Johnny Isakson

Mr. ISAKSON

Mr. ISAKSON. Madam President, I rise to wholeheartedly endorse an amendment filed today prior to the 2:30 deadline, authored by Senator Chambliss and coauthored by myself. The amendment relates to SCHIP, State Children's Health Insurance Program, and a crisis that exists right now, this minute, in 17 States in the United States of America. As the occupant of the chair knows, SCHIP is a program where our most needy children are able to get health insurance. It is a 71-percent Federal Medicaid match. But unlike Medicaid, it is not an entitlement; it is an appropriated amount annually that is derived by a formula as the States get their benefit. What has happened this year is that a number of States, with a number of children eligible for the program, have run out of their Federal match and it is capitated. Also, a number of States have a significant surplus. What Senator Chambliss has proposed, and what I am advocating, is an amendment we want to propose to the CR which would take that amount of surplus SCHIP money in States with more than 200 percent of their estimated need-- take that amount above 200 percent and put it into a pool and reallocate it to those States that are falling short, so that through this fiscal year every child in America who has been promised children's health insurance can in fact get it. It doesn't penalize any State that has a surplus because that is money they have not and will not use. It doesn't benefit any State who has abused the system. It is just that we have a number of States that have grown rapidly in their numbers. In Georgia alone, in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, we added 43,000 children immediately into our State's population, most all of whom remain today. I know the CR amendment tree has been filled as of now. The distinguished majority leader has filled the tree, so there will be no room for amendments to the continuing resolution. I intend to vote tomorrow for cloture to allow us to complete this resolution and continue appropriations for this year. I hope the distinguished majority leader will think about the value of saving the SCHIP program this year. I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record a letter that was distributed by the majority leader and the Speaker, written to the President of the United States, on February 2.

Mr. ISAKSON. Madam President, they made my case better than I make it in this letter. Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Majority Leader Harry Reid say we must fix the SCHIP program and suggested that the President add that to the emergency supplemental on Iraq, which we are going to take up in April. The problem with that is, my State of Georgia runs out of SCHIP money at the end of this month--maybe, at the latest, at the end of March. We are having to cut off new enrollees now and will soon send out the notices to 273,000 children. There will be no money for the remainder of the year after March to meet the obligations of SCHIP. That will take place in States around the country, North, South, East and West. Think about it. If you have enough money here and everybody who had that money allocated has used all they need, and you don't have enough money over here, it is a simple accounting measurement to fix that in this interim time. Senator Grassley and Senator Baucus have already committed, and Senators Rockefeller and Reid--all of us on both sides have all said we have to fix the formula; we will get to it toward the end of the year. But we can fix it in the interim to see to it that no child with health care under SCHIP loses that before we make the permanent fix. I commend Senator Chambliss, who is on the floor, on his leadership and this amendment. I ask the majority leader to give close thought to this issue that was referenced in his own letter of February 2. If there was one amendment that could go on the continuing resolution and would receive unanimous support in the Congress and in the Senate, it is the amendment authored by Senator Chambliss and cosponsored by myself. I ask the leadership to seriously consider allowing an opening on the amendment tree so that amendment can be passed and adopted, and children in Georgia and around the country will end up having the health care that they have been promised and that they deserve. I yield the floor.

Mr. ISAKSON

Mr. ISAKSON. At the outset, let me say as a rookie in the Senate, I add and echo everything that was said about Senator Cochran. He is truly one to whom all of us who are new to this body should subscribe and hope in time we could equal his accomplishment.

Mr. ISAKSON. Mr. President, I ask to be able to address the Senate as if in morning business for up to 5 minutes.

Mr. ISAKSON

Mr. ISAKSON. I rise for a moment to ask all Members of the Senate to join me in expressing their concern, their hopes, and their prayers for Congressman Charlie Norwood. Congressman Norwood, of Georgia, yesterday notified the House and the Senate that he would be returning to his home in Augusta. A little over 2 years ago, Charlie had a lung transplant to try to correct a degenerative disease which he had had with him throughout his life. That transplant was successful and he returned to the House of Representatives and, as he always did, he represented the State of Georgia with courage, with dignity, and with tenacity. Unfortunately, last year, cancer occurred in the lung and successfully was removed by surgery. But it has reappeared now in his liver. Charlie is fighting for his life. His lovely wife Gloria is in Augusta with him, and his countless thousands of friends are there. But in this business that we go through in this Senate, there is always a time that all of us should reflect on the blessings we have, and that is the blessing of life. I pray now that the good Lord will look after Charlie and give him as much of that life as He possibly can. I think it is also appropriate that we reflect a minute on how important his service in the Congress has been. We all know that domestically health care, affordability of health insurance, doctor- patient relationship is probably the singular thing the American people look to us to help solve. Charlie Norwood and his cosponsorship of Norwood-Dingell laid a platform for which one day many of those problems will be solved. He has fought tenaciously for better health care, for better patient-doctor relationships, and a better relationship between the Federal Government and the providers of lifesaving health care around the country. At this moment, while a champion of health care is in dire straits himself, I hope all Members will join me and pray that his recovery will be fast and swift and that God puts His blessed hand on his shoulder. I yield the floor, and I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. ISAKSON

