-60 helicopters for the National Guard and Army Reserve. It also provides four C-130's for our Air National Guard and Reserves. The agreement adds funding for additional trainer aircraft for the Navy. It fully funds the requirements for the F-22, the JSF and the F/ A-18. In funding for future investment for research and development, the measure recommends $48.9 billion, nearly $1.5 billion more than the amounts appropriated for fiscal year 2001. Regarding missile defense, the bills is very close to the level requested by the President. Last week, the Pentagon announced that it was terminating the Navy' area wide missile defense program. Additionally, we were informed that the Pentagon is restructuring its space based on infrared--low program. These two adjustments allowed the conferees to reduce funding for missile defense. However, similar to the provision in the Senate and the authorization bill, the committee provides $478 million in additional funding that can be used for counter terrorism programs. This is a balanced bill that supports the priorities of the administration and the Senate. In order to cut spending by nearly $2 billion, some difficult decisions were required. The bill reduces funding for several programs that have been delayed or are being reconsidered because of the secretary's strategic review, the nuclear posture review, and the quadrennial defense review. The bill also makes adjustments that are in line with the reforms championed by the administration: A concerted effort was made at reducing reporting requirements in the bill; The bill also reduces funding for consultants and other related support personnel as authorized by the Senate. As requested, the bill provides $100 million for DOD to make additional progress in modernizing its financial management systems. Finally, the bill places a cap on legislative liaison personnel which the Secretary of Defense has indicated are excessive. I would like to take a few minutes to discuss an item that some have mis-characterized. The bill provides discretionary authority to the Defense Department to lease tankers to replace the aging KC-135 fleet. This is a program that is strongly endorsed by the Air Force as the most cost effective way to replace our tankers. Despite what has been claimed, the language in the bill requires that the lease can only be entered into if the Air Force can show that it will be 10 percent cheaper to lease the aircraft than to purchase them. In addition, it stipulates that the aircraft must be returned to the manufacturer at the end of the lease period. No business sector has suffered more from the events of 9-11 than has our commercial aircraft manufacturers. The tragic events of that day have drastically reduced orders for commercial aircraft. We have been informed that Boeing, for example, will have to lay off approximately 30,000 people as a direct consequence of the terrorist attack. We have provided funding to support the aircraft manufacturers as a result of that tragedy. We are including funds elsewhere in this bill to help in the recovery in New York and the Pentagon. The leasing authority which we have included in Division A allows us to help assist commercial airline manufacturers while also solving a long-term problem for the Air Force. I strongly endorse this initiative which was crafted by my good friend Senator Stevens with the support of several other Members, including Senators Cantwell, Murray, Roberts, and Durbin. I believe it deserves the unanimous support of the Senate. Today is December 20th. Nearly one quarter of the fiscal year has passed. The Defense Department is operating under a continuing resolution which significantly limits its ability to efficiently manage its funding. I don't need to remind any of my colleagues that we have men and women serving half way around the world defending us. Less than one percent of Americans serve in today's military. These few are willing to sacrifice themselves for us. They deserve our support. One hundred days ago our Nation was shocked and hurt by a surprise attack. This is the bill, Mr. President, that allows us to respond to that attack. It is also the measure we need to show our military forces that we support them. This bill is urgently needed to fight and win this war and to demonstrate to the world our resolve. I urge all my colleagues to support this bill.

Mr. INOUYE. Madam President, pursuant to the unanimous consent agreement, I would like to proceed with my statements.