Ted Kennedy

Mr. KENNEDY

Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, today is National Hunger Awareness Day, and it is an opportunity for all of us in Congress to pledge a greater effort to deal effectively with this festering problem that shames our Nation and has grown even more serious in recent years. The number of Americans living in hunger, or on the brink of hunger has increased every year during the current administration. It now includes 13 million children--400,000 more than when President Bush took office. These Americans deserve higher priority by all in Congress. Day in and day out, the needs of millions of Americans living in poverty have been overlooked, and too often their voices have been silenced. These are real people, struggling every day to get by. They are single mothers serving coffee at the local diner at 5 a.m. and cleaning houses in the afternoon, yet are still unable to afford both shelter and food. They are low-wage workers holding down two jobs, yet still forced to make impossible choices between feeding their family, paying the rent, and obtaining decent medical care. They are children who go to bed hungry every night whose parents can't afford to give them more than a single slim meal a day. The World Food Summit in 1996 called global attention to this crisis and in response the Clinton administration pledged to begin an effort to cut hunger and food insecurity in half in the United States by 2010. In the boom of the Clinton years, we made progress toward that goal-- hunger decreased steadily through 2000. We now have 6 years left to fulfill our commitment, and we must not fail. The answer is a renewed commitment to reaching that goal. The fastest, most direct way to reduce hunger in the Nation is to improve and expand the current Federal nutrition programs. Sadly, it is difficult to persuade the current administration and the current Congress to fund important child nutrition programs such as the school breakfast and school lunch programs and the summer food program, but numerous groups throughout the Nation are doing their best to make a difference. Project Bread in Massachusetts helps fund nearly 400 food pantries, soup kitchens, food banks and food salvage programs across the State, and also coordinates local efforts to develop effective solutions to reduce hunger. Congress can also do better. The Senate Agriculture Committee approved a bipartisan child nutrition bill last month to strengthen and expand nutrition programs, and it deserves to be enacted into law as soon as possible. A strong job market will also significantly reduce hunger. A major challenge in today's troubled economy is that it has been creating just one job for every three out-of-work Americans. We need an economy that works for everyone, and a job creation plan that enables every American to afford a decent quality of life. That means jobs that pay a living wage. Right now, we are sending the wrong message to low-income workers. We are telling them that hard work does not pay. We are saying that workers who play by the rules deserve little or even nothing in return. Why can't we all agree that no one who works for a living should have to live in poverty, constantly wondering where the next meal is coming from? For too many adults of all ages, the fight against hunger is a constant ongoing struggle. It undermines their productivity, their earning power, and even their health. It keeps their children from concentrating and learning in school. It makes no sense to allow the gap between rich and poor to grow wider. We can not ignore the poorest in our Nation, and all those who need our help the most. National Hunger Awareness Day is our chance to rededicate ourselves in Congress to this cause, and we can't afford to miss it.

Mr. KENNEDY

Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent for the permission of the use of the floor for Matthew Stump, a fellow in our office, during the consideration of this amendment.

Mr. KENNEDY. I thank the Chair.

Mr. KENNEDY

Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I welcome this opportunity to bring to the attention of my colleagues a special event taking place next month, when the National Fire Protection Association, NFPA, headquartered in Quincy, MA, will publish the 50th edition of the National Electrical Code. First published in 1897, the code provides a blueprint for safeguarding schools, hospitals, homes, and workplaces from the potential dangers of electricity. The code is recognized throughout the United States and is used extensively in other nations. In many respects, it is the most widely accepted building construction code in the world. According to Bob Vila, the well-known home improvement personality, the code ``. . . not only promotes best practices, it is also a nearly universal document which helps everyone in the business achieve the safest possible results.'' The wide acceptance of the code as a public safety document is a tribute to the success of the National Fire Protection Association's voluntary consensus process, which is used by the Association to develop many other safety codes and standards as well. The process is accredited by the American National Standards Institute and is the same voluntary consensus process mandated for Federal agencies by Congress in the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995. The National Electrical Code is currently updated every 3 years and is the result of thousands of hours of work by more than 450 representatives of the enforcement community, the construction industry, organized labor, the manufacturing sector, suppliers, and the insurance industry. Before a new edition of the code is published, members of the public are invited to provide input. Upon completion of that process, the document is then voted on for adoption by the entire membership of the Association. By continually updating the code to address new emerging technologies and construction methods, the association has enabled Americans to enjoy an unparalleled level of safety against electrical hazards. I congratulate the association and the many volunteers who have spent so many hours to make the 50th edition of the National Electrical Code a reality. They deserve the Nation's gratitude for their skill and dedication in providing this extraordinary public service.

Mr. KENNEDY

Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, this year marks the 20th anniversary of the Urban Scholars Program of the University of Massachusetts Boston. The program was created to provide academically talented students in urban middle and high schools the skills and motivation to achieve their full potential. In 1984, UMass Boston and the Boston Public Schools formed a partnership that helped the first 15 students and the program has grown increasingly ever since. Today, the program lists hundreds of graduates who have gone on to earn undergraduate and advanced degrees. The Urban Scholars Program is a year-round enterprise featuring rigorous after-school classes, seminars, tutoring and supervised study. In the summer, the program offers a 7-week institute in which students are immersed in science, technology, and humanities courses not offered at their high schools, and many earn college credit for their work. Students and their families make sacrifices to participate, but they work hard, and the results are remarkable. A study showed that participants in the Urban Scholars Program improved attendance and academic achievement. And over the past 20 years, 100 percent of the Urban Scholars have been accepted at colleges across the country. They have an 85 percent college retention rate, compared to the 50 percent national rate. Investing early in these talented young men and women pays off for the students and the entire community. UMass Boston deserves great credit for its commitment to this outstanding program, and I especially commend Adaline Mirabal, the director of the program, and Joan Becker, its administrator. Their skillful work and dedication has transformed the lives of these young students, and has demonstrated the immense possibilities of early intervention in bringing a first-class education within reach of every child.