Mr. ISAKSON. Mr. President, I pause for a moment to pay tribute and welcome Rev. Henry Holley, our Chaplain of the day. It is a special occasion for me because this is personal. I have known Henry Holley for 30 years, his beautiful wife Betty and his daughter Debbie, who are with us today. I have known him in many ways. I would like the Senate to know, first of all, that this is a U.S. marine. For 22 years, he served the United States of America in the Marine Corps and retired in 1966, upon which time he joined the Billy Graham organization and for the last 40 years has traveled 12 million miles to countries around the world. He leads now the Graham evangelical organization throughout the Pacific rim. His reach is so important that it is countless millions of people. One evening in 1990, in Hong Kong, Dr. Henry Holley and Dr. Graham preached the Gospel to more than 100,000 people in Asia. But he has a special reach. He has a reach around the corner and around the world. Just about any Tuesday, Wednesday or Thursday in Marietta, GA, at the Caribou Coffeehouse, which has been renamed the Caribou Cathedral, Henry holds court with countless individuals in our community, celebrating the joy of our life and the belief of his faith. And this Friday or Saturday he takes off again on his third trip, third trip to Korea and to China--this year. He will travel, before this year is out, probably a quarter of a million miles to countries around the world. He probably knows more leaders of business and politics, of Government and of religion than any single individual in the United States of America. It is an honor and a privilege for me to introduce him to the Senate, but it is a greater privilege to know him as a friend, a pastor, and a mentor.

Mr. ISAKSON

Mr. ISAKSON. Madam President, I rise for a few moments to address the subjects that have been discussed for the last 30 minutes. First of all, I rise in particular to lend my support to Senator McConnell who has seen to it that the Senate is able to fully express itself on the issues before us in Iraq. No one should be confused about this debate. There are many opinions here, and every one of them deserves the right to be expressed. Secondly, I rise in support of the President's plan, and I am going to explain why in just a second. First, however, the Senator from New York made a statement a minute ago that I want to open my remarks with. The Senator from New York said not many people are paying attention to what we debate on the floor of the Senate, that they are too busy working in their daily lives. That may very well be right, but I want to tell you who is listening to every word. First, it is the men and women in our Armed Forces, their families, and their loved ones. All you have to do is go to Iraq, where I have been many times, go to any mess hall or almost any command post, and CNN and Fox are streaming constantly. Our men and women watch what we say, so what we say on this floor is important. The resolutions we send, binding or not, should not send mixed signals. There is another audience that listens to what we say, and they are our enemies. They listen as well. Those networks are their intelligence agencies. The messages we send should not be a message which relays a lack of confidence to our troops or to our Commander in Chief. I am on the Foreign Relations Committee. I have spent 20 of the last 28 hours of committee meetings listening to experts from a variety of resources, and two things became quite clear. There were varying opinions on whether a surge would work. Some thought it would conclusively; many thought it would not. Most gave it varying degrees of potential success. Without exception, however, everyone I heard testify, when asked the question: What would be the ramifications of withdrawal or redeployment, everyone, in one degree or another, said there would be tens of thousands of lives lost, and possibly millions, and the sectarian violence that we are trying to quell now could spread through the region. The way I see it, we have two choices right now at this stage of the game. Choice one is an opportunity for success. Choice two is a recipe for disaster. I choose the opportunity for success. I think the message we ought to send to our troops is that we support them, we wish them Godspeed, and we pray for their success. A second message we need to send, which this debate has very helpfully done, is a message to al-Malaki and the assembly in Iraq and the people of Iraq that we came to their country with three objectives, two of which we have secured. One objective was to seek out the weapons of mass destruction the entire world believed were there. Second was to allow a constitution to be written and a free election to be held. Both of those things have been accomplished. The last most elusive goal that we had was to secure the nation and train the Iraqi military so it could carry on that security and let that fledgling democracy go forward. That third goal, which has been elusive, has gotten closer. The President's strategy to send additional troops to Anbar and to Baghdad requires the absolute cooperation of the Iraqis and the commitment of their military to assist side by side. If they blink and look the other way, they will have failed themselves. If we blink and we look the other way, we will have failed not only them but we will have failed the people of our country. Make no mistake about it, the war in Iraq that we are now in is not the war we entered, but it is the war we are in, and those are the words of our President. Regardless of where mistakes may have been made, those of us, and I am one of those, who voted to support this when we went into Iraq did not vote for failure. I hope and I pray that our soldiers will be successful, that al-Malaki and the Iraqi military will come through and perform, and I am going to do everything I can to give them that support because I choose an opportunity for success over a recipe for failure. With regard to the mistakes that have been made, I want to be crystal clear because there are some awfully selective memories on the floor of the Senate. I remember what I believed when I voted to go into Iraq. I remember what the National Intelligence Estimate said. And I remember the horror of 9/11 and the fear of weapons of mass destruction. We voted to do what every other member of the United Nations voted on in Resolution 1441, and that was to seek out what the world thought was there. While we didn't find the smoking gun, we found a lot of the components and a lot of the evidence. We found the 400,000 bodies in mass graves and the tyranny of a horrible dictator in Saddam Hussein. We accomplished our goal of deposing him and allowing the Iraqis to determine a free democratic society. In the critical days of this battle, it is time for us to stand forward and stand strong and give this opportunity for success that the President has proposed a chance to succeed, rather than subscribe to a recipe of failure. These are trying times, and I respect the opinions of every Member of this body expressed on this floor, but remember who our audiences are and how important it is that the message that we send not be mixed, not be one of a political message but be a message of commitment and resolve. I will support the President not out of partisanship, not out of blind loyalty, but I will support the President because the evidence submitted in all of the hearings in the Foreign Relations Committee told me we have two choices: We can choose an opportunity to succeed or we can subscribe to a recipe for failure. I choose success, and I pray God's blessings on our men and women in the Armed Forces of the United States. Madam President, I yield the floor.

