Tim Johnson

Mr. JOHNSON

Mr. JOHNSON. Mr. President, I wish to publicly commend Walter Schramm, a resident of Winner, SD, on his selection as last year's Outstanding Older Worker of South Dakota. The Outstanding Older Worker award is sponsored by Experience Works a national, nonprofit organization that provides training and employment services for mature workers. Walter will be honored in Washington, D.C., September 17-21, at the annual Experience Works Prime Time Awards Program. He will join 51 other outstanding older workers representing each State, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico. Due to the tragic incidents of September 11, 2001, and the subsequent cancellation of the Experience Works Prime Time Awards Program, Walter will be recognized at this year's event. After serving in the Pacific theater in World War II as a Marine Air Corps pilot, Walter returned to the United States to complete his military service and start a career. With little money, and no retail experience, he opened the Schramm Furniture store in Winner. His lack of business knowledge and experience was overcome by his tremendous work ethic and strong sense of community. Walter's hard work and dedication over the years have helped him succeed and grow as a small business owner, and today, his two sons, Jeff and Tom, share the business with their father. For the past 56 years Walter has been the owner/president of Schramm Furniture, Inc. At age 85, he continues to work six days a week, nine hours a day. Walter opened his business with the motto: ``Provide good service to the customer and they will come back.'' Though times have changed, Walter's motto has remained the same, and today, just as 56 years ago, customers continue to return to Schramm Furniture for its reliable customer service. Walter's tremendous contributions to the community, and civic/ business leadership have set him apart from other outstanding senior workers. He is a member of the Chamber of Commerce and Rotary International, Trinity Lutheran Church, the SD Retailers Association, the Winner Athletic Association, and a lifetime member of the American Legion and VFW. This prestigious honor is a reflection of his extraordinary service and commitment to the Winner community. Through his outstanding community involvement and dedication to service, the lives of countless South Dakotans have been enormously enhanced. His wonderful example serves as a model for other hard working and dedicated individuals throughout South Dakota to emulate. Walter Schramm is an extraordinary person who richly deserves this distinguished recognition. I strongly commend his years of hard work and dedication, and I am very pleased that his substantial efforts are being publicly honored and celebrated. It is with great honor that I share his impressive accomplishments with my colleagues.

Mr. JOHNSON

Mr. JOHNSON. Mr. President, I wish to publicly commend Russell Wyatt, a resident of Hot Springs, on his selection as this year's Outstanding Older Worker of South Dakota. The Outstanding Older Worker award is sponsored by Experience Works, a national, nonprofit organization that provides training and employment services for mature workers. Russell will be honored in Washington, D.C., September 17-21, at the annual Experience Works Prime Time Awards Program. He will join 51 other outstanding older workers representing each State, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico. At age 76, Russell Wyatt continues to own and operate Wyatt's Real Estate and Appraisal Service in Hot Springs. Russell's hard work and dedication over the years has helped him succeed and grow as a small business owner. His entrepreneurial spirit has led to many tremendous accomplishments, and helped him adapt to a rapidly changing workplace. However, it is Russell's tremendous contributions to the community, civic leadership, and volunteer work that set him apart from other outstanding senior workers. He helped organize the Oral Volunteer Fire Department and Southern Hill's Real Estate Board, promote the Miss South Dakota Pagaent, and bring a Pamida Store and Civic Center to Hot Springs. Hot Springs residents have come to count on his hard work and dependability. This prestigious honor is a reflection of his extraordinary service and commitment to the Hot Springs community. Through his outstanding community involvement and dedication to service, the lives of countless South Dakotans have been enormously enhanced. His wonderful example serves as a model for other hard working and dedicated individuals throughout South Dakota to emulate. Russell Wyatt is an extraordinary person who richly deserves this distinguished recognition. I strongly commend his years of hard work and dedication, and I am very pleased that his substantial efforts are being publicly honored and celebrated. It is with great honor that I share his impressive accomplishments with my colleagues.

Mr. JOHNSON

Mr. JOHNSON. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the American Legion Amendment Act to make technical changes to the membership qualifications in the Federal charter of the American Legion. Under the American Legion's current charter, a veteran who leaves the Armed Services may become a member of the American Legion if he or she served since ``August 2, 1990 through the date of cessation of hostilities, as decided by the United States Government'' and ``was honorably discharged or separated from that service or continues to serve honorably after that period.'' At this point, the United States Government has not issued a cessation of hostilities decision for U.S. military operations during this period. For those military men and women who are no longer serving, they have discharge papers stating they served honorably during that period which makes them qualified for American Legion membership. Yet, servicemembers who served since August 2, 1990, and are still on active duty, have no discharge papers for the period, and are not officially serving after the cessation of hostilities. Therefore, they are not eligible for membership in the American Legion despite their dedicated service in our nation's Armed Forces. The bill that I am introducing today would change the standard for a veteran to qualify for membership in the American Legion to ``continues to serve during or after that period.'' This change would make it clear that membership is open to the thousands of active duty personnel who served during operations Desert Shield and Desert Storm, in addition to the operations that followed in Iraq, Bosnia, Kosovo, and Afghanistan. As my colleagues in the Senate know, the American Legion continues to be one of our Nation's most effective advocates on behalf of America's veterans, as well as a pre-eminent service organization. The American Legion has grown to nearly 3 million members whose efforts are truly making a difference in communities throughout our country. As the father of a son who served in Bosnia, Kosovo, and Afghanistan, I am pleased to offer the American Legion Amendment Act that will offer him and his military colleagues the opportunity and the honor to join the American Legion. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. JOHNSON

Mr. JOHNSON. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the American Legion Amendment Act to make technical changes to the membership qualifications in the Federal charter of the American Legion. Under the American Legion's current charter, a veteran who leaves the Armed Services may become a member of the American Legion if he or she served since ``August 2, 1990 through the date of cessation of hostilities, as decided by the United States Government'' and ``was honorably discharged or separated from that service or continues to serve honorably after that period.'' At this point, the United States Government has not issued a cessation of hostilities decision for U.S. military operations during this period. For those military men and women who are no longer serving, they have discharge papers stating they served honorably during that period which makes them qualified for American Legion membership. Yet, servicemembers who served since August 2, 1990, and are still on active duty, have no discharge papers for the period, and are not officially serving after the cessation of hostilities. Therefore, they are not eligible for membership in the American Legion despite their dedicated service in our nation's Armed Forces. The bill that I am introducing today would change the standard for a veteran to qualify for membership in the American Legion to ``continues to serve during or after that period.'' This change would make it clear that membership is open to the thousands of active duty personnel who served during operations Desert Shield and Desert Storm, in addition to the operations that followed in Iraq, Bosnia, Kosovo, and Afghanistan. As my colleagues in the Senate know, the American Legion continues to be one of our Nation's most effective advocates on behalf of America's veterans, as well as a pre-eminent service organization. The American Legion has grown to nearly 3 million members whose efforts are truly making a difference in communities throughout our country. As the father of a son who served in Bosnia, Kosovo, and Afghanistan, I am pleased to offer the American Legion Amendment Act that will offer him and his military colleagues the opportunity and the honor to join the American Legion. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. JOHNSON

