Ted Kennedy

Mr. KENNEDY

Mr. KENNEDY. Also, as our colleagues know, the Senate bill reauthorizing the Elementary and Secondary Education Act provided that bilingual funds would be allocated under the current competitive program structure until the appropriation reaches $700 million. Even the authorized trigger of $700 million is not sufficient, however, to provide adequate level of support and services for all students with limited English proficiency. Over the past decade, the enrollment of these children in the nation's schools has grown at a dramatic rate--by 104 percent since 1989. More than half of all school teachers have LEP students in their classroom, and yet only one-third of these teachers have received sufficient training to serve these students. For these reasons, the Senate passed the Lincoln-Kennedy amendment to the Senate version of H.R. 1, placing Title III on a path toward full funding over 7 years by authorizing $2.8 billion to adequately serve all students. We should work to increase funding for bilingual education to at least $700 million for 2002 to provide 1.1 million limited English proficient students with good instruction, quality programs, and well-qualified teachers. A minimum of $700 million is a needed start toward ensuring that schools can provide high quality instruction for these students, and the support that teachers need to do well to meet this goal. Under the funding level included in the Senate bill, we intend the funds to be allocated under the current competitive program structure, as provided for in the Senate version of H.R. 1.

Mr. KENNEDY. As the chairman knows, if we are to eliminate these racial and ethnic disparities, we must gain a greater understanding of what causes pregnancy-related illness and death. I find it very troubling that even though more women in the United States are getting prenatal care now than ever before, the number of maternal deaths and preterm deliveries has not declined in the past 25 years.

Mr. KENNEDY

Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, in a meeting today with America's Ambassador to Ireland, Richard Egan, the Ambassador gave me a poem written by an 11-year-old from Northern Ireland. The poem addresses the horrendous attack on our Nation on September 11 and the shared fears of the American and Irish people. It is moving and eloquent tribute to the innocent victims of these atrocities, and I commend it to my colleagues. I ask unanimous consent that the poem be printed in the Record.

Mr. KENNEDY

Mr. KENNEDY. Would the Senator be kind enough to yield 1 minute to the Senator from Massachusetts in opposition to the Gregg amendment.