Mr. ISAKSON

Mr. ISAKSON. Madam President, today I wish to recognize Flowers Foods of Thomasville, GA, which has just been named by Forbes magazine as this year's ``Best-Managed'' publicly traded food company. This honor comes on top of a record fourth quarter and a record year for Flowers Foods. Flowers Foods has clearly set a standard of excellence for which all of us should strive. Operating out of Thomasville, GA, since 1919, Flowers Foods has a proven record of success and dedication not only to its customers and employees but also to the State of Georgia. I have watched as this company has grown over the years to the point where it now serves almost 40 percent of the U.S. population. I expect its continued success to serve as a shining example to businesses across Georgia and the United States. I want to commend chief executive officer George E. Deese and all the employees of Flowers Foods and their families on a job well done.

Mr. ISAKSON

Mr. ISAKSON. Madam President, later today the Senate will approve a resolution commending Ms. Lauren Nelson, Miss Oklahoma, as having been named Miss America in the contest on Monday night. I certainly join all Members of the Senate in congratulating her. I also wish to acknowledge my pride in Amanda Kozak, who finished as second runner-up as Miss Georgia. She is an equally beautiful and talented young lady. I think it is appropriate that we memorialize on the floor of the Senate for the record the fact that one of our own was also in that contest on Monday night. I am very proud of Miss Kate Michael, Miss District of Columbia, who has worked in my office for the past 3 years. She is a talented, insightful young woman, dedicated to the betterment of mankind and committed to her country. She is a gifted professional dancer who has danced off-Broadway. She is a beautiful person on the outside, and she is equally beautiful on the inside. She is very bright. She graduated magna cum laude from the University of Georgia, and now, while pursuing the Miss America contest, working every day in the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee with me, at night she goes to Johns Hopkins to pursue a master's degree in government. Truly, sometimes the media takes those sensational things that happen to young people that are always disappointing and elevates them to front-page news. Yet fine young women such as the ones we recognize in this resolution rarely ever get a comment once the crown is placed on their head. But I am very proud today to say how proud I am of Miss Kate Michael, Miss District of Columbia, my employee and an employee of this Senate, who performed masterfully and competed masterfully in the Miss America contest and is the winner of a crown with me every day of the year. I yield the floor.

Mr. ISAKSON

Mr. ISAKSON. Madam President, later today the Senate will approve a resolution commending Ms. Lauren Nelson, Miss Oklahoma, as having been named Miss America in the contest on Monday night. I certainly join all Members of the Senate in congratulating her. I also wish to acknowledge my pride in Amanda Kozak, who finished as second runner-up as Miss Georgia. She is an equally beautiful and talented young lady. I think it is appropriate that we memorialize on the floor of the Senate for the record the fact that one of our own was also in that contest on Monday night. I am very proud of Miss Kate Michael, Miss District of Columbia, who has worked in my office for the past 3 years. She is a talented, insightful young woman, dedicated to the betterment of mankind and committed to her country. She is a gifted professional dancer who has danced off-Broadway. She is a beautiful person on the outside, and she is equally beautiful on the inside. She is very bright. She graduated magna cum laude from the University of Georgia, and now, while pursuing the Miss America contest, working every day in the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee with me, at night she goes to Johns Hopkins to pursue a master's degree in government. Truly, sometimes the media takes those sensational things that happen to young people that are always disappointing and elevates them to front-page news. Yet fine young women such as the ones we recognize in this resolution rarely ever get a comment once the crown is placed on their head. But I am very proud today to say how proud I am of Miss Kate Michael, Miss District of Columbia, my employee and an employee of this Senate, who performed masterfully and competed masterfully in the Miss America contest and is the winner of a crown with me every day of the year. I yield the floor.

Mr. ISAKSON

Mr. ISAKSON. Madam President, in a few moments the Senate will be considering the vote on the confirmation of Lisa Godbey Wood as a judge in the State of Georgia. First of all, I wish to thank the chairman of the Judiciary Committee, Senator Leahy, for all the commitments he made last year as ranking member and that he has followed through on this year as chairman to bring this judge's confirmation to the full Senate for a vote. Senator Leahy has been a gentleman. He has been diligent. He has lived up to every responsibility he accepted. I, personally, along with Senator Chambliss, am very grateful for the opportunity to confirm this outstanding jurist. I also wish to say that Lisa Godbey Wood brings to the bench for the Federal courts of the United States of America the integrity, the intellect, the sense, and the judgment that all of us seek in a fine judge. I am pleased to stand before the Senate today to commend her to each and every Member of the Senate, and my sincerest hope is that her confirmation will be a unanimous vote. I yield the floor, and I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Mr. ISAKSON