Mr. JOHNSON. Mr. President, today I publicly commend Vanessa Short Bull, a resident of Rapid City, South Dakota, on her selection to represent South Dakota in the Miss America Pageant in Atlantic City, NJ. Vanessa Short Bull's extraordinary dedication to educational excellence, efforts to increase political awareness, prodigious ballet talent, and years of dedicated practice helped her win the title of Miss South Dakota. Vanessa will now be traveling to Atlantic City to compete against other highly talented women from across our nation for the title of Miss America 2002. Vanessa obtains the honor of being the first American Indian to be crowned Miss South Dakota. She was born on the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation, and currently resides in Rapid City. She is an enrolled member of the Oglala Sioux Tribe, and a direct descendent of several great Lakota leaders. Thomas and Darlene Short Bull are Vanessa's proud parents, and they deserve special recognition for their roles in helping Vanessa obtain this prestigious honor. ``Political Awareness and Participation'' is the center of Vanessa's platform. She believes it is important for Americans, especially young people and minorities, to become more involved in the democratic process. She has been actively helping her cause by registering voters and encouraging them to get out and vote. Vanessa will perform the classical ballet piece ``The Dying Swan'' for the talent portion of the competition. She has danced for more than 15 years and has studied at the School of Cleveland Ballet, Ballet West Conservatory, and the University of Utah. The Miss America Organization has maintained a tradition of empowering American women to achieve their personal and professional goals, while providing a forum for them to express their opinions, talents, and intelligence. Vanessa exemplifies this tradition, and provides an excellent example for other gifted young women to emulate. All of South Dakota is proud to have her represent our great state. Vanessa Short Bull is an extraordinary woman who richly deserves this distinguished recognition. I strongly commend her years of hard work and dedication, and I am very pleased that her substantial efforts are being publicly honored and celebrated. I wish her the best at the Miss America competition, and it is with great honor that I share her impressive accomplishments with my colleagues.

Mr. JOHNSON

Mr. JOHNSON. Madam President, I rise today to commemorate the vicious terrorist attacks that occurred on our Nation a year ago today, September 11, 2001. Over the past few days, in large cities and small towns, in New York and the Pentagon today, in my home State of South Dakota, people have gathered to remember and to reflect upon what happened this last year. In many ways it still does not seem possible that a year has passed since the attacks of September 11, 2001. It seems too soon to look back and reflect on the meaning of September 11 because the events of that day still echo in our daily lives. The wound is still too fresh, the loss too great. Every American will remember exactly where they were when they realized that our Nation was under attack. The images of that day will be with us forever: The burning buildings, the endless television footage of airplanes crashing into the Twin Towers, the images of New York covered in rubble. I will always remember the smoke of the Pentagon as it appeared through a too-perfect blue sky here in Washington DC. But other thoughts-- candlelight vigils, American flags adorning buildings, fences, and barns, the heroism of the passengers of American flight 93, and the lasting bravery of firefighters and other first responders--will also remain in our hearts as constant reminders of that day in September. Across the Nation and around the world, people came together to do what they could for the victims and their families. I was proud, but not at all surprised, when South Dakotans overwhelmingly responded with offers of blood and other assistance. Millions of dollars were donated by South Dakotans to relief organizations, and thousands of hours of time were volunteered in efforts to aid survivors and the family members of victims. Employees at Luverne Fire Apparatus in Brandon put in 2,000 hours of their own time to build a fire truck that was donated to New York City. Red Cross volunteers from Rapid City assisted in recovery efforts at the Pentagon. Farmers and ranchers throughout the state sold cattle and grain at auctions and livestock drives and donated that money to relief efforts. In one extraordinary example, Don and Adeline Hight of Murdo sold 100 calves and donated the proceeds, about $40,000, to help victims of the terrorist attacks. In Brown County, the Rural American Patriot Fund used the money they collected from fellow farmers and ranchers to buy thousands of dollars in Patriot Bonds. The idea of Patriot Bonds began with a call from a South Dakotan to my office, and were approved by the Treasury Department last December. Patriot Bonds, similar to World War II war bonds, allow Americans to support the relief and recovery efforts at the World Trade Center and the Pentagon and to help fund the war on terrorism. South Dakotans also helped to ease the emotional strain that the attack had on survivors and the victims' families. Police officers specializing in stress management from Mitchell and Yankton went to New York to help the police officers there deal with the emotional aftermath of the terrorist attacks. Lance Fillspipe, Junior Rodriguez, and eight other police officers from Pine Ridge Indian Reservation traveled to New York to help the police there handle security. Bonnie Riggenbach and Bob Holmes of Rapid City, both therapists, traveled to New York to do what they could to help people mend their lives. The Disaster Mental Health Institute at the University of South Dakota went to New York City in the wake of the September 11 attacks and played a key role in helping the recovery process. Students at Mount Marty College put together a banner signed by members of the community with words of sympathy and support for the city of New York. That banner is being considered by the Guinness Book of World Records as being the largest handmade banner ever made. Through gestures large and small, South Dakotans united with their neighbors and worked to bring something positive from all of the terrible destruction. A lot has changed in our country, and in our world, since September 11. Our Nation has learned, to our vast sorrow, that we were not as untouchable as we had believed ourselves to be. Our country is involved in a war against terror that has taken our courageous military men and women, including my son Brooks, to Afghanistan as well as other far-off corners of the world. Our military effort in Afghanistan has helped to free people who were oppressed by a dictatorial regime that, in addition to the atrocities that the government inflicted upon its own people, harbored a terrorist group representing the worst humanity can become. Here on the home front, things have changed as well. Barricades have been erected around national monuments, the Capitol, and the White House. Lines are longer and security more thorough at airports. Despite the longer lines and tighter security, our Nation still moves and functions much as it has for the last 225 years. We remain a beacon of democracy and justice for much of the world, and I work very hard as a Senator to make certain that new regulations, however necessary they may be in our post-September 11 world, do not infringe upon the basic rights of our citizens that we seek to secure. So as we take this day to reflect upon the many lives lost last year, we are to reflect on the courage and heroism of those who did so much to save lives and defend our liberty today. We take comfort that the terrorists' goals were not realized--that there were attacks on buildings, but there were also attacks on everything America stands for--on individual liberty, on religious tolerance, on democracy, on free speech, and all the rights of our Constitution. These forces of hate, these forces of intolerance tried to destroy the very things that make this Nation strong. Buildings are being repaired but, more importantly, the light of democracy that holds this Nation together and our fundamental values burn just as brightly as it ever has. The United States took a hit, but we have responded aggressively, and America will remain a beacon of liberty and freedom for the world forever after. I yield the floor.