Mr. KENNEDY. I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. KENNEDY

Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, it is a privilege to join Senators Brownback, Cantwell, Collins, Edwards, Hagel, Reid, and Ensign in introducing legislation to strengthen the security of our borders and enhance our ability to deter potential terrorists. There is an urgent need to improve intelligence and technology capabilities, enhance the ability to screen individuals before they arrive at our borders, and improve the monitoring of foreign nationals already within the United States. In strengthening the security of our borders, we must also safeguard the unobstructed entry of the more than 31 million persons who enter the U.S. legally each year as visitors, students, and temporary workers. Many of them cross the Canadian and Mexican borders to conduct daily business or visit close family members. We must also live up to our history and heritage as a Nation of immigrants. Immigration is essential to who we are as Americans. Continued immigration is part of our national well-being, our identity as a Nation, and our strength in today's world. In defending the Nation, we are also defending the fundamental constitutional principles that have made America strong in the past and will make us even stronger in the future. Our action must strike a careful balance between protecting civil liberties and providing the means for law enforcement to identify, apprehend and detain potential terrorist. It makes no sense to enact reforms that severely limit immigration into the United States. ``Fortress America,'' even if it could be achieved, is an inadequate and ineffective response to the terrorist threat. A major goal of this legislation is to improve coordination and information-sharing by the Department of State, the Immigration and Naturalization Service, and law enforcement and intelligence agencies. It will require the Department of State and the INS to work with the Office of Homeland Security and the recently formed Foreign Terrorist Tracking Task Force to submit and implement a plan to improve their access to critical security information. It will give those responsible for screening visa applicants and persons entering the U.S. the tools they need to make informed decisions. We must provide enforcement personnel at our ports of entry with greater resources and technology. These men and women are a primary defense in the battle against terrorism. This legislation will see that they receive adequate pay, can hire necessary support staff, and are well-trained to identify individuals who pose a security threat. The anti-terrorism bill recently passed by the Senate addressed the need for machine-readable passports, but it did not focus on machine- readable visas, a necessary part of our efforts to improve border security. This legislation allows the Department of State to raise fees through the use of machine-readable visas and use the funds collected from those fees to improve technology at our ports of entry. We must do more to improve our ability to screen individuals along our entire North American perimeter. This legislation directs the Department of State and the INS to work with the Office of Homeland Security and the Foreign Terrorist Tracking Task Force to strengthen our ability to screen individuals at the Perimeter before they reach our continent. We can work with Canada and Mexico to coordinate these efforts. We must also strengthen our ability to monitor foreign nationals in the United States. In 1996, Congress enacted legislation mandating the development of an automated entry/exit control system to record the entry of every non-citizen arriving in the U.S., and to match it with the record of departure. Although technology is currently available for such a system, it has not been implemented because of the high costs involved. Our legislation builds on the anti-terrorism bill and provides greater direction to the INS for implementing the entry/exit system. We must improve the ability of foreign service officers to detect and intercept potential terrorists before they arrive in the U.S. Most foreign nationals who travel here must apply for visas at American consulates overseas. Traditionally, consular officers have focused on interviewing applicants to determine whether they are likely to violate their visa status. Although this review is important, consular officers must also be trained specifically to screen for security threats. We must require all airlines to electronically transmit passenger lists to destination airports in the United States, so that once the planes have landed, law enforcement authorities can intercept passengers who are on federal lookout lists. United States airlines already do this, but some foreign airlines do not. Our legislation requires all airlines to transmit passenger manifest information prior to the arrival of flight in the U.S. In 1996, Congress established a program to collect information on non-immigrant foreign students and participants in exchange programs. Although a pilot phase of this program ended in 1999, a permanent system has not yet been implemented. Congress passed provisions in the anti-terrorism bill for the quick and effective implementation of this system by 2003, but gaps still exist. This legislation will increase the data collected by the monitoring to include the date of entry, the port of entry, the date of school enrollment, and the date the student leaves the school. It requires the Department of State and INS to monitor students who have been given visas, and to notify schools of their entry. It also requires a school to notify the INS if a student does not actually report to the school. If institutions fail to comply with these and other requirements, they should lose their ability to admit foreign students. INS regulations provide for regular reviews of over 26,000 educational institutions that are authorized to enroll foreign students. However, inspections have been sporadic in recent years. This legislation will require INS to monitor institutions on a regular basis. As we work to implement stronger tracking systems, we must also remember that the vast majority of foreign visitors, students, and workers who overstay their visas are not criminals or terrorists. It would be wrong and unfair, without additional information, to stigmatize them. This legislation will also help restrict visas to foreign nationals from countries that the Department of State has determined are sponsors of terrorism. It precludes visas to individuals from countries that sponsor terrorism, unless specific steps are taken to ensure the person is not a security threat. We must be able to retain highly skilled immigration inspectors. Our legislation will provide incentives to immigration inspectors by providing them with the same benefits as other law enforcement personnel. We must fully implement the use of biometric border crossing cards and allow sufficient time for individuals to obtain these cards. Many of these cards are already in use, but INS does not have the necessary equipment to read the cards. This legislation appropriates needed funds to enable the INS to purchase the machines, and it extends the deadline for individuals crossing the border to acquire the cards. When planes land at our airports, inspectors are under significant time constraints to clear the planes and ensure the safety of all departing passengers. Our legislation removes the existing 45 minute deadline, providing inspectors with adequate time to clear and secure aircraft. The Senate took significant steps last week to improve immigration security by passing the anti-terrorism bill, but further action is needed. This legislation will strengthen the security of our borders and enhance our ability to prevent future terrorist attacks, while also reaffirming our tradition as a Nation of immigrants. I strongly urge my colleagues to support it.