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

Mr. ISAKSON

Mr. ISAKSON. Mr. President, as one ages, there are many things they appreciate in life. There is nothing greater or more appreciated than friendship. It is an old saying that when you get toward the end of life and you go back to count friends, you can sometimes count them and only need one hand. When I look at my one hand in counting my friends, I look and see the face of Ruben Alexander Crumbley, who, on today, will celebrate his 65th birthday in McDonough, GA. So I wish to, for a moment on the floor of the Senate, memorialize that occasion but also to remind myself and all of us, as we deal with the daily workings of the Senate and the importance of our job, to never forget the importance of our friends. Sixty-five years ago, when Rubin Alexander Crumbley was born, he had a serious heart ailment, at a time when medical science was not nearly as advanced as it is today. Through the surgeries and the care of his doctor, the ailment was cured, and he has lived a long and successful life, making significant contributions to the great State of Georgia. He served in the State senate in the State of Georgia. He served as a superior court judge in Henry County in that judicial circuit. And he sought election, although falling short, to the Georgia supreme court. He is a tireless worker and advocate on behalf of individuals, and he and his wife Claire have worked tirelessly to improve the county of Henry and the city of McDonough. But most important of all, as his friends gather tonight at the Eagles Landing Country Club in McDonough, GA, to celebrate his life and his birthday, I today wish to acknowledge, as a friend, my great appreciation for all the contributions he has made to me, to my life, and to my family. In closing, I wish to also remember the third person of our group. We were such close friends at the University of Georgia. Rarely a night went by that after studying or partying, we did not gather together for a cup of coffee to talk over the day and ahead to the next day. It was Ruben Alexander Crumbley, Johnny Isakson, and Jack Cox. So in remembering my friendship with Alex and celebrating his birthday, I also wish to acknowledge Jack Cox because he sacrificed his life in Vietnam and died fighting on behalf of the United States of America. That was many years ago, but he and Alex and I have shared together a great friendship and many great memories, which Alex tonight will review. I regret I will not be with him in person, but I wanted to take this moment to acknowledge a great occasion and a great friendship. Mr. President, I yield back.

Mr. ISAKSON. I ask unanimous consent that I be recognized for 3 minutes as in morning business prior to the continued deliberation.

Mr. ISAKSON

Mr. ISAKSON. Mr. President, first of all, I commend the Senator from Texas on his remarks. I commend Senator Judd Gregg on the submission of this amendment. I commend Senator McConnell, the Republican leader, for his insistence on bringing this amendment to the floor of the Senate early. It had been my preference that it be debated during the lobbying reform and ethics bill, S. 1, which we debated last week because the remarks I am going to make tell you how much I think the enhanced rescission and a second look at wasteful spending is so important to end, curb, and finally do away with what has been an abuse in this body for a long time, and that is the abuse of earmarks. In fact, I want to tell a story. When I first came to the Congress of the United States in 1999, the first budget that I voted on and was passed was a voluminous, huge budget--appropriations bill. It had spending in thousands of different categories, many of which I never even looked at, A, because I was not on the committee that had jurisdiction or, B, because so much of it went into last-minute negotiations in the conference committee on the appropriations bill. I will never forget a telephone call I got at 8 o'clock in the morning from a reporter, shortly after--about 2 weeks after the passage of an Omnibus appropriations bill. A newspaper reporter called and said to me: Congressman, why did you vote for a $50,000 appropriation for a tatoo removal parlor in California? I said: I didn't vote for any such a thing. The reporter said: Yes, you did. Didn't you vote for the Omnibus budget? I said: Yes, I did. The reporter said: Well, it was right there in clear view. I said: Well, it wasn't in clear view to me. Well, it turned out, after going through that embarrassing experience, which all of us in this business go through from time to time, I started digging around trying to find the $50,000 appropriation for a tatoo removal parlor in California. Finally, I found it. It went into the budget on the appropriations bill on the last night of negotiations. It was on something like page 1186, line 33, in small print. The appropriations act we voted on was put on our desk about 8 hours before we voted on it. I am not a fast reader anyway, but I couldn't read 1,100 pages in 8 hours. I would go blind. And the fact is, Congress was embarrassed, the Representative who put it in there was very embarrassed, but this Representative was very embarrassed. So I introduced legislation the next year to basically put an end to the last-minute earmark that said the earmark had to be in bold type, large fonts, and on the front page of each appropriations act, and had to lay on the desk for 24 hours to at least give us a chance to look at it. What Senator Gregg has proposed today is the opportunity for us to not only get a second look, but in the case of a lot of these earmarks a first look, at wasteful appropriations. That is why I thought it should have gone on the previous bill we debated last week, the lobbying reform and ethics bill for, you see, if a President of the United States had gotten that omnibus budget and had the right of rescission, that President could have said: I think we ought to strike the $50,000 for a tatoo removal parlor in California. And under the Gregg proposal, it would come back to the Senate and the House, and we would have to affirm that. I do not think there is a single person in either party, including the author of that earmark 9 years ago, who would not have voted to affirm the President's rescission. The light of day, sunshine, the power of knowledge, facts are stubborn things. But so often in the appropriations process facts get obliterated or not seen. Appropriations get written in late at night in negotiations between conferees, and we end up with wasteful spending. This is an outstanding proposal by Senator Gregg. As Senator Cornyn has said, and others who have spoken today have said, it actually reflects what has been approved by Members of both parties in this Senate before. But it makes good, common, horse sense and passes the constitutional test, which is so important. The President gets four times a year to send rescissions to the Congress. The Congress has to fast-track its response within 8 days. The Congress has to affirm the rescission, which is the key point in the balance of power between each of the bodies of Government that are so important to our Constitution. It does not give a President unilateral authority, but it forces the light of day on a Presidential decision for us to take a second look at what was probably a mistake that this body might have made. Lastly, I have had some experience with this process. I had the privilege of representing the great State of Georgia for 17 years in its statehouse, in its State senate. At the time I was in the minority, and the Democratic Party in Georgia was in the majority. A dear friend of mine, a fellow against whom I ran for Governor of Georgia in 1990, and who came to this Senate, Zell Miller, and whom I later replaced in this Senate, a great Georgian--I watched him use the line-item veto, which is legal in Georgia, to cause accountability on the part of legislators, to let the light of day shine on appropriations and, most importantly, to see to it that Georgia was run in a fiscally sound way and we didn't get away with things that we should not have gotten away with. If it is good enough for the States, it is good enough for the Federal Government. If it passes the constitutional test of the division of power in our Government--legislative, executive, judicial-- it ought to be a part of the body of law, and this proposal does. Most important of all, although all the promotion pieces I have read call this a second look at the budget process, in many cases because of the volume it gives us, as individuals, a first look at a mistake we made. Instead of current law, where once that mistake is made it is there, under this right of recision we have a second chance at what was a first impression, and we can make the right decision and do the right thing. The money, when it is struck, goes where it ought to go--to deficit reduction. This country has a serious deficit problem, and it has had a serious spending problem. Enhanced rescission places the responsibility on the President to delineate a mistake and forces us to affirm if that, in fact, was a mistake, and the benefit from that savings goes to reduce the deficit, which is the mortgage on our children's future and the future of our grandchildren. I am delighted to come to the floor today as a cosponsor of the enhanced rescissions amendment proposed by Senator Gregg to speak in its favor, and I encourage every Member of the Senate to take a second look at this proposal. It makes sense. It is constitutional. It is the right thing to do. I yield the floor. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. ISAKSON. Mr. President, how much time is remaining?