Mr. KENNEDY

Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, this year thousands of fifth graders across the United States competed in a writing contest on immigration sponsored by the American Immigrant Law Foundation and the American Immigration Lawyers Association. The students responded to the question, ``Why I'm Glad America is a Nation of Immigrants.'' I had the privilege of serving as one of the judges for the competition, and I was impressed with the students' responses. They radiate with pride for the diversity of America and our immigrant heritage. Many students told personal stories of their families and friends and their immigration to the United States. The winner of this year's contest is Audrey Kidwell of Clayton, MO. In her essay, ``The Garden of America,'' she explains how immigrants' new roots become ``entwined'' with the roots of others helping us to ``incorporate their strong points into our ever-growing garden.'' The United States has often been compared to a melting pot or a colorful patchwork quilt, and Audrey's eloquent essay adds a new vision of a garden ``watered with kindness and friendship causing us to grow and to flourish.'' Other students honored for their exceptional writing are Camille Allamel of Indianapolis, Sarah Mesterton-Gibbons of Tallahassee, Daniel Pietryla of Chicago, and Sam Sanson of Bay Village, OH. I congratulate these students on their outstanding achievement. These award-winning essays will be of interest to all of us in the Senate, and I ask that they be printed in the Record. The material follows: The Garden of America (By Audrey Kidwell, Wilson School, Clayton, MO, Grand Prize Winner) Many people have said that America is like a melting pot or stew, but I think our country is more of a garden. In a melting pot, all of the ingredients blend together into mush. When you make stew, it all becomes one flavor and nothing stands out. Try as I might, I can't think of any food that is truly able to be associated with America. But a garden is different. When an immigrant first comes to America, he or she puts out new, young roots into the soil of our heritage. These roots become entwined, almost connected you might say, to other root systems, holding the soil together. With the soil held together, we are saved from erosion. We learn of the ways these people have suffered in their countries, so we know which mistakes not to make. It is good this way because when we learn about other nations, we can incorporate their strong points into our ever-growing garden. For this reason, the sun of freedom always shines over our garden. Even though we are all different, we all originated as seeds. Some of us are violets or mums, some ferns or vines, but none of us are weeds. We are all beautiful. This is wonderful because in many other places, no one accepts differences. In our garden we all help each other because our roots hold the soil together. Our garden is watered with kindness and friendship causing us to grow and to flourish. These things are good because in other places, the soil crumbles; the plants dry up, but not in America. I love America because it has so many good qualities. We offer a home to immigrants so that they can be happy. They, in turn, make our nation stronger and help it to thrive. They pass on new traditions to us and enrich our culture. I can't imagine what our garden would be like without immigrants. It would be similar to a garden with only roses. Roses are nice, but I think variety and diversity is better. We are all lucky and should be thankful to be rooted in the garden of America. America, the Mosaic (By Camille Allamel, International School of Indiana, Indianapolis, IN, Runner-Up) Over time, America has become, A gorgeous mosaic made of precious, living stones. The jade stands for Asian immigrants, Who brought mysterious China Towns and fireworks, Along with sweet and sour chicken. The ruby symbolizes the Hispanics, With their juicy burritos and tacos, Fiestas, mariachis, and pinatas! The sapphire represents the French, Down to Louisiana, Right to Cajun Land, With jambalaya, gumbo, and zydeco. The emerald stone is for Italians, Who have brought pasta and pizza along. Now, the diamond, Who is dedicated to this special group, Forced to make it here, Because of slavery, When finally free, Deciding to stay, They are the African Americans! Let's not forget the native turquoise, Made for the Indians the immigrants have found, Who have introduced and shared this beautiful land That we today call America. There are so many other stones, Too many to name them all, These immigrants who brought their history, Their customs and their ministries, Together create this grand mosaic, Making all these people, United to form America, In a unique melting pot!!! Why I Am Glad That America Is a Nation of Immigrants (By Sarah Mesterton-Gibbons, Home School, Tallahassee, FL, Runner-Up) You might not be able to tell from looking at me, that I come from a family of many immigrants. My friends might think that I look ``American,'' but they don't realize that each part of me reflects the characteristics of my ancestors. For example, I got my blonde hair from my Swedish relatives, my green eyes from my Northern Spanish relatives, my fair skin and freckles from my Irish relatives, my short height from my Puerto Rican relatives, and my facial shape from my Finnish relatives. Immigration is common in my family, and many of my relatives have married people from different countries, faiths and backgrounds. Two of my grandparents and all of my great-grandparents immigrated from different countries, and many of my great-great-grandparents were immigrants, too. My father immigrated here from England. His parents went to England from Ireland. We all have different accents than our looks. And different interests and celebrations. My friends think it's unusual that we celebrate different holidays and eat different foods, but they also find it interesting. We celebrate Christmas on Christmas Eve as they do in Europe, and also Santa Lucia Day and Midsommar as they do in Sweden. We'd much rather eat rice and beans, chapattis, spanikopita, Cornish pasties and ratatouille than typical American dishes. My sister and I have even learned to cook the dishes ourselves. When we listen to music, we listen to everything from Irish jigs, to Swedish polkas, to Spanish sambas to English folk songs. Our house is filled with furniture and articles from all over the world. Our lifestyle reflects our many nationalities. Even our very best friends are from many countries. Even though I look typically American--but am not--I AM a typical American, because we are all immigrants or descendants of immigrants. And that is wonderful, because it means it is easy to find the food, decorations and costumes to celebrate holidays as my ancestors have done. This varied cultural background has enriched my life. The people I love have taught me about their religions, customs, food and celebrations. No matter who I'm with, or what country I'm in, I feel very much at home. Thanks to my Dad, I feel especially at home in England. Being exposed to so many different opinions has made me look at America's problems in new ways. I often find that other countries have handled similar problems in better ways than we have and I hope I'm open-minded enough to learn from them. I would like to convince my country to consider many world views before making decisions. And I hope my fellow immigrants try their very best to do the same. Maybe if we remember that we are all immigrants, then we can continue to make America a better place to live. Why I Am Glad That America Is a Land of Immigrants (By Daniel Pietryla, St. Christina School, Chicago, IL, Runner-Up) Dedicated to my parents, grandparents and to all immigrants who have endured personal hardships for the sake of their children. Leaving their homelands and bravely entering a foreign country with hopes and dreams of freedom, happiness and prosperity. The gift of America, a gift of immigrants!) My ancestors are from Poland, Where life was hard and long, Their future was in a new land, America is where they belong. The dirt floor, wooden shack, Beds of feathers and straw, The privy around back, Was the last thing they saw. They turned and gazed, For one last look, The home where they were raised, Is the memory they took. Over the Atlantic by ship, many hardships were endured, Herbal tea they would sip, their senses were blurred. Days and nights of wondering, Frightened and alone were they, Deep doubts were pondering, Through this long, long way. Two weeks of seasickness, Unsure of their choice, America came in darkness, No one did rejoice. They boarded a train, Never understanding the words, Lightning and rain, Were all that they heard. The train's wheels were squealing, The sudden stop that they felt, Nervous stomachs were feeling, And hearts about to melt. Streetlights and cars Intensifying the fear, And heard from afar, A familiar voice so clear. ``Welcome, Welcome, You're finally here!'' Our senses were numb, They broke into tears. America at last! Everything so new, Letting go of the past, It's a hard thing to do. Grandpa and Grandma, My Mom and her brothers, From Poland to America, Similar stories of others. Son of an immigrant, America, my home, A story so important, Memorialized in poem. Our ancestors from somewhere, So brave and alone, Gave a gift so rare, America, Our Home!