Mr. JOHNSON

Mr. JOHNSON. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Veterans Health Care Funding Guarantee Act. I am introducing the legislation because I believe the VA health case system is on the brink of crisis. While the number of veterans in the United States has decreased over the years, the number of veterans utilizing the VA health care system has increased exponentially. This is due in large part to the availability of Community-Based Outpatient Clinics and the prescription drug benefits available through the VA. The VA estimates that it will see an additional 1.2 million patients over the next fiscal year. This would bring the number of veterans served through the VA up to 4.9 million, a 31 percent increase in one year. While the VA has become the health care system of choice for many veterans, the system is simply not equipped to handle this kind of patient influx at the current funding level. According to the VA, 300,000 veterans are waiting for appointments, half of them will end up waiting six months or more. I know this to be the case in my own State. In Sioux Falls, veterans are currently being given appointment dates for November of 2003. Furthermore, recent articles in the Aberdeen American News and the Argus Leader reported that the VA has been instructed not to recruit veterans into the health care system any more because of lack of resources. This is despite the fact that for the past several years Congress has provided funding for veterans health care in excess of the VA's request. Two years ago, I helped fight for a $1.4 billion increase in veterans health care funding over the Administration's initial request. Last year, we succeeded in adding an additional $1.1 billion. During Senate consideration of the Fiscal Year 2002 Emergency Supplemental Appropriations bill, I was pleased to work with my fellow members of the Appropriations Committee to ensure that $417 million in additional funding for veterans health care was included in the bill. Given the current problems within the VA health care system, I was disappointed that President refused to spend $275 million of the emergency funding that was earmarked for veterans health care. According to the Independent Budget, which is prepared by the Disabled American Veterans, AMVETS, the Paralyzed Veterans of America, and the Veterans of Foreign Wars, the Administration's Fiscal Year 2003 request for VA health care is $1.7 billion less than what is needed to fully fund our veterans' health care needs. We need a new approach to veterans health care. The Veterans Health Care Funding Guarantee Act that I am introducing today would change the way in which the VA health care system is funded by moving it from discretionary to mandatory spending. The bill would establish a base- line funding year and calculate the average cost of a veteran using the VA health care system. The bill would them provide funding for the total number of veterans who participate in the VA health care system. That would be indexed annually for inflation. In my opinion, the men and women who put their lives on the line in defense of this Nation should not be told that they need to wait up to a year before someone can assess their medical needs. I believe that the Veterans Health Care Funding Guarantee Act is an important starting point to begin a discussion about maintaining our commitments to our Nation's veterans. It is my hope that my colleagues will join me in examining new ways to provide our veterans with the high-quality health care they deserve.

Mr. JOHNSON

Mr. JOHNSON. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Veterans Health Care Funding Guarantee Act. I am introducing the legislation because I believe the VA health case system is on the brink of crisis. While the number of veterans in the United States has decreased over the years, the number of veterans utilizing the VA health care system has increased exponentially. This is due in large part to the availability of Community-Based Outpatient Clinics and the prescription drug benefits available through the VA. The VA estimates that it will see an additional 1.2 million patients over the next fiscal year. This would bring the number of veterans served through the VA up to 4.9 million, a 31 percent increase in one year. While the VA has become the health care system of choice for many veterans, the system is simply not equipped to handle this kind of patient influx at the current funding level. According to the VA, 300,000 veterans are waiting for appointments, half of them will end up waiting six months or more. I know this to be the case in my own State. In Sioux Falls, veterans are currently being given appointment dates for November of 2003. Furthermore, recent articles in the Aberdeen American News and the Argus Leader reported that the VA has been instructed not to recruit veterans into the health care system any more because of lack of resources. This is despite the fact that for the past several years Congress has provided funding for veterans health care in excess of the VA's request. Two years ago, I helped fight for a $1.4 billion increase in veterans health care funding over the Administration's initial request. Last year, we succeeded in adding an additional $1.1 billion. During Senate consideration of the Fiscal Year 2002 Emergency Supplemental Appropriations bill, I was pleased to work with my fellow members of the Appropriations Committee to ensure that $417 million in additional funding for veterans health care was included in the bill. Given the current problems within the VA health care system, I was disappointed that President refused to spend $275 million of the emergency funding that was earmarked for veterans health care. According to the Independent Budget, which is prepared by the Disabled American Veterans, AMVETS, the Paralyzed Veterans of America, and the Veterans of Foreign Wars, the Administration's Fiscal Year 2003 request for VA health care is $1.7 billion less than what is needed to fully fund our veterans' health care needs. We need a new approach to veterans health care. The Veterans Health Care Funding Guarantee Act that I am introducing today would change the way in which the VA health care system is funded by moving it from discretionary to mandatory spending. The bill would establish a base- line funding year and calculate the average cost of a veteran using the VA health care system. The bill would them provide funding for the total number of veterans who participate in the VA health care system. That would be indexed annually for inflation. In my opinion, the men and women who put their lives on the line in defense of this Nation should not be told that they need to wait up to a year before someone can assess their medical needs. I believe that the Veterans Health Care Funding Guarantee Act is an important starting point to begin a discussion about maintaining our commitments to our Nation's veterans. It is my hope that my colleagues will join me in examining new ways to provide our veterans with the high-quality health care they deserve.