Mr. ISAKSON

Mr. ISAKSON. Mr. President, today I wish to recognize the city of Valdosta, which received the Audrey Nelson Community Development Achievement Award for its outstanding administration of the 2006 Southern Hospitality Workcamp. The city of Valdosta is 1 of 11 cities from across the Nation to receive this award. I am very proud of its accomplishments, and I would like to commend all of the people involved in this effort. The Audrey Nelson Community Development Award is presented by the National Community Development Association in recognition of outstanding achievements and exemplary uses of the community development block grant funds. In the spirit of this program, which assists the needs of low-income families and neighborhoods, the city of Valdosta has set a goal of eliminating substandard housing by the year 2010. Through its 2006 Southern Hospitality Workcamp, the city gathered over 350 youths from across the country to repair 46 homes for low- income and disabled individuals and families. This annual program has also earned the city of Valdosta the State of Georgia's Magnolia Award for excellence in affordable housing. The city has won this award in 3 of the past 6 years. The honorable work by these students exemplifies the dedication the city has to its goal of eliminating substandard housing. I would like to thank the city of Valdosta for its efforts as well as encourage the city to keep working on this outstanding goal in the future.

Mr. ISAKSON

Mr. ISAKSON. Mr. President, I am pleased to rise today before the Senate. This is an issue this Senate visited 9 months ago in the month of May. Nine months ago, the Senate tackled what I submit is the most important domestic issue in the United States of America and in every State. That is the issue of legal immigration and illegal immigration. In that debate of what became known as a comprehensive immigration reform bill, I submitted an amendment that ended up being amendment No. 1. The amendment simply said that before any provision of this act that grants legal status to someone who is in America illegally takes effect, the Secretary of Homeland Security will certify to the Congress that all of the provisions of border security contained in the bill were funded, in place, and operational. It become known as a trigger-- and it was a trigger--because the immigration issue is not like when you can never figure what is the chicken, what is the egg, and what came first. There is no way to reform illegal immigration unless you first stop the porous borders we have and the flow of illegal immigrants. But to do only one without the other is a terrible mistake. The result of last year's debate was the Senate passed a bill without the trigger that granted new legal statuses. Although it provided for the authorization of border security, it did not provide for the guarantee of border security. The House reaction was, we want border security only, and the debate to this day between the House and the Senate has been the Senate is for comprehensive reform and the House is for border security only and never the twain will meet. The twain must meet. It is the No. 1 domestic issue. I come to the Senate today to introduce a major immigration reform bill that is the bridge from where we are to where we must go. For a moment, I will discuss the provisions of that proposal. First of all, it contains the trigger. It predicates any reform of immigration that grants legal status to someone here illegally to be noneffective until we have first closed the doors to the south and to the north. It provides for all the security measures the Senate passed last year--and they are 2,500 new port-of-entry inspectors, 14,000 border inspectors, trained and ready to deploy, $454 million for unmanned aerial vehicles to give us the 24/7 eyes in the sky essential to enforcement on our border, authorization and ultimate appropriation for those barriers and those fences and those roads that are necessary for our agents to patrol, 20,000 beds for detention, to end the practice of cash and release. When I came to the Senate 2 years ago as a Georgian and one who loves the outdoors, I thought ``catch and release'' was a fishing term. I found out it became a border term, where we would catch people, tell them to go home, release them and they would wait for us to leave and come back again. We must remember the reason we have this problem is we have the greatest Nation on the face of this Earth. We do not find anyone trying to break out of the United States of America. They are all trying to break in and for a very special reason: The promise of hope, opportunity, and jobs. But we must make the right way to come to America be the legal way to come to America, not the ease of crossing our border in the dark of night under some other cover. Lastly, an integral part of border security is a verifiable program, where America's employers can be given a verifiable ID by someone who is here legally that verifies they are who they say they are. The biggest growth industry in the United States of America on our southwestern border is forged documents. We have a proliferation today of forged documents, where illegal aliens have legal-looking documents and we have a customs and immigration system that cannot tell an American farmer or an American employer that, in fact, the document they were shown is, in fact, right or wrong. That has to be fixed. Once those provisions are in, we have a secure border. Interestingly enough, it takes about the same amount of time to put in the barriers, get unmanned aerial vehicles in the air, train the border security and port-of-entry people as it takes to get the verifiable identification system in place. We know both will take about 24 months. When we have the trigger, it does not protract reform, but it precedes the implementation of what is going to take 24 months to do anyway. And all of a sudden we have a new paradigm in America. Those who want to come here realize the way to come is the legal way, not the illegal way. They learn there are consequences to coming illegally and employers know when they get an ID they can either swipe it on a computer or they can go up on the Internet and code to customs and immigration and find out that person is legal. The paradigm changes, and then the hope and opportunity of reforming legal immigration in this country can become a reality. I am not an obstructionist to doing it. In fact, if anything needs to be done, we need to reform the legal system because we almost promote, through the rigidity and difficulty of legal immigration, coming here illegally because we are looking the other way on the border. We have a historical precedent. In 1986, we reformed immigration with the Simpson Act. We granted 3 million people amnesty, said we were going to secure the border and didn't. Today, we have 12 million because we did not secure that border. That can never happen again. Second, if the border is secure and we give people who are here illegally but are lawfully obeying the laws a chance to come forward, we can identify who is here who is not a problem. And you, also, leave open, for those who do not come forward whom you must concentrate on, to see to it they are not here for the wrong reasons and they go home. But you can never enforce the system internally before you first close the external opportunity to come through illegal immigration. Mr. President, in May 1903, Anders Isakson came through Ellis Island because of the potato famine in Scandinavia. In 1916, my father was born to him and his wife, Josephine. My father became a citizen of this country because he was born on our soil. In 1926, my grandfather became a naturalized citizen of the United States of America. In my home today, framed and hanging on the wall, are his naturalization certificates from 1926, when he raised his right arm and pledged his allegiance to the United States of America. There is no one who has greater respect and greater joy in the promise of this country and the opportunity of immigration. But we must begin restoring the respect for legal immigration and shutting the door on illegal immigration, or else those lines become blurred, and the stress we have on our social service system, civil justice system, public health system, and public education system that is stretched to the limit because of illegal aliens today will increase. We owe it to the history of our country and the greatness which makes us great to secure our borders, to honor legal immigration, and to move forward with a reform of illegal immigration that matches the economic needs of the United States of America. I stand on the Senate floor today committed to work with any Member of this Senate for comprehensive reform, as long as its cornerstone in its foundation is that we fix the problem on our borders, have it certified, and have that fix be the foundation for the modernization and reform of our immigration laws. Mr. President, I thank you for the time and yield the floor.