Mr. KENNEDY

Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, on June 4th hundreds of talented, motivated young men and women will meet in Boston to celebrate the 15th Anniversary of City Year. In 1989 the first group of young people completed a year of service to their community, inspiring what would become AmeriCorps. Now, 15 years later, City Year will hold its annual meeting in the city where it began. Since then, thirteen additional cities have welcomed the young idealists in red jackets and Timberland boots who, in their own words, ``are young enough to want to change the world and old enough to do it.'' City Year recruits start each day with ``PT,'' a trademark exercise routine to wake up the mind and spirit to take on the challenges of the day. They move on to challenge the apathy in the communities they serve. They spend each day tackling illiteracy, tutoring, refurbishing buildings, improving access to health care, and changing lives in many other ways. City Year participants also work tirelessly to encourage others to serve, attracting volunteers through Serve-a-thons and special service days that focus community efforts on a particular project. They spread their love of service and highlight local problems that can be solved by working together. ``Cyzygy,'' their annual meeting, is a time when they celebrate service and discuss strategies to improve recruitment, retention and the quality of service. Just as they work to improve communities, they work to improve the way communities address their problems, and engage others in the search for effective solutions. When they launched City Year in the 1980's, Alan Khazei and Michael Brown had a noble vision that spending a year in service to community could become the norm. They foresaw a domestic Peace Corps that could transform lives and rebuild communities. At the time, many thought they were impractical dreamers. Today we know they were practical visionaries and we are all proud to witness the results of their vision. Happy Birthday, City Year!

Mr. KENNEDY

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

Mr. KENNEDY

Mr. KENNEDY. Madam President, I welcome the action of the leadership in taking up the nomination of Dennis Saylor to the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts. I urge the Senate to confirm him. Mr. Saylor has received impressive support from a broad spectrum of leaders of the bar. They are confident of his ability, his good judgment, and his fairness. I am confident he will be a distinguished member of the court. Mr. Saylor has past experience in the executive branch. I am confident he understands the importance of the independence of the judicial branch. He is currently a partner at the highly respected law firm of Goodwin Procter in Boston, where he joined as an associate after graduating from Harvard Law School in 1981. He later served as an assistant U.S. attorney in Boston. From 1990 to 1993, he served as the chief of staff of the Assistant Attorney General, Robert Mueller, in the criminal division of the Department of Justice, providing litigation and policy advice, and served as a liaison with Congress and outside organizations. He returned to Goodwin Procter as a partner in the litigation department and currently specializes in white-collar criminal defense cases and other complex legal issues involving individuals and corporations. His impressive background, legal expertise, and experience make him well qualified for this position and inspire confidence that he will be a judge in which Massachusetts will take pride. The Federal district supreme court in Massachusetts is one of the most efficient and effective district courts in the country, and its judges are highly regarded and respected. It dispenses justice fairly and takes seriously its role as part of an independent branch of our government. I am sure Mr. Saylor will contribute to the distinguished work of this court. I urge the Senate to approve his nomination. Madam President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. KENNEDY

Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, today I am proud to pay tribute to the late Charles F. Albaugh, a Vietnam era veteran from Fairhaven, MA. Mr. Albaugh passed away on April 14, 2002, but his love of his country continues to be an inspiration in southeastern Massachusetts. Shortly after September 11, 2001, Mr. Albaugh was determined to express the emotions we all shared on that terrible day. Although confined to a wheelchair, he went to the interstate overpass running through his town of Fairhaven, MA, and placed American flags on it as a constant reminder to the thousands who passed by each day of the strength and unity of the American people. Despite his physical limitations, he and his wife Mary Ann tended those flags every day on the Main Street overpass, no matter the weather. At its peak, this man's monument totaled 175 flags. And each night at dusk, he returned to the overpass with a lit votive candle to pray for the victims of 9/11. His presence was an inspiration to the community and soon drew volunteers to help maintain the flags. Although Charles Albaugh has left us, his inspiration will be remembered permanently on the Main Street overpass in Fairhaven. On Memorial Day this year, a flagpole and plaque will be dedicated to his memory and to the patriotism and love of country we all share. A light will shine on the flag each night to remind us of Charles Albaugh's inspiration and dedication, and of the candle he lit in prayer each evening on that overpass. I am pleased to join with those honoring Charles Albaugh and I know that my colleagues in the Senate join in commending their efforts to mark the difference he made in Southeastern Massachusetts.

Mr. KENNEDY

Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, today, Senator DeWine and I are introducing legislation to give the Food and Drug Administration broad authority to regulate tobacco products for the protection of the public health. We cannot in good conscience allow the Federal agency most responsible for protecting the public health to remain powerless to deal with the enormous risks of tobacco, the most deadly of all consumer products. This legislation is a fair and balanced approach to FDA regulation. It creates a new section in FDA jurisdiction for the regulation of tobacco products, with standards that allow for consideration of the unique issues raised by tobacco use. It is sensitive to the concerns of tobacco farmers, small businesses, and nicotine-dependent smokers. But, it clearly gives FDA the authority it needs in order to prevent youth smoking and to reduce addiction to this highly lethal product. The stakes are vast. Five thousand children have their first cigarette every day, and two thousand of them become daily smokers. Nearly a thousand of them will die prematurely from tobacco-induced diseases. Smoking is the number one preventable cause of death in the Nation today. Cigarettes kill well over 400,000 Americans each year. That is more lives lost than from automobile accidents, alcohol abuse, illegal drugs, AIDS, murder, suicide, and fires combined. Our response to a public health problem of this magnitude must consist of more than half-way measures. We must deal firmly with tobacco company marketing practices that target children and mislead the public. The Food and Drug Administration needs broad authority to regulate the sale, distribution, and advertising of cigarettes and smokeless tobacco. The tobacco industry currently spends over $9 billion a year to promote its products. Much of that money is spent in ways designed to tempt children to start smoking, before they are mature enough to appreciate the enormity of the health risk. The industry knows that more than 90 percent of smokers begin as children and are addicted by the time they reach adulthood. Documents obtained from tobacco companies prove, in the companies' own words, the magnitude of the industry's efforts to trap children into dependency on their deadly product. Recent studies by the Institute of Medicine and the Centers for Disease Control show the substantial role of industry advertising in decisions by young people to use tobacco products. If we are serious about reducing youth smoking, FDA must have the power to prevent industry advertising designed to appeal to children wherever it will be seen by children. This legislation will give FDA the ability to stop tobacco advertising which glamorizes smoking from appearing where it will be seen by significant numbers of children. It grants FDA full authority to regulate tobacco advertising ``consistent with and to the full extent permitted by the First Amendment.'' FDA authority must also extend to the sale of tobacco products. Nearly every State makes it illegal to sell cigarettes to children under 18, but surveys show that those laws are rarely enforced and frequently violated. FDA must have the power to limit the sale of cigarettes to face-to-face transactions in which the age of the purchaser can be verified by identification. This means an end to self- service displays and vending machine sales. There must also be serious enforcement efforts with real penalties for those caught selling tobacco products to children. This is the only way to ensure that children under 18 are not able to buy cigarettes. The FDA conducted the longest rulemaking proceeding in its history, studying which regulations would most effectively reduce the number of children who smoke. Seven hundred thousand public comments were received in the course of that rulemaking. At the conclusion of its proceeding, the Agency promulgated rules on the manner in which cigarettes are advertised and sold. Due to litigation, most of those regulations were never implemented. If we are serious about curbing youth smoking as much as possible, as soon as possible; it makes no sense to require FDA to reinvent the wheel by conducting a new multi- year rulemaking process on the same issues. This legislation will give the youth access and advertising restrictions already developed by FDA the immediate force of law, as if they had been issued under the new statute. The legislation also provides for stronger warnings on all cigarette and smokeless tobacco packages, and in all print advertisements. These warnings will be more explicit in their description of the medical problems which can result from tobacco use. The FDA is given the authority to change the text of these warning labels periodically, to keep their impact strong. Nicotine in cigarettes is highly addictive. Medical experts say that it is as addictive as heroin or cocaine. Yet for decades, tobacco companies have vehemently denied the addictiveness of their products. No one can forget the parade of tobacco executives who testified under oath before Congress that smoking cigarettes is not addictive. Overwhelming evidence in industry documents obtained through the discovery process proves that the companies not only knew of this addictiveness for decades, but actually relied on it as the basis for their marketing strategy. As we now know, cigarette manufacturers chemically manipulated the nicotine in their products to make it even more addictive. The tobacco industry has a long, dishonorable history of providing misleading information about the health consequences of smoking. These companies have repeatedly sought to characterize their products as far less hazardous than they are. They made minor innovations in product design seem far more significant for the health of the user than they actually were. It is essential that FDA have clear and unambiguous authority to prevent such misrepresentations in the future. The largest disinformation campaign in the history of the corporate world must end. Given the addictiveness of tobacco products, it is essential that the FDA regulate them for the protection of the public health. Over forty million Americans are currently addicted to cigarettes. No responsible public health official believes that cigarettes should be banned. A ban would leave forty million people without a way to satisfy their drug dependency. FDA should be able to take the necessary steps to help addicted smokers overcome their addiction, and to make the product less toxic for smokers who are unable or unwilling to stop. To do so, FDA must have the authority to reduce or remove hazardous ingredients from cigarettes, to the extent that it becomes scientifically feasible. The inherent risk in smoking should not be unnecessarily compounded. Recent statements by several tobacco companies make clear that they plan to develop what they characterize as ``reduced risk'' cigarettes. This legislation will require manufacturers to submit such ``reduced risk'' products to the FDA for analysis before they can be marketed. No health-related claims will be permitted until they have been verified to the FDA's satisfaction. These safeguards are essential to prevent deceptive industry marketing campaigns, which could lull the public into a false sense of health safety. Smoking is the number one preventable cause of death in America. Congress must vest FDA not only with the responsibility for regulating tobacco products, but with full authority to do the job effectively. This legislation will give the FDA the legal authority it needs--to reduce youth smoking by preventing tobacco advertising which targets children--to prevent the sale of tobacco products to minors--to help smokers overcome their addiction--to make tobacco products less toxic for those who continue to use them--and to prevent the tobacco industry from misleading the public about the dangers of smoking. We believe that there is an excellent chance of enacting this bill this year. The interest of tobacco-state members in passing a tobacco farmers' quota buyout provides a golden opportunity. By joining a strong FDA bill with relief for tobacco farmers, we can assemble a broad, bipartisan coalition to accomplish both of these goals during this session. This approach is supported by the public health community and by farmers' organizations. Most importantly, it is the right thing to do for America's children.