Mr. JOHNSON

Mr. JOHNSON. Mr. President, I rise to speak in favor of an amendment which I have cosponsored which provides direct and immediate emergency aid to the nation's farmers and ranchers coping with a drought of devastating proportions. Mr. President, recently President Bush visited my home State of South Dakota at Mount Rushmore. He was met with great courtesy, respect, and hospitality which we always extend to Presidents of either political party. I was there, along with my wife, to greet the President at Mount Rushmore. We are proud of our State and always pleased to have an opportunity to show it off. There was a great deal that the President said in South Dakota on which I could agree. There are a number of areas of common ground on which we can work together as Americans. I have to say, however, that I was profoundly disappointed that the President chose at that time to express his opposition to emergency drought relief for farmers and ranchers in my State all across America. Some 40 States have been struck to some degree or another by this relentless drought. There are areas in my State in dire circumstances. We have lost almost $2 billion in the South Dakota economy over the course of this past year, and in our small State, that is an enormous hit. I have visited farmers and ranchers across my State who detail with great pain and emotion the problems they're being forced to cope with due to this drought. I recently was in Philip and Faith, SD. The pastures look like the surface of the Moon. There is no vegetation at all. I talked to Gary Vance, the owner of the Faith livestock auction barn who indicated to me that a year ago, over a 2-month period, they sold 1,200 cattle. Over 2 months this summer they sold over 12,000 cattle as people continued to liquidate their herds, including breeding stock, simply having to get out of the business altogether. Corn cannot be cut for silage, soybeans are lying in the dust, and pastures are simply patches of dirt at this point. It is having a devastating impact. As the Senator from North Dakota indicated, I have always been supportive of emergency aid in circumstances where people have been struck by forces of nature, whether it is hurricanes in Florida or earthquakes in California. I do not begrudge providing money to New York and other places where we had floods, hurricanes, and tornadoes. I find it striking that some are arguing to set a new precedent whereby this one sector of the economy, the agricultural sector, is being asked to play by a different rule. Those suggesting this new precedent believe we can take money out of the existing farm program to deal with a natural disaster. The farm bill was never designed to address problems of natural disasters. By their very nature, droughts and floods are unpredictable. They occur some years; some years they do not. Some years, their scope is of one kind; others, another. I find it hard to believe the administration has taken this position while at the same time talking about an economic stimulus package. I can think of few things that could be more stimulating to the economy in our part of the country other than a drought bill to provide some relief to get these people through the winter. Right now, in too many instances livestock producers have no feed, they have no water. They are not going to make it through the winter. They are selling their herds off at a $250-a-head loss. These pastures are not going to recover, in some instances, for years. This is an enormous hit, and it is not just the farmers and ranchers, it is mainstream business. It is the entire fabric of the economy of South Dakota that is suffering mightily, as it is in so many other States. In the past, we have always dealt with this on an emergency basis. Presidents of both political parties, President Bush Sr., and this President, when he was Governor of Texas, asked for drought relief on an emergency basis in his State. So it seems hard to believe we find ourselves in this circumstance where the Senate passed drought relief for the 2001 year over 6 months ago that was defeated and pulled out of the farm bill by colleagues in the House. The White House expressed opposition to it. some 200 days ago. We attempted to put drought relief in the supplemental appropriations bill but again ran into resistance. Now we are looking at the 2003 fiscal year beginning on October 1. Things are delayed already, I don't think we can afford to wait, we must enact emergency relief now. There are some who talk about finding the money within the farm bill, within the LDP and the countercyclical payment money that will not be used. The Congressional Budget Office indicates to us there is no such fund, there is no such $5 billion lying around in the farm program waiting to be used, and we would not know what the scope of the funding for those programs would be until September of 2003 in any event. Frankly, we have producers who needed help months ago who have to make wrenching decisions right now relative to whether they are going to make it through the winter. They will have to liquidate everything they have in order to survive in too many instances. Too many young producers are being chased out of the business altogether. Those most vulnerable, those least capitalized, tend to be among the youngest. We are at risk of losing an entire generation of farmers, ranchers, school board members, and church leaders in rural America if something is not done to provide meaningful and immediate relief. There is great urgency to this, and I hope we can find the bipartisan support to pass the comprehensive drought relief bill in these comings days.

Mr. JOHNSON

Mr. JOHNSON. Madam President, it is with great honor that I rise today to congratulate the South Dakota Developmental Center, SDDC, for its 100 years of service. The SDDC was established in 1899 by the South Dakota State Legislature as the Northern Hospital for the Insane. The Center accepted its first admissions in 1902 to meet the needs of individuals with developmental disabilities for the State of South Dakota. One Hundred years later, the Center continues to serve South Dakota and the needs of its citizens. Over the last century, the South Dakota Developmental Center in Redfield, SD has provided quality services to individuals with developmental disabilities who do not have the option of receiving care from a community-based center. To meet the needs of its patients, services are provided by specialists from many areas of health care, including Audiology, Optometry, Chemical Dependency Counseling, Dentistry, Nutrition, Teaching, Physical Therapy, Pharmacy, Nursing, Psychiatry, Speech Pathology, Vocational Instruction, Mental Health Therapy, and Occupational Therapy. These staff members enable the SDDC to meet the needs of its diverse population, and help them reach their ultimate goal, a higher level of independence. This year also marks 100 years of partnership between the local community and the SDDC. Currently, the SDDC employs more than 400 staff, making them a major employer in the Redfield area. The impact of SDDC on the local economy cannot be overstated. The SDDC not only provides quality jobs to more than 400 individuals, but indirectly helps sustain numerous community businesses, organizations, and public services. I am pleased to announce that the South Dakota Development Center is planning a centennial celebration on September 20, 2002. The centennial celebration includes a rededication of several buildings on campus, an award ceremony, a luncheon, special afternoon activities, and an evening social at the local VFW for returning former employees, dignitaries, special guests and friends. I am proud to have this opportunity to honor the South Dakota Development Center for its 100 years of outstanding service. It is an honor for me to share with my colleagues the exemplary leadership and strong commitment to individuals with developmental disabilities that the South Dakota Development Center has provided. I strongly commend their years of hard work and dedication, and I am very pleased that their substantial efforts are being publicly honored and celebrated.

Mr. JOHNSON

Mr. JOHNSON. Mr. President, today, I am pleased to join Senator Byron dorgan in introducing legislation that will establish a world-class, science-based long-term monitoring program for the Missouri River. As America's longest river, fed by the headwaters of thousand, year-old glaciers, the Missouri is intertwined into the fabric of the American experience. Fed by dozens of tributaries crisscrossing Montana, North and South Dakota, Nebraska, Missouri, and Kansas, the Missouri River supports hundreds of river species and provides crucial wildlife habitat for migratory birds and other animals. The Missouri River also sustains trophy walleye fishing on South Dakota's main stem reservoirs and is the hub for the cultural and economic development of several communities and Indian Tribes. The Missouri River faces challenges on several fronts: The manipulation of its water levels by the Corps of Engineers, the continued development of river shoreline, and the invasion of nonnative fish and plants. The Missouri River Enhancement and Monitoring Act of 2002 creates a comprehensive monitoring program to investigate and examine how the multiple uses of the Missouri are impacting water quality and the sustainability of fish and wildlife. The legislation authorizes the establishment of a federal research program through the Biological Resources Division of the USGS, the Department of the Interior's research engine. The strength of the bill, however, stems from the participation of the states, Indian Tribes, and academic institutions all who have a stake in the health of the River. To that end, the legislation authorizes the establishment of monitoring field stations throughout the Missouri River basin. The bill also includes a competitive funding process to contract with Indian Tribes and basin States for the recovery of threatened species and specific habitat restoration projects. These focused investigations will encourage States and Indian Tribes to study the impact of water flows on fish populations at main stem reservoirs. Earlier this year, water releases from South Dakota reservoirs damaged the spring fish spawn and the ecology of the Missouri River. This bill authorizes funds for State agencies with jurisdiction over fish and wildlife habitat to initiate projects that will be able to tell us how low water levels at South Dakota reservoirs impact fish populations and recreational opportunities. I ask unanimous consent that a letter from the South Dakota Department of Game, Fish, and Parks in support of the Missouri River Monitoring Act of 2002 be printed in the Record.