Mr. ISAKSON

Mr. ISAKSON. Mr. President, I am pleased to rise today before the Senate. This is an issue this Senate visited 9 months ago in the month of May. Nine months ago, the Senate tackled what I submit is the most important domestic issue in the United States of America and in every State. That is the issue of legal immigration and illegal immigration. In that debate of what became known as a comprehensive immigration reform bill, I submitted an amendment that ended up being amendment No. 1. The amendment simply said that before any provision of this act that grants legal status to someone who is in America illegally takes effect, the Secretary of Homeland Security will certify to the Congress that all of the provisions of border security contained in the bill were funded, in place, and operational. It become known as a trigger-- and it was a trigger--because the immigration issue is not like when you can never figure what is the chicken, what is the egg, and what came first. There is no way to reform illegal immigration unless you first stop the porous borders we have and the flow of illegal immigrants. But to do only one without the other is a terrible mistake. The result of last year's debate was the Senate passed a bill without the trigger that granted new legal statuses. Although it provided for the authorization of border security, it did not provide for the guarantee of border security. The House reaction was, we want border security only, and the debate to this day between the House and the Senate has been the Senate is for comprehensive reform and the House is for border security only and never the twain will meet. The twain must meet. It is the No. 1 domestic issue. I come to the Senate today to introduce a major immigration reform bill that is the bridge from where we are to where we must go. For a moment, I will discuss the provisions of that proposal. First of all, it contains the trigger. It predicates any reform of immigration that grants legal status to someone here illegally to be noneffective until we have first closed the doors to the south and to the north. It provides for all the security measures the Senate passed last year--and they are 2,500 new port-of-entry inspectors, 14,000 border inspectors, trained and ready to deploy, $454 million for unmanned aerial vehicles to give us the 24/7 eyes in the sky essential to enforcement on our border, authorization and ultimate appropriation for those barriers and those fences and those roads that are necessary for our agents to patrol, 20,000 beds for detention, to end the practice of cash and release. When I came to the Senate 2 years ago as a Georgian and one who loves the outdoors, I thought ``catch and release'' was a fishing term. I found out it became a border term, where we would catch people, tell them to go home, release them and they would wait for us to leave and come back again. We must remember the reason we have this problem is we have the greatest Nation on the face of this Earth. We do not find anyone trying to break out of the United States of America. They are all trying to break in and for a very special reason: The promise of hope, opportunity, and jobs. But we must make the right way to come to America be the legal way to come to America, not the ease of crossing our border in the dark of night under some other cover. Lastly, an integral part of border security is a verifiable program, where America's employers can be given a verifiable ID by someone who is here legally that verifies they are who they say they are. The biggest growth industry in the United States of America on our southwestern border is forged documents. We have a proliferation today of forged documents, where illegal aliens have legal-looking documents and we have a customs and immigration system that cannot tell an American farmer or an American employer that, in fact, the document they were shown is, in fact, right or wrong. That has to be fixed. Once those provisions are in, we have a secure border. Interestingly enough, it takes about the same amount of time to put in the barriers, get unmanned aerial vehicles in the air, train the border security and port-of-entry people as it takes to get the verifiable identification system in place. We know both will take about 24 months. When we have the trigger, it does not protract reform, but it precedes the implementation of what is going to take 24 months to do anyway. And all of a sudden we have a new paradigm in America. Those who want to come here realize the way to come is the legal way, not the illegal way. They learn there are consequences to coming illegally and employers know when they get an ID they can either swipe it on a computer or they can go up on the Internet and code to customs and immigration and find out that person is legal. The paradigm changes, and then the hope and opportunity of reforming legal immigration in this country can become a reality. I am not an obstructionist to doing it. In fact, if anything needs to be done, we need to reform the legal system because we almost promote, through the rigidity and difficulty of legal immigration, coming here illegally because we are looking the other way on the border. We have a historical precedent. In 1986, we reformed immigration with the Simpson Act. We granted 3 million people amnesty, said we were going to secure the border and didn't. Today, we have 12 million because we did not secure that border. That can never happen again. Second, if the border is secure and we give people who are here illegally but are lawfully obeying the laws a chance to come forward, we can identify who is here who is not a problem. And you, also, leave open, for those who do not come forward whom you must concentrate on, to see to it they are not here for the wrong reasons and they go home. But you can never enforce the system internally before you first close the external opportunity to come through illegal immigration. Mr. President, in May 1903, Anders Isakson came through Ellis Island because of the potato famine in Scandinavia. In 1916, my father was born to him and his wife, Josephine. My father became a citizen of this country because he was born on our soil. In 1926, my grandfather became a naturalized citizen of the United States of America. In my home today, framed and hanging on the wall, are his naturalization certificates from 1926, when he raised his right arm and pledged his allegiance to the United States of America. There is no one who has greater respect and greater joy in the promise of this country and the opportunity of immigration. But we must begin restoring the respect for legal immigration and shutting the door on illegal immigration, or else those lines become blurred, and the stress we have on our social service system, civil justice system, public health system, and public education system that is stretched to the limit because of illegal aliens today will increase. We owe it to the history of our country and the greatness which makes us great to secure our borders, to honor legal immigration, and to move forward with a reform of illegal immigration that matches the economic needs of the United States of America. I stand on the Senate floor today committed to work with any Member of this Senate for comprehensive reform, as long as its cornerstone in its foundation is that we fix the problem on our borders, have it certified, and have that fix be the foundation for the modernization and reform of our immigration laws. Mr. President, I thank you for the time and yield the floor.