Mr. KENNEDY

Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, it is a privilege to join Senators Brownback, Cantwell, Collins, Edwards, Hagel, Reid, and Ensign in introducing legislation to strengthen the security of our borders and enhance our ability to deter potential terrorists. There is an urgent need to improve intelligence and technology capabilities, enhance the ability to screen individuals before they arrive at our borders, and improve the monitoring of foreign nationals already within the United States. In strengthening the security of our borders, we must also safeguard the unobstructed entry of the more than 31 million persons who enter the U.S. legally each year as visitors, students, and temporary workers. Many of them cross the Canadian and Mexican borders to conduct daily business or visit close family members. We must also live up to our history and heritage as a Nation of immigrants. Immigration is essential to who we are as Americans. Continued immigration is part of our national well-being, our identity as a Nation, and our strength in today's world. In defending the Nation, we are also defending the fundamental constitutional principles that have made America strong in the past and will make us even stronger in the future. Our action must strike a careful balance between protecting civil liberties and providing the means for law enforcement to identify, apprehend and detain potential terrorist. It makes no sense to enact reforms that severely limit immigration into the United States. ``Fortress America,'' even if it could be achieved, is an inadequate and ineffective response to the terrorist threat. A major goal of this legislation is to improve coordination and information-sharing by the Department of State, the Immigration and Naturalization Service, and law enforcement and intelligence agencies. It will require the Department of State and the INS to work with the Office of Homeland Security and the recently formed Foreign Terrorist Tracking Task Force to submit and implement a plan to improve their access to critical security information. It will give those responsible for screening visa applicants and persons entering the U.S. the tools they need to make informed decisions. We must provide enforcement personnel at our ports of entry with greater resources and technology. These men and women are a primary defense in the battle against terrorism. This legislation will see that they receive adequate pay, can hire necessary support staff, and are well-trained to identify individuals who pose a security threat. The anti-terrorism bill recently passed by the Senate addressed the need for machine-readable passports, but it did not focus on machine- readable visas, a necessary part of our efforts to improve border security. This legislation allows the Department of State to raise fees through the use of machine-readable visas and use the funds collected from those fees to improve technology at our ports of entry. We must do more to improve our ability to screen individuals along our entire North American perimeter. This legislation directs the Department of State and the INS to work with the Office of Homeland Security and the Foreign Terrorist Tracking Task Force to strengthen our ability to screen individuals at the Perimeter before they reach our continent. We can work with Canada and Mexico to coordinate these efforts. We must also strengthen our ability to monitor foreign nationals in the United States. In 1996, Congress enacted legislation mandating the development of an automated entry/exit control system to record the entry of every non-citizen arriving in the U.S., and to match it with the record of departure. Although technology is currently available for such a system, it has not been implemented because of the high costs involved. Our legislation builds on the anti-terrorism bill and provides greater direction to the INS for implementing the entry/exit system. We must improve the ability of foreign service officers to detect and intercept potential terrorists before they arrive in the U.S. Most foreign nationals who travel here must apply for visas at American consulates overseas. Traditionally, consular officers have focused on interviewing applicants to determine whether they are likely to violate their visa status. Although this review is important, consular officers must also be trained specifically to screen for security threats. We must require all airlines to electronically transmit passenger lists to destination airports in the United States, so that once the planes have landed, law enforcement authorities can intercept passengers who are on federal lookout lists. United States airlines already do this, but some foreign airlines do not. Our legislation requires all airlines to transmit passenger manifest information prior to the arrival of flight in the U.S. In 1996, Congress established a program to collect information on non-immigrant foreign students and participants in exchange programs. Although a pilot phase of this program ended in 1999, a permanent system has not yet been implemented. Congress passed provisions in the anti-terrorism bill for the quick and effective implementation of this system by 2003, but gaps still exist. This legislation will increase the data collected by the monitoring to include the date of entry, the port of entry, the date of school enrollment, and the date the student leaves the school. It requires the Department of State and INS to monitor students who have been given visas, and to notify schools of their entry. It also requires a school to notify the INS if a student does not actually report to the school. If institutions fail to comply with these and other requirements, they should lose their ability to admit foreign students. INS regulations provide for regular reviews of over 26,000 educational institutions that are authorized to enroll foreign students. However, inspections have been sporadic in recent years. This legislation will require INS to monitor institutions on a regular basis. As we work to implement stronger tracking systems, we must also remember that the vast majority of foreign visitors, students, and workers who overstay their visas are not criminals or terrorists. It would be wrong and unfair, without additional information, to stigmatize them. This legislation will also help restrict visas to foreign nationals from countries that the Department of State has determined are sponsors of terrorism. It precludes visas to individuals from countries that sponsor terrorism, unless specific steps are taken to ensure the person is not a security threat. We must be able to retain highly skilled immigration inspectors. Our legislation will provide incentives to immigration inspectors by providing them with the same benefits as other law enforcement personnel. We must fully implement the use of biometric border crossing cards and allow sufficient time for individuals to obtain these cards. Many of these cards are already in use, but INS does not have the necessary equipment to read the cards. This legislation appropriates needed funds to enable the INS to purchase the machines, and it extends the deadline for individuals crossing the border to acquire the cards. When planes land at our airports, inspectors are under significant time constraints to clear the planes and ensure the safety of all departing passengers. Our legislation removes the existing 45 minute deadline, providing inspectors with adequate time to clear and secure aircraft. The Senate took significant steps last week to improve immigration security by passing the anti-terrorism bill, but further action is needed. This legislation will strengthen the security of our borders and enhance our ability to prevent future terrorist attacks, while also reaffirming our tradition as a Nation of immigrants. I strongly urge my colleagues to support it.