Mr. JOHNSON

Mr. JOHNSON. Mr. President, I rise today to pay tribute to John E. Brewer of Rapid City, SD, on the occasion of his retirement as president of Rushmore Bank and Trust in Rapid City. The people of the Rapid City area share my pride in John's accomplishments, and I know they join me in congratulating him on his retirement after a distinguished 32 year career in the banking industry. Throughout his career, John has worked to provide financial opportunities for South Dakotans. For the past 16 years, John has guided Rushmore Bank and Trust in new and innovative directions. John has also helped guide the entire banking profession in South Dakota by serving as a past president of the South Dakota Bankers Association. John came to South Dakota in the same year I was first elected to Congress. During my years in Congress and now as the Chairman of the Senate Banking Subcommittee on Financial Institutions, I have relied on John's vast experience and knowledge of the banking industry to help guide my decisions on important policy matters. In addition to his professional dedication, John is a true leader in the Rapid City community and has earned the respect and friendship of so many of us fortunate to spend time with him. John has served as the chairman of the Rapid City Area Chamber of Commerce, president of the Children's House Society, and president of the Mount Rushmore History Association. John represents the goodness and diligence that we find in so many South Dakotans, and I wish him well for a long and happy retirement.

Mr. JOHNSON

Mr. JOHNSON. Mr. President, I recognize the National Health Center Week that will be celebrated from August 18, to 24, 2002. Health centers provide services to over ten million people living in under- served areas throughout the United States, with about 50 percent of the users being from rural areas such as South Dakota. It gives me great pride to have been selected for the National Association of Community Health Centers' ``2002 Community Super Hero'' award which was presented to me earlier this year. Community health centers have a long-standing history of providing quality primary health care services to medically under-served populations. Providing care to one of every 12 rural Americans, health centers provide medical attention to those who would otherwise lack access to health care. For less than one dollar per day, these health centers provide care to both individuals and families. Today, there are 23 community health centers serving 31,0000 individuals across my State and I am working, along with the President and my colleagues in Congress, to greatly increase the number nationwide. I am pleased, as a member of the Senate Appropriations Committee, to have recently voted to increase funding by $190 million for a total of $1.53 billion for the Nation's community health centers next year. This funding level represents a $76 million increase over the President's Fiscal Year 2003 budget request. A unique aspect of community health centers allows them to individualize their center to met the specific needs of a particular community. By partnering with community organizations, schools and businesses, health centers are able to best meet the health care needs of individuals in each respective community. Let me also pay special recognition to John Mengenhausen, Chief Executive Officer of Horizon Health Care in Howard, South Dakota and the National Association of Community Health Care Center's Board Chair, Scot Graff, Executive Director of the Community Health Care Association in South Dakota, and all of the staff at the association for the fine work they do on behalf of South Dakota. Furthermore, I want to commend all of the dedicated health care professionals in the health centers throughout South Dakota who work day in and day out devoting their lives to delivering critical health care to those most in need. Once again, it gives me great pleasure to recognize the National Health care Center Week on behalf of the South Dakota Community Health care Association and the many thousands of South Dakotans who may continue to benefit through this important program.

Mr. JOHNSON

Mr. JOHNSON. Mr. President, today, I am pleased to join Senator Byron dorgan in introducing legislation that will establish a world-class, science-based long-term monitoring program for the Missouri River. As America's longest river, fed by the headwaters of thousand, year-old glaciers, the Missouri is intertwined into the fabric of the American experience. Fed by dozens of tributaries crisscrossing Montana, North and South Dakota, Nebraska, Missouri, and Kansas, the Missouri River supports hundreds of river species and provides crucial wildlife habitat for migratory birds and other animals. The Missouri River also sustains trophy walleye fishing on South Dakota's main stem reservoirs and is the hub for the cultural and economic development of several communities and Indian Tribes. The Missouri River faces challenges on several fronts: The manipulation of its water levels by the Corps of Engineers, the continued development of river shoreline, and the invasion of nonnative fish and plants. The Missouri River Enhancement and Monitoring Act of 2002 creates a comprehensive monitoring program to investigate and examine how the multiple uses of the Missouri are impacting water quality and the sustainability of fish and wildlife. The legislation authorizes the establishment of a federal research program through the Biological Resources Division of the USGS, the Department of the Interior's research engine. The strength of the bill, however, stems from the participation of the states, Indian Tribes, and academic institutions all who have a stake in the health of the River. To that end, the legislation authorizes the establishment of monitoring field stations throughout the Missouri River basin. The bill also includes a competitive funding process to contract with Indian Tribes and basin States for the recovery of threatened species and specific habitat restoration projects. These focused investigations will encourage States and Indian Tribes to study the impact of water flows on fish populations at main stem reservoirs. Earlier this year, water releases from South Dakota reservoirs damaged the spring fish spawn and the ecology of the Missouri River. This bill authorizes funds for State agencies with jurisdiction over fish and wildlife habitat to initiate projects that will be able to tell us how low water levels at South Dakota reservoirs impact fish populations and recreational opportunities. I ask unanimous consent that a letter from the South Dakota Department of Game, Fish, and Parks in support of the Missouri River Monitoring Act of 2002 be printed in the Record.

Mr. JOHNSON

Mr. JOHNSON. Mr. President, I want to recognize the heroic efforts of over 60 South Dakota community fire departments and the State of South Dakota's Wildland Fire Suppression Division in responding to recent forest fires in the Black Hills. Their work was heroic, professional, and saved several Black Hills communities from complete devastation. On Saturday, June 29, 2002, a forest fire broke out in Grizzly Gulch, south of the town of Lead, SD, and near the town of Deadwood. Steep, rugged hills and unstable terrain crisscross the Black Hills impeding efforts to control the early stages of a forest fire. By Saturday evening, fire had crept within a few hundred yards of the historic city of Deadwood and in some instances flames literally touched the sides of houses. Ninety-degree temperatures, high winds, and low humidity levels fueled the fires run up ridges and engulfed thousands of acres in a matter of hours. If it had not been for the quick reaction and professionalism of the South Dakota Wildland Suppression Office and the men and women who established a fire line between Deadwood, the city could have witnessed a catastrophic fire. Within a few hours Joe Lowe, the Grizzly Gulch Incident Commander, had marshaled over 250 personnel, including several hand crews, 7 heavy air tankers, and pieces of heavy earth-moving equipment to keep the fire from approaching Deadwood. By the Fourth of July the number of personnel fighting the fire swelled to over 670 with an influx of U.S. Forest Service crews under the authority of Paul Hefner, fire commander for the Grizzly Gulch blaze. As fire crews battled flareups and constructed fire lines to control the fire, high winds kept crews alert for what firefighters refer to as slop-over, flames jumping the line and burning out ahead of the fire line. South Dakotans responded. Volunteer firefighters from 60 community fire departments from as far away as Sioux Falls descended on the region. After the fires were contained, Deadwood sponsored a night of festivities to thank the hundreds of firefighters who battled the Grizzly Gulch fire and saved the town of Deadwood. The town's round of applause and appreciation spoke for the entire State's gratitude for the bravery of our community firefighters. At the fire's peak, over 900 firefighters fought the Grizzly Gulch fire, putting themselves in harm's way to save the towns of Lead and Deadwood. Through their selfless action, the community and State firefighters of South Dakota reaffirmed that during a crisis South Dakotans speak with one voice. I would like to add my voice and say thank you to the men and women who served us so proudly last month.

Mr. JOHNSON

Mr. JOHNSON. Mr. President, my friend from Iowa is correct. For the past several years, the Center for Chronic Pain and Fatigue Research has conducted research that is unique in its focus on the internal mechanisms and most effective treatment of Gulf War Illnesses and other undiagnosed post-deployment illnesses. This research has been funded by Congress each year and overseen by the U.S. Army Medical Research and Material Command and its peer review process. Continued funding for this program will enable the continuation of research into a variety of illnesses reported by personnel upon returning from the Gulf War.

Mr. JOHNSON. Mr. President, I would like to engage in a colloquy with the Majority Leader, Senator Daschle, and the Chairman of the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee, Senator Inouye, regarding the B-1 bomber. The B-1 remains the backbone of our nation's bomber fleet by providing our military with a reliable, long-range bomber capable of delivering a large amount of munitions to targets thousands of miles away. Nowhere was the continued importance of the B-1 more clear than over the skies of Afghanistan during the major battles of Operation Enduring Freedom. Since October, B-1s have dropped more than 38 percent of the bombs in Operation Enduring Freedom while maintaining over a 78 percent mission capable rate. I am particularly proud of the accomplishments of the B-1 because a portion of the fleet is stationed at Ellsworth Air Force Base in my home state. On many occasions, I have had the opportunity to meet with the men and women who fly and maintain these planes, and each time I am struck by their dedication and professionalism. In order to maintain the integral role the B-1 plays in our national security, the Department of Defense has committed to reinvest the savings from the consolidation of the fleet into the modernization of the remaining aircraft. Currently, the Air Force is in the midst of a multi-year plan to upgrade the B-1 to improve its reliability, survivability, and lethality. One aspect of this ongoing effort is the Defense System Upgrade-- DSUP--program which will replace the existing defensive system on the B-1 with components of the ALQ-214 Integrated Defensive Electronic Countermeasures--IDECM--system, the ALR-56M Radar Warning Receiver, and the ALE-55 Fiber Optic Towed Decoy, FOTD. Completion of this upgrade will greatly enhance the survivability of the B-1 and improve its long- range penetrating bomber capabilities. During the course of the DSUP program, problems arose with the deployment of the towed decoy system. It should be noted that these problems were not unique to the B-1, but did slow progress on the upgrade program. However, I was pleased to learn recently that DSUP testing of the towed decoy has once again begun. On June 25, a test was conducted at Edwards Air Force Base in which two decoys were successfully deployed and towed from a B-1. This was followed by a July 25 test in which a decoy was deployed and towed while the B-1 flew with varying wing sweep positions. It is my hope these tests demonstrate the DSUP program is back on track. At the time the House and Senate Appropriations Committees were writing the Fiscal Year 2003 Defense appropriations bills, these DSUP problems had not been addressed. As a result, the bills currently contain reductions in funding for the B-1 program. The House version of the Defense appropriations bill rescinds $67 million in Fiscal Year 2002 funding, and cuts the President's Fiscal Year 2003 request for the B-1 by $82 million. These cuts would terminate the DSUP program completely and would cripple the B-1 modernization program. The Senate version of the Defense appropriations bill would rescind $32 million in Fiscal Year 2002 funds and cut $40 million from the B-1 request for Fiscal Year 2003. I would like to thank the Chairman for including report language that would allow the Air Force to request reprogramming of funds for the B-1 if the DSUP problems are resolved. In the time since these bills were written, I believe we have seen progress within the DSUP program. It is my hope that we can address this funding issue within conference to restore funds for DSUP or provide additional funds for other aspects of the B-1 modernization programs.

Mr. JOHNSON

Mr. JOHNSON. Mr. President, most of all I thank him for his extraordinary leadership on the development of this landmark legislation. I think it is fair to say this is the most critically important piece of investor protection legislation since the Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. This comes on the heels of the disclosure of corporate corruption that has been endemic in recent months, where we have witnessed lost jobs, lost savings, lost pensions, and ultimately lost confidence worldwide in America's capital markets. There is an urgency that strong legislation be passed by this body and the Congress to restore confidence--restore both the perception and the reality of integrity in our capital markets. This legislation is strong legislation. That is why it has been applauded by editorial writers from the east coast to the west coast. Senator Sarbanes has been the subject of much congratulatory observation on the part of so many. This comes on the heels of, frankly, much weaker legislation that had been passed previously in the House of Representatives, the other body. By passing a strong Senate bill, we were able to go to conference. I am proud to have served on that conference committee and to craft legislation there that goes in the direction of the Senate rather than in the direction of the other body and gives this Nation strong securities legislation. It provides a stiff penalty for corporate wrongdoing, creates a strong oversight board to ensure that corporate audits are done properly, and that the books, in fact, are not cooked. It imposes tough new corporate responsibility standards and implements control over stock analysts' conflicts of interest, so they are not making a fortune while advising their clients to invest. It requires public companies to quickly and accurately disclose financial information. It ensures that the Securities and Exchange Commission has the resources to accomplish its mission of regulating the securities markets. These important provisions will ensure that America's financial markets remain efficient and transparent and the envy of the world. It will benefit average people who may not have had enough information to make informed decisions in the past and certainly could not have possibly known that the books were cooked, that the audits were incorrect, and that corruption was running rife. They had no way of knowing that. This will turn that around. This is not the last word, but this is a critically important step in the right direction to returning integrity to our markets. We can observe, having come through this horrible experience in recent months of disclosure after disclosure of corruption having taken place, a recognition that free market economies can only work when there is a cop on the beat. Free market economies can only work when there are fair, well-enforced, and strictly enforced rules. A free market economy without rules, without a cop on the beat, is not an economy that will ever work at all. This goes a long way, I believe, to reviving confidence in America's economic future. It goes a long way to restoring the fairness and transparency so that people may make their investments--and investments may go up, and they may go down, but they can know when they make those investments, they are making those investments based on true and accurate analysis and not on bogus numbers that some audit firm on the take has been willing to put forward as the truth when, in fact, they are not the truth. Again, the whole Nation owes a great deal of gratitude to Chairman Sarbanes and to the Senate, in this case, for what I am confident is going to be an overwhelming vote in favor of this legislation. I yield the floor.

Mr. JOHNSON

Mr. JOHNSON. Mr. President, I rise today in praise of the Americans with Disabilities Act on the occasion of its 12th anniversary. The advances in law, health care, education, transportation, and technology promoted in this historic legislation over the past 12 years have given Americans with disabilities a new lease on life. Today, 53 million Americans live with a disability, of which 1 in 8 is severely disabled. Yet due to the landmark Americans with Disabilities Act, the stereotypes against these persons are crumbling and they are able to lead increasingly integrated fulfilled lives. The Americans with Disabilities Act has provided disabled individuals protection from discrimination in both the public and private sector, and guarantees equal access to employment, public services, and public accommodations. The Act has also spurred research and improved care for seniors, children and mentally disabled persons. In going so, this monumental Act has ensured an improved quality of life for people living with disabilities and has promised disabled children hope for a successful future. The contributions of the Americans with Disabilities Act over the past 12 years are an inspiration for what can be done to improve the lives of Americans living with disabilities, and a proponent of more progress in the future. Once again, it gives me great pleasure to recognize and honor today's celebration on behalf of the millions of disabled Americans who may continue to benefit throughout this country.