Mr. ISAKSON

Mr. ISAKSON. Madam President, today I mourn the passing and pay tribute to a wonderful Georgian and a personal friend. Thomas Watson Brown passed away on January 13, 2007, leaving a tremendous void in the hearts of all who knew and loved this extraordinary gentleman. Although he was a longtime resident of Marietta, GA, Tom was actually born here in our Nation's Capital where he attended Saint Alban's School. He graduated magna cum laude from Princeton with a degree in history and served a stint in the U.S. Army. He graduated from Harvard Law School in 1959 and moved to Atlanta where he practiced law until his death. Although Tom was not originally from Georgia, his family had deep Georgia roots. His great-grandfather was U.S. Senator Tom Watson, who was nominated in 1896 for Vice President on the Populist Party ticket with William Jennings Bryan. Brown's grandfather, J.J. Brown, served as Georgia's commissioner of agriculture. Tom was a character unlike any other. He often described himself as an ``18th-century gentleman'' and held court in his antebellum mansion on Cherokee Street near the Marietta Square arguing politics with a host of different personalities. History was his greatest passion, especially the Civil War era. He had an unmatched intellect and was a respected historian. He preferred his 10,000-volume library to a personal computer. Tom was also always ready to support education. He was the former chair of the Watson-Brown Foundation, established by his father Walter Brown in 1970 to provide college opportunities for underprivileged boys and girls. Today his son Tad is president of the foundation, which awards more than $1 million annually in merit- and need-based college scholarships to students from the Central Savannah River Area of Georgia and South Carolina. The foundation also gives grants in support of southern colleges and universities. Recipients of these grants include the University of Georgia for a broadcast museum, Georgia College and State University in Milledgeville for its library, and Mercer Press in Macon for publications of numerous books of Southern history and biography. Tom led numerous business, civic, philanthropic, and scholarly organizations. He served on the boards of the Atlanta Historical Society, the Georgia Historical Society, the Georgia Civil War Commission, the Atlanta Legal Aid Society, and the Georgia Legal History Foundation. He was also an enthusiastic supporter of the Atlanta Press Club and helped fund its debates each election cycle. Tom was awarded the Martin Luther King, Jr., Center's community service award for peace and justice. Coretta Scott King herself presented him with the award for his substantial contributions to and support of the Legal Aid Society of Atlanta. This strong-willed and generous man will always be remembered for his keen intellect and his devotion to history and education. He touched the lives of many Georgians, including this Senator, through his efforts on behalf of our community and State. It was an honor to know Thomas Watson Brown and it is a privilege to pay tribute to his life.

Mr. ISAKSON

Mr. ISAKSON. Mr. President, today I pay tribute to SFC Robert Lee ``Bobby'' Hollar, Jr. Sergeant First Class Hollar was an exemplary soldier, respected U.S. Postal employee, and a loving family man. Before deploying for Iraq, Sergeant First Class Hollar dropped by Crescent Elementary School in Griffin, GA, to visit a class of students. In the classroom, Sergeant First Class Hollar fielded questions about where he was headed, what he would be doing there, and when he would be coming home. He encouraged the students to write and promised he would do the same. On September 1, 2005, on a road south of Baghdad, an IED ended the life of Sergeant First Class Hollar. As word of his death reached the classroom where he had stood just months before, the children began to cry. You see, Sergeant First Class Hollar taught them something else: he taught them that our freedom is not free. This week, the Senate passed S. 4050, a bill naming the post office in Thomaston, GA, as the Sergeant First Class Robert Lee ``Bobby'' Hollar, Jr. Post Office Building. For the children at Crescent Elementary School, this building will serve as a lasting memory of their pen pal and hero. For the rest of us, this building will serve as a reminder that our freedom is not free. In closing, I would like to thank the numerous people in Georgia who helped to make this possible as well as the U.S. Postal Service and my fellow Senators.