Mr. KENNEDY

Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, today, Senator DeWine and I are introducing legislation to give the Food and Drug Administration broad authority to regulate tobacco products for the protection of the public health. We cannot in good conscience allow the Federal agency most responsible for protecting the public health to remain powerless to deal with the enormous risks of tobacco, the most deadly of all consumer products. This legislation is a fair and balanced approach to FDA regulation. It creates a new section in FDA jurisdiction for the regulation of tobacco products, with standards that allow for consideration of the unique issues raised by tobacco use. It is sensitive to the concerns of tobacco farmers, small businesses, and nicotine-dependent smokers. But, it clearly gives FDA the authority it needs in order to prevent youth smoking and to reduce addiction to this highly lethal product. The stakes are vast. Five thousand children have their first cigarette every day, and two thousand of them become daily smokers. Nearly a thousand of them will die prematurely from tobacco-induced diseases. Smoking is the number one preventable cause of death in the Nation today. Cigarettes kill well over 400,000 Americans each year. That is more lives lost than from automobile accidents, alcohol abuse, illegal drugs, AIDS, murder, suicide, and fires combined. Our response to a public health problem of this magnitude must consist of more than half-way measures. We must deal firmly with tobacco company marketing practices that target children and mislead the public. The Food and Drug Administration needs broad authority to regulate the sale, distribution, and advertising of cigarettes and smokeless tobacco. The tobacco industry currently spends over $9 billion a year to promote its products. Much of that money is spent in ways designed to tempt children to start smoking, before they are mature enough to appreciate the enormity of the health risk. The industry knows that more than 90 percent of smokers begin as children and are addicted by the time they reach adulthood. Documents obtained from tobacco companies prove, in the companies' own words, the magnitude of the industry's efforts to trap children into dependency on their deadly product. Recent studies by the Institute of Medicine and the Centers for Disease Control show the substantial role of industry advertising in decisions by young people to use tobacco products. If we are serious about reducing youth smoking, FDA must have the power to prevent industry advertising designed to appeal to children wherever it will be seen by children. This legislation will give FDA the ability to stop tobacco advertising which glamorizes smoking from appearing where it will be seen by significant numbers of children. It grants FDA full authority to regulate tobacco advertising ``consistent with and to the full extent permitted by the First Amendment.'' FDA authority must also extend to the sale of tobacco products. Nearly every State makes it illegal to sell cigarettes to children under 18, but surveys show that those laws are rarely enforced and frequently violated. FDA must have the power to limit the sale of cigarettes to face-to-face transactions in which the age of the purchaser can be verified by identification. This means an end to self- service displays and vending machine sales. There must also be serious enforcement efforts with real penalties for those caught selling tobacco products to children. This is the only way to ensure that children under 18 are not able to buy cigarettes. The FDA conducted the longest rulemaking proceeding in its history, studying which regulations would most effectively reduce the number of children who smoke. Seven hundred thousand public comments were received in the course of that rulemaking. At the conclusion of its proceeding, the Agency promulgated rules on the manner in which cigarettes are advertised and sold. Due to litigation, most of those regulations were never implemented. If we are serious about curbing youth smoking as much as possible, as soon as possible; it makes no sense to require FDA to reinvent the wheel by conducting a new multi- year rulemaking process on the same issues. This legislation will give the youth access and advertising restrictions already developed by FDA the immediate force of law, as if they had been issued under the new statute. The legislation also provides for stronger warnings on all cigarette and smokeless tobacco packages, and in all print advertisements. These warnings will be more explicit in their description of the medical problems which can result from tobacco use. The FDA is given the authority to change the text of these warning labels periodically, to keep their impact strong. Nicotine in cigarettes is highly addictive. Medical experts say that it is as addictive as heroin or cocaine. Yet for decades, tobacco companies have vehemently denied the addictiveness of their products. No one can forget the parade of tobacco executives who testified under oath before Congress that smoking cigarettes is not addictive. Overwhelming evidence in industry documents obtained through the discovery process proves that the companies not only knew of this addictiveness for decades, but actually relied on it as the basis for their marketing strategy. As we now know, cigarette manufacturers chemically manipulated the nicotine in their products to make it even more addictive. The tobacco industry has a long, dishonorable history of providing misleading information about the health consequences of smoking. These companies have repeatedly sought to characterize their products as far less hazardous than they are. They made minor innovations in product design seem far more significant for the health of the user than they actually were. It is essential that FDA have clear and unambiguous authority to prevent such misrepresentations in the future. The largest disinformation campaign in the history of the corporate world must end. Given the addictiveness of tobacco products, it is essential that the FDA regulate them for the protection of the public health. Over forty million Americans are currently addicted to cigarettes. No responsible public health official believes that cigarettes should be banned. A ban would leave forty million people without a way to satisfy their drug dependency. FDA should be able to take the necessary steps to help addicted smokers overcome their addiction, and to make the product less toxic for smokers who are unable or unwilling to stop. To do so, FDA must have the authority to reduce or remove hazardous ingredients from cigarettes, to the extent that it becomes scientifically feasible. The inherent risk in smoking should not be unnecessarily compounded. Recent statements by several tobacco companies make clear that they plan to develop what they characterize as ``reduced risk'' cigarettes. This legislation will require manufacturers to submit such ``reduced risk'' products to the FDA for analysis before they can be marketed. No health-related claims will be permitted until they have been verified to the FDA's satisfaction. These safeguards are essential to prevent deceptive industry marketing campaigns, which could lull the public into a false sense of health safety. Smoking is the number one preventable cause of death in America. Congress must vest FDA not only with the responsibility for regulating tobacco products, but with full authority to do the job effectively. This legislation will give the FDA the legal authority it needs--to reduce youth smoking by preventing tobacco advertising which targets children--to prevent the sale of tobacco products to minors--to help smokers overcome their addiction--to make tobacco products less toxic for those who continue to use them--and to prevent the tobacco industry from misleading the public about the dangers of smoking. We believe that there is an excellent chance of enacting this bill this year. The interest of tobacco-state members in passing a tobacco farmers' quota buyout provides a golden opportunity. By joining a strong FDA bill with relief for tobacco farmers, we can assemble a broad, bipartisan coalition to accomplish both of these goals during this session. This approach is supported by the public health community and by farmers' organizations. Most importantly, it is the right thing to do for America's children.