Mr. JOHNSON

Mr. JOHNSON. Mr. President, I am pleased to rise today to introduce the Armed Forces Filing Fairness Act of 2002. Current law allows for servicemembers serving in a combat zone, like Afghanistan, to receive a tax filing extension. The Armed Forces Filing Fairness Act will extend that filing deadline for military servicemembers serving in contingency operations as well. This bill would allow the military servicemember to delay filing taxes until they have returned to the United States, or when the combat zone or contingency area is no longer designated as such by the Department of Defense. As the father of a son who serves in the Army and has recently returned from Afghanistan, I am pleased to introduce legislation that will help to lift some of the burdens from our military men and women serving so bravely in combat zones and contingency operations around the world. I am committee to improving the quality of life for our military servicemembers and their families, and I am proud to introduce the Armed Forces Filing Fairness Act of 2002, which will help make life just a little easier for our men and women in uniform.

Mr. JOHNSON

Mr. JOHNSON. Mr. President, I am pleased to rise today to introduce the Armed Forces Filing Fairness Act of 2002. Current law allows for servicemembers serving in a combat zone, like Afghanistan, to receive a tax filing extension. The Armed Forces Filing Fairness Act will extend that filing deadline for military servicemembers serving in contingency operations as well. This bill would allow the military servicemember to delay filing taxes until they have returned to the United States, or when the combat zone or contingency area is no longer designated as such by the Department of Defense. As the father of a son who serves in the Army and has recently returned from Afghanistan, I am pleased to introduce legislation that will help to lift some of the burdens from our military men and women serving so bravely in combat zones and contingency operations around the world. I am committee to improving the quality of life for our military servicemembers and their families, and I am proud to introduce the Armed Forces Filing Fairness Act of 2002, which will help make life just a little easier for our men and women in uniform.

Mr. JOHNSON

Mr. JOHNSON. Mr. President, I rise in support of the Graham-Miller legislation that is on the floor today. I note that Senator Daschle deserves great credit. For years, many of us have been trying to bring a prescription drug bill to the floor of the Senate, and we have been blocked. We would be blocked year after year if Senator Daschle had not become majority leader in the Senate this past year. We have an opportunity for a bipartisan debate and hopefully the successful passage of legislation will at last break the blockade that has been imposed against us for so long relative to providing prescription drugs under Medicare. I believe the contrast is absolutely stark between what we have an opportunity to pass in the Graham-Miller legislation versus what our friends on the Republican side have been proposing as an alternative. I think it profoundly says a great deal when we find out who are the supporters of the legislation on our side versus who supports the legislation of the other side of the aisle. We are talking about an expansion of Medicare. We are not talking on our side about some form of privatization of the Medicare Program, some form of taxpayer subsidy to the insurance industry in the hopes that somehow the insurance industry will come up with stand-alone prescription drug policies which they will then offer and somehow people will find ways, then, to buy those policies. We are talking about an actual strengthening of the Medicare system, an effort that is supported by AARP, by the National Committee for the Preservation of Social Security and Medicare, and by Families USA. Senior citizen groups across the board are in support of our legislation. Who supports the alternative? The pharmaceutical industry. What does that tell you? What does that tell you about price control? What does that tell you about who is going to benefit by these alternative pieces of legislation? On our side, we are talking about a Medicare prescription drug coverage with a defined benefit. Every American of Medicare eligibility age will know precisely what the premium is in a voluntary program. If they choose to undertake this program--they certainly do not have to, but if they choose to take this program, they will know precisely what the premium is, they will know precisely what the benefit is, they will know precisely how the program works, and it will not depend on whether they live in Sioux Falls, SD, or Los Angeles or New York or anywhere else. Every American will have the same program, and it will not be dependent upon whether the insurance industry happened to decide to come into their State or into their community. In my home State of South Dakota, the insurance companies increasingly are leaving the State and leaving people in very rural areas with too few options. That is not where we want to be with prescription drugs. Every American deserves to have a strong Medicare Program, and I know there are those on the other side who have ideological qualms. They do not like the idea of more Government, so they would rather privatize Medicare and rather go in the direction of taxpayer subsidies to the insurance industry to the applause of the pharmaceutical industry but not to the applause of American seniors who want a stronger Medicare Program as the underlying basis for prescription drug coverage. We talk about whether this would contain prescription drug costs. In our underlying bill, we have the generic incentives and promotion which will be enormously helpful. We have also passed by a large margin a very closely monitored and controlled reimportation provision. Also within the underlying Graham-Miller bill under Medicare, there would be opportunities to negotiate and use the leverage of that huge population base for negotiated prices, keeping in mind that the citizens of no other industrialized nation pay anything close to what American citizens pay for the cost of prescription drugs. If you go to Canada, Mexico, Britain, France, Scandinavia, or Germany, it does not matter, you pay less than half what American citizens are expected to pay. It is long overdue that we have a component in this prescription drug bill that not only affords every Medicare-eligible individual a cost- effective, efficient way of gaining prescription drugs, but it holds those costs down and that, in fact, is why the pharmaceutical industry has objected so much to what we are trying to do and is so supportive of what the other side is trying to do because they know that the effective way of cutting costs, which indeed comes from massive profiteering that has been going on in recent years, will take place in our version. It will not take place in the version coming from the other side. It always stuns me somewhat, I have to say, that those who talk about the cost of these programs and who preach the loudest about fiscal responsibility when it comes time to figure out how we can best serve the Medicare-eligible citizens of our nation in the most effective and efficient way, do not seem to be bothered when it comes time to propose follow-on tax cuts, primarily for the billionaires of this society, to cost in excess of what we are talking about for a Medicare drug coverage program. It seems to me we have some priorities we need to sort out in this institution. We need to talk about how to effectively make sure that every senior gets the drugs they need. I talk to many, far too many, people as I go across my State of South Dakota--one of the lowest per capita income States in the America--who literally are choosing between groceries and prescription drugs. They are cutting pills in half and not renewing their prescriptions, and then they show up in emergency rooms with an acute illness and the taxpayer picks up the cost. How much better for the long-term cost, how much better for the dignity of these people to keep them healthy in the first place with a prescription drug regime that they and their physician have chosen which can be secured through Medicare and not at the whim of the insurance industry and not to the applause of the pharmaceutical industry but to the applause of the senior citizens organizations. How much better would it be to follow that road in terms of the reforms we need to be doing this week. I know this is going to be a difficult debate because of the parliamentary rules that may require 60 votes to pass legislation. I do not know if we have the 60 votes or not. It is certainly my hope that we will because the problems this Nation faces, the problems that my senior citizens in South Dakota face are not Republican or Democrat problems. They transcend that. They are the problems of our entire society in my State and across this Nation. They deserve to be dealt with aggressively and effectively, and we have that opportunity with the Graham-Miller legislation and the underlying generic legislation before the Senate today. Mr. President, there will be few more important votes in terms of domestic policy that this Senate will take anytime during the 107th Congress. It is my hope that politics can be laid aside, that ideological qualms about opposition to Medicare and Social Security that some have can be set aside, and recognize that Medicare is, indeed, the commonsense vehicle for trying to address cost containment and access to prescription drugs in a uniform, consistent way across this Nation; that opposition can be set aside, and we will, in fact, have the bipartisan support this legislation deserves to have and that at long last the gridlock, the obstructionism that has gone on for so many years can be broken and we can go home to our respective States at the conclusion of this debate knowing that we have done the right thing; we have done the good thing. I have always believed the best politics is good government; that is, doing the right thing for people. If this body supports this underlying legislation, it will be a cause of great celebration. Everyone can get whatever credit they choose to have, but it will be the right thing for America and the right thing for our seniors. I thank the Chair.