Mr. ISAKSON

Mr. ISAKSON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be dispensed with.

Mr. ISAKSON

Mr. ISAKSON. Mr. President, I rise for a moment in morning business to address an issue that to some may appear only to affect the State of Georgia and maybe even in particular the city of Atlanta. But in practice, I say to the distinguished Senator from Utah who is in the chair and others, this is an issue of major import to the United States of America. An offer has been tendered for the purchase of Delta Airlines. Delta Airlines is a great American carrier that, like most airlines, has gone through terribly difficult times post-9/11. Delta went into bankruptcy. Delta has worked hard in bankruptcy to develop a plan to exit bankruptcy as a healthy, thriving, and dominate company. To Delta's eternal credit, their management committed from the beginning that they would honor and preserve the pension plans of their employees were we able in the U.S. Congress to modernize the pension laws in this country to allow them to do so. Thanks in no small measures to yourself, Mr. President, and to Senator Hatch as well and the 97 Members of this body, the pension modernization bill passed. We put in specific provisions for the aviation industry, and great airlines and their employees now will be able to earn their pensions and not have them dispensed with because we addressed that crisis, and more importantly Delta Airlines' management has worked to reduce its costs, and its employees have voluntarily taken pay cuts. They have modernized their fleet. They have repositioned their fleet. They have opened international marketplaces that never before were available to people in this country. They have paid the heavy price that only in the great American free-enterprise system are you able to do where you take the problems and adversity and turn them into opportunities. Now on the doorstep of exiting bankruptcy and filing that petition, a hostile takeover has been made to purchase that great airline. Before I came to the Senate, I was in business. Nobody understands buying and selling companies and opportunities better than I, and no one would ever diminish those who seek to take advantage of those opportunities which are there. But I rise for just a minute to make some points that I hope all of us in this Senate and the appropriate committees in this body and the appropriate agencies of the United States are very careful to examine before any acquisition or merger of U.S. Airlines and Delta Airlines were to take place. First, in our fragile aviation system it is critical to understand that competition is still in the best interests of the American consumer. If you overlay the routes of those two airlines, you will see massive duplications, which ends up in many cases that where there are two competitors in an airport, it is reduced to only one. In the absence of competition, prices rise and service is diminished. Second, in the great hub-and-spoke airlines and the legacy carriers of this country, people in secondary markets have had access to the major airports such as O'Hare and Hartsfield and LAX in Los Angeles. But as you merge two together, the first place they find savings is in reductions of those flights and those capacities from those secondary markets--the Augusta, Georgias; the Columbuses; the Meridian, Mississippis; the Asheville, North Carolinas; and many other cities such as those around the country. It is very important for us to be sure, when we analyze the viability of such a proposal, that we not diminish the opportunity for Americans in those cities to be able to access aviation as they have in the past. Equally important is the future of aviation in this country. A further consolidation of the airlines we have now would lead us to singular service in many cities, an absence of competition, an inevitable increase in rates, and, unfortunately, less than the healthiest aviation industry in the country. As this proposal has now come forward, it is important for us in this body to analyze from a competitive standpoint, from a competition standpoint, from a consumer interest standpoint, from a marketplace standpoint, from a secondary market standpoint, and from the heavy prices that have been paid by the American aviation industry to reposition itself post-9/11 to make sure we honor those that have paid the price, are prepared to exit bankruptcy as a viable competitive airline, and not allow a quick, hostile takeover at the last minute and threaten competition, secondary market service, lower flight costs, and the great reward of America for paying the price to do the right thing, to exit bankruptcy and come back stronger than ever before. I respect this great system. I respect greatly Delta Airlines and the price its employees have paid. I respect greatly the management that committed itself even in bankruptcy to ensuring its employees come first, their pensions would be honored, and they did whatever to see to it that was a reality. As one Member of this Senate, I will call on my colleagues to look diligently at all of these questions as we move forward and make sure we honor competition, that we honor the secondary market, that we honor the employees of this great airline and do everything we can to preserve the modern competitive aviation system we have today and do not succumb ourselves to the threat of massive consolidation and an absence of competition. I yield the floor.

Mr. ISAKSON

Mr. ISAKSON. Mr. President, I would like to express my sincere appreciation to the Senator from Ohio for allowing me to intercede for a few moments. Since he is on the Senate floor and he has been so gracious as to give me this time--I did not come to the floor and will not talk long about Senator DeWine, but since he is on the Senate floor and gave me the time, I wanted to express to him my grateful appreciation for his service to the Senate, not just the people of Ohio but the people of this great country. One of the great joys I have had as a Member of the Senate, having been elected 2 years ago, was to serve on the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee with Senator DeWine. One of my great joys I had early on as a Member of this body was to watch him join the Gang of 14 and break the logjams, allowing us to confirm Supreme Court Justices Alito and Roberts. I worked closely with him on the pensions bill. Time and again, I saw his tireless effort on behalf of the best interests of this country and in particular always the best interests of the people of Ohio. To Senator DeWine, not to pander because of his graciousness in giving me the time but for giving me the unique chance to express that, we are all very grateful.