Mr. KENNEDY

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

Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I strongly support the Project Bioshield Act. It is an essential part of our Nation's ability to respond effectively to the threat of terrorist attacks that use biological or chemical weapons. I commend Senators Gregg, Frist, Reed, and other members of our HELP Committee for their efficient and effective bipartisan work on this bill, and I thank Senator Levin for his expertise and thoughtful considerations. I also commend our colleagues on the Appropriations Committee, and especially the chairman, Senator Stevens, and the ranking member, Senator Byrd, for already providing the funding that Project Bioshield needs to be effective. Their leadership is essential in protecting the Nation. We have worked closely, too, with Secretary Tommy Thompson and CMS Administrator Mark McClellan on this important legislation. They deserve great credit for their leadership as well. The Project Bioshield Act is an important addition to the Public Health Security and Bioterrorism Preparedness and Response Act that we passed 2 years ago. Since that major legislation was enacted, we have seen new examples of the vicious impact of terrorism around the world. The brutal pictures from the appalling bomb attack in Madrid and the horrifying images of other terror attacks around the world are savage reminders that we must never let down our guard. The will to protect the Nation from terrorism is not enough. We must also provide the resources and the means. Bioshield is a major step toward giving the Nation's health care professionals the support they need to respond to attacks of biological, chemical, and nuclear weapons. A terrorist armed with a vial of a deadly pathogen could inflict pain and death on a vast scale. For too many of the weapons we face, our defenses are inadequate. The Nation needs better vaccines and drugs to fight ancient enemies such as smallpox or new plagues launched by genetically modified disease bacteria. The members of our HELP Committee have worked together to help America's skilled physicians and scientists develop the vaccines, the diagnostic tests, and treatments needed to meet these disease challenges. Clearly, new legislation is needed to improve America's defensive arsenal against these threats. The current bill will help guide the talents of America's medical researchers and biotechnology industry in building the stronger medical defenses we need to keep families safe from bioterrorism. I am proud that Boston is, once again, leading the way in developing pioneering new biodefense countermeasures. We have taken steps to expedite the discovery of new vaccines and cures needed to protect the Nation. This chart is a statement about this overall legislation: Bioshield will accelerate the development of new vaccines, treatments and diagnostics to keep America safe from biological, chemical and radiological weapons. The fact remains that there is little commercial interest in the development of countermeasures, because they will only be used in the event of some kind of assault or attack on the United States. Nonetheless, we need to develop these vaccines and the various treatments for treating these kinds of dangers because we may very well face them. If we are going to be serious about dealing with biodefense and bioterrorism, this is a very important part of the whole process. Harvard Medical School has worked with other academic centers to create a New England Regional Center for Excellence for Biodefense. The new center will be the incubator for innovative ideas for treatments of the future. The Boston University Medical Center is building a major new laboratory to enable these pioneering new treatments be tested in a safe and secure research facility. At the new laboratory, researchers from across America will be able to help turn promising new ideas into treatments to help patients. NIH has recognized the excellence of the center and the laboratory by making substantial investments in their development. The Project Bioshield will help complete this pipeline of discovery by harnessing the creativity and the skill of the flourishing biotechnology industry. The legislation will ensure companies know that investing in new responses for bioterrorist attacks is a risk worth taking. The bill before the Senate guarantees that any company which develops a successful new product for these threats will find a willing buyer in the Federal Government. With that guarantee, companies will make the investments needed to prepare for any attack. Without that guarantee, they will not. It is as simple as that. The act will accomplish several other important goals. It will streamline and accelerate the research at NIH on bioterrorism and other weapons of mass destruction. The most effective weapons in the war against biological and chemical attacks are often the skills of our health professionals and the ingenuity of our scientists. The new flexibility for NIH under this legislation will help use these extraordinary talents in the search for new responses. The act will also encourage the biotechnology, pharmaceutical, and medical device industries to use their creativity to develop countermeasures against the dangerous pathogens and chemical or radioactive agents. In addition, it authorizes the Food and Drug Administration to allow the emergency use of unapproved medicines when needed to deal with such attacks. The authorization for the emergency use of unapproved products also includes strong provisions on informed consent for patients and limits the scope of products that can qualify for emergency authorization. The FDA must carefully monitor adverse reactions to unapproved products and must require the recordkeeping and studies necessary to assure the safest possible use of these products. The enactment of the Project BioShield Act is a significant accomplishment, but there is much more work to be done. This is a brief outline of what this legislation is all about. It establishes the $5.6 billion fund as a guaranteed market for the new biodefense products, and it ensures that the Departments of Homeland Security and HHS set priorities in developing medicines for the threats that America faces. So you combine intelligence about the nature of the threat with expertise from HHS to set the priorities in developing medicines. It gives NIH, the gold standard in terms of research throughout the world, much needed flexibility to ensure promising research areas can advance quickly. Finally, it allows the FDA to authorize the emergency use of medicines under the tightly controlled conditions outlined in this legislation. The most sophisticated disease monitoring system will be of little use if public health agencies are so starved of funds that they cannot keep our communities safe. I want to take a few moments of the Senate's time to look at the progress for bioterror preparedness. This is taken from a GAO study from February 10 of this year. It says: No State reported meeting what they call the third benchmark, a plan for the hospitals in the State to respond to an epidemic involving at least 500 patients. This is extraordinary. On the one hand, dealing with bioterrorism we have to be able to detect and contain it, and then we have to be able to treat people. That is where BioShield can be enormously effective. But if we are going to be able to contain and treat a bioterror attack, we must be able to deal with it in our medical centers. What we are finding out now, as we review our preparedness, is that we are not making the progress that is absolutely essential to protect communities. Report after report shows that we are falling short in preparing our defenses against the threat of bioterrorism. The GAO conducted a detailed analysis of the readiness of hospitals for such attacks. How many communities do you think have plans--just plans to be able to treat a surge of 500 additional patients in a terrorism emergency? Would you say 75 percent? 50 percent? Only 25 percent? No, you would be wrong. The correct answer is none. Zero! Not a single community in the GAO survey had a plan to treat an additional 500 patients. That is basic--and none of the communities in the GAO survey could do it. That is a situation that has to be remedied. An expert panel assembled by the Trust for America's Health conducted an analysis of the readiness for bioterrorism of public health agencies in all 50 States. They examined 10 key indicators of readiness, such as adequate laboratory capacity to respond to bioterrorism emergencies. How many States do you think were fully prepared? The answer, again, shockingly, is none. This chart shows the different grades of States in bioterror preparedness. The highest we find is 7 out of 10. That would be the green. That includes California, Florida, Tennessee, and Maryland. But if you look at most of this chart you will see it is red or pink, which means they have only 2 or 3 of the 10 required actions necessary to be successful in dealing with bioterrorism. You need to have laboratories, hospital capacity and, as mentioned before in Bioshield, the basic medicines to treat the victims. The Institute of Medicine in 2003 found that America's health agencies have ``vulnerable and outdated health information systems and technologies, an insufficient and inadequately trained public health workforce, antiquated laboratory capacity, a lack of realtime surveillance in epidemiological systems, an ineffective and fragmented communications network, incomplete domestic preparedness and emergency response capabilities, and communities without access to essential public health services.'' That is really the challenge. If we talk about homeland security, this is a key aspect in ensuring homeland security. It is a challenge we have to address. That puts the Project BioShield Act in an ominous perspective. It is a large step in the right direction, but without a commitment to adequately fund our hospitals and our health agencies, genuine preparedness and effective homeland security will still be far from what is needed. I urge my colleagues in approving this important bipartisan legislation to also do what it takes to see that our hospitals and health agencies have the resources they need to use the new tools that BioShield gives them. We don't know how much time we have, but we do know we have to get the job done and do it as quickly as we can. Mr. President, I want to take a moment to thank a number of our colleagues' staffs who have worked tirelessly in this endeavor over the period of these last 2 years. This has been an enormous effort on the part of many of them. They have done an extraordinary job working this through. The passage of the BioShield legislation owes much to the hard work and skill of dedicated staff members on both sides of the aisle in the Senate and the House of Representatives, and in the administration too. I would like to take a moment to thank the effective and skillful work of Senator Gregg's staff, particularly Vince Ventimiglia and Steve Irizarry. Their expertise was helpful in so many ways. I also want to thank Craig Burton of Senator Frist's staff for his effective work on the legislation. Our Republican colleagues on the House Commerce and Homeland Security committees were ably assisted by Tom DiLenge and Nandan Kenkeremath. John Ford worked tirelessly on behalf of the many Democratic Members with an interest in this legislation. I also commend many senior staff in the Department of Health and Human Services for their work in seeing this important legislation enacted. We owe particular thanks to Stewart Simonsen, the Assistant Secretary for Public Health Preparedness, as well as Raissa Downs, Ken Bernard and Scott Whitaker from the Office of the Secretary, and Amit Sachdev of the FDA. Staff members from many Democratic Senators made numerous helpful contributions to the success of this legislation. I would like to thank Peter Levine and Gary Leeling from Senator Levin's staff, as well as Lisa German from Senator Reed's staff. I would also like to thank my health staff, particularly David Nexon, David Bowen, David Dorsey and Paul Kim for their excellent work on this legislation. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. KENNEDY. I agree with the Senator from Michigan and the Senator from New Hampshire that that is my understanding of the provision. However, it is also my understanding that the primary intent of the Bioshield program is to accelerate the development of new products rather than providing an additional funding source to pay for products developed prior to the enactment of the legislation. special reserve fund

Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I commend the leadership of our distinguished chairman in bringing the Bioshield legislation to the Senate floor. I am optimistic that our colleagues will approve this urgently needed legislation. I would like to clarify with the chairman the intent behind one of the key provisions in the legislation. Would the chairman agree that as we have considered this legislation during our bipartisan and bicameral negotiations, it has been clear that the congressional intent is for the Bioshield special reserve fund to be one option for the Secretary with respect to procuring countermeasures against chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear agents. A second option is ordinary appropriations for the stockpile outside of the special reserve fund. It is clear though that we expect that the Secretary will endeavor not to use the Bioshield special reserve fund as a substitute for the commercial market in procuring such countermeasures.

Mr. KENNEDY

Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Elizabeth Prescott, a fellow in my office, be granted the privilege of the floor during consideration of this legislation.

Mr. KENNEDY

Mr. KENNEDY. It is report language. All I want to do is have the same kind of courtesies. If I could ask, then, at least it be considered after the floor managers have an opportunity to review the amendment. If there is an objection, that would be satisfactory with me. But it is relevant. Otherwise, I will insist on the reading of the amendment.

Mr. KENNEDY. Reserving the right to object, and I will not object, I ask consent my amendment be in order, as well.

Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that my amendment to this legislation be printed at the appropriate place at the end of the discussion on this legislation here today.

Mr. KENNEDY. I was waiting for my time. You were next to offer your amendment and were going to take 90 minutes. I was prepared to remain here and, hopefully, we are alternating amendments. This is directly germane. My good friend from New Mexico offered his amendment and asked for consent to do it. I was trying to get the same courtesies. I am glad to play by whatever rules the Senator wants to play by, but if we are waiting our turn to get here and someone asks consent to be able to advance their amendment, all I am asking is to get the same kind of consideration. That is the only thing.

Mr. KENNEDY. I ask for the same privilege.

Mr. KENNEDY. I withdraw my request, in courtesy to my friend from New Mexico. I ask consent that I be recognized to offer an amendment at the conclusion of the Senator from Mississippi and the Senator----

Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, and I will not object, I want the Record to reflect we were prepared to go ahead with our amendment this evening for debate and discussion. I understood the Senator from New Mexico had an amendment. We were here at 3:30 or so, 4 o'clock. I was reminded by our ranking member about the desire to move ahead on the Defense authorization bill, so I want to be sure the ranking member and the floor manager of the bill, my friend and colleague, knows we are here ready to go with an amendment. It is an amendment of very significant importance about the Iraq policy. We were prepared to debate that amendment this evening and have discussion about this matter. I want to say, I certainly want to cooperate with the floor manager. We are all looking forward to the hearing tomorrow morning at 8:30, when we will have General Abizaid and General Sanchez, and others-- General Miller--who are going to be there, which will necessitate my attendance. I want to cooperate in every way, and will certainly, but I do want to indicate many of us who feel strongly about this issue and the importance of it were prepared to deal with this through the evening time. But it is evidently the wish of the floor manager to bring us into morning business. I would like to ask if I cannot at least have my amendment pending after the Senator from--as I understand, the Senator from New Mexico had intended to offer an amendment. As the floor managers remember, I tried to follow that Senator, considering the fact we had the Lott amendment, and then the Domenici amendment, that we might have an amendment from over on this side. I want to try to work it out, but I do want to try to at least find out if we can get in the queue on this issue so we can notify our Members. I am inquiring from the manager if we cannot at least get the amendment pending after the disposition of the amendment of the Senator from New Mexico, before we go into morning business.

Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I will not object, although it is perfectly satisfactory with the Senator from New Jersey for us to move ahead in the way I have outlined here, but if the chairman, the Senator from Virginia, wants to proceed in that way, it is obviously his right to do so. I am going to ask at least that my amendment get sent to the desk, not that it be in order but that it be sent to the desk prior to the time we go into morning business, if that is agreeable with the Senator, so it can be printed in the Record.