Mr. JOHNSON

Mr. JOHNSON. Mr. President, I rise today to thank Senators Conrad and Roberts for holding an important hearing today in the Senate Agriculture Production and Price Competitiveness Subcommittee concerning S. 532, the Pesticide Harmonization Act. It is my pleasure to cosponsor this important legislation. Differences in the prices of agricultural pesticides in the United States and Canada are one of the most important issues in bilateral trade discussions. Grains harvested in the United States compete on the open market against grains grown in Canada. Much of Canadian grain is treated with pesticides substantially less expensive than those used in the United States. I feel it is necessary for the United States to allow growers to access Canadian pesticides in order to remain competitive on the open market. I commend Senator Dorgan for his leadership on this issue, as lead sponsor of this legislation, which would allow U.S. farmers to access chemicals approved in the U.S. but sold at discounted rates in Canada. Currently, farmers pay 117 to 193 percent higher pries in the U.S. than in Canada for virtually identical products. Canadian producers are applying less expensive pesticides to their crops and exporting their commodities to the U.S., where the same chemicals cannot be legally purchased at the Canadian reduced price by American producers. Our farmers are not allowed access to these pesticides, but must still compete with Canadian crops grown with these products. American farmers are at a clear disadvantage to Canadian farmers due to the price differences in agricultural pesticides. This is another example of how NAFTA has put American producers at a disadvantage. I did not support or vote for NAFTA, even though supporters claimed that the trade agreement would create free, equal trade between the U.S., Canada and Mexico. In fact, NAFTA contributes to the present agricultural pesticide differential pricing problem. Allowing Canada to export millions of bushels of grain into the U.S. without restriction was intended to create equal trade, but has instead placed our agricultural industry at a disadvantage. Furthermore, the agricultural disadvantage that hinders American farmers in this situation, benefits no one other than the pesticide industry. This industry sells the same product to Americans for twice the price that it is sold to the Canadians producers across the boarder. S. 532 would eliminate the competitive advantage Canadian producers have over American producers by amending the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act. This legislation would permit a State to register a Canadian pesticide for distribution and use within that State if the pesticide is substantially similar or identical to one already registered in the U.S. I am confident the time to act on this matter is now.

Mr. JOHNSON

Mr. JOHNSON. Mr. President, South Dakota tribes are prevented from developing elder care on their reservations due to a State imposed moratorium on the construction or acquisition of additional nursing home beds. This impasse has gone on for nearly a decade, much too long. Today I am introducing legislation along with my good friend and colleague Senator Daschle, that will facilitate the development and operation of nursing facilities that are owned or operated by an Indian tribe or tribal organization on Indian reservations that are located in the State of South Dakota. Additionally, the legislation will protect the right of members of Indian tribes and tribal organizations to access health care provided by nursing facilities in the exercise of those members' entitlement to medical assistance under the Medicaid program. The facts and information discussed during the Senate Indian Affairs July 10, 2002, Hearing on Elder Health Issues, confirms the need for this legislation. The National Resource Center on Native American Aging at the University of North Dakota, NRCNAA, reports that there is a ``greater level of need for personal assistance among the Native American elders than in the general population''. Only 6.5 percent of the Native American elders over 55 receive such services. This fact is especially alarming in light of the fact that Indian elders are affected disproportionately by disability and poor health. For example, the prevalence of diagnosed diabetes among American Indians and Alaska Natives age 65 and over, is 21.5 percent. This is nearly double the rate of 11 percent for the non-Hispanic white population, age 65 and over. Additionally, because of their rural isolation, poverty, and other barriers, reservation elders have little access to existing long term care delivery mechanisms that may serve mainstream or urban elderly populations. This legislation will reduce existing barriers and give South Dakota tribes, their tribal elders, and their families long-term care alternatives. This legislation will assist tribes in their goal of providing their elders with care that preserves the individuals' dignity and health. I will continue to work closely with tribal leaders in South Dakota and Senator Daschle to address this critical problem facing the Native American community. I urge my colleagues to support passage of the South Dakota Tribal Nursing Facilities Act of 2002.

Mr. JOHNSON

Mr. JOHNSON. Mr. President, South Dakota tribes are prevented from developing elder care on their reservations due to a State imposed moratorium on the construction or acquisition of additional nursing home beds. This impasse has gone on for nearly a decade, much too long. Today I am introducing legislation along with my good friend and colleague Senator Daschle, that will facilitate the development and operation of nursing facilities that are owned or operated by an Indian tribe or tribal organization on Indian reservations that are located in the State of South Dakota. Additionally, the legislation will protect the right of members of Indian tribes and tribal organizations to access health care provided by nursing facilities in the exercise of those members' entitlement to medical assistance under the Medicaid program. The facts and information discussed during the Senate Indian Affairs July 10, 2002, Hearing on Elder Health Issues, confirms the need for this legislation. The National Resource Center on Native American Aging at the University of North Dakota, NRCNAA, reports that there is a ``greater level of need for personal assistance among the Native American elders than in the general population''. Only 6.5 percent of the Native American elders over 55 receive such services. This fact is especially alarming in light of the fact that Indian elders are affected disproportionately by disability and poor health. For example, the prevalence of diagnosed diabetes among American Indians and Alaska Natives age 65 and over, is 21.5 percent. This is nearly double the rate of 11 percent for the non-Hispanic white population, age 65 and over. Additionally, because of their rural isolation, poverty, and other barriers, reservation elders have little access to existing long term care delivery mechanisms that may serve mainstream or urban elderly populations. This legislation will reduce existing barriers and give South Dakota tribes, their tribal elders, and their families long-term care alternatives. This legislation will assist tribes in their goal of providing their elders with care that preserves the individuals' dignity and health. I will continue to work closely with tribal leaders in South Dakota and Senator Daschle to address this critical problem facing the Native American community. I urge my colleagues to support passage of the South Dakota Tribal Nursing Facilities Act of 2002.