Mr. KENNEDY

Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I wish to express strong support for what our good friend from North Dakota, Senator Dorgan, has addressed. I am very hopeful it will be successful on whatever legislation he offers it, and is signed into law. It is a provision we have included in strong bipartisan legislation which Senator Brownback and I have introduced. The reasons for it are so compelling. He has outlined those reasons this afternoon. I congratulate and thank him for his leadership on this issue.

Mr. KENNEDY

Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I thank our leader, Senator Daschle, for the introduction of amendment No. 2044 to this Health and Human Services appropriations. I welcome the opportunity to cosponsor this with him. So much of the Labor, HHR appropriations bill addresses the well being of our Nation's workers. We must meet the needs of all our workers, including our public safety workers, who do so much for us. The firefighters tell us that this amendment is their highest priority. This amendment is the least we can do for them, in light of the sacrifices they have made for our country. This amendment is an important bipartisan effort to help protect our Nation's public safety officers on the job. I have been pleased to work with my Republican cosponsors, Senator Gregg, Senator DeWine, and Senator Snowe. This amendment will measurably add to the caliber of our defense against threats to the security of our communities. It will also further this country's historic commitment to collective bargaining. I can point out to the Senate the substance of this amendment, in legislation, passed overwhelmingly from our Senate Labor and Human Resource Committee. I know that no one in this room needs to be reminded of the heroic efforts made by the country's public safety officers in the last 10 days. The pictures of tired, dust covered firefighters confronting unimaginable horror are permanently emblazoned in our minds. The courage and dedication of those who died--including Peter Ganci, the chief of the New York Fire Department; William Feehan, the first deputy commissioner; and Mychal Judge, the chaplain of the Department-- set a shining example for all of us. There were 344 firefighters and paramedics who died in the World Trade Center rescue effort. They were members of locals 94 and 854 of the International Association of Firefighters. And, just miles from the Capitol, hundreds of firefighters risked their lives in the rescue efforts at the Pentagon. America needs these men and women, now more than ever, and it is no exaggeration to say that we owe our lives to them. This amendment will ensure that firefighters, police officers, correctional officers, and emergency medical personnel will be afforded the fundamental right to bargain collectively with their employers. The amendment guarantees the basic rights that are necessary to meet that goal--to form and join a union; to bargain over hours, wages, and working conditions; to sign legally enforceable contracts; and to deal with an impasse in negotiations. This proposal follows in the honorable traditions of our country's labor laws, by recognizing the importance of collective bargaining to improve job conditions, increasing worker safety, and improving productivity. Most importantly, this amendment will lead to safer working conditions for public safety officers and to enhanced safety for the public that they serve. As we now know all too well, firefighters, police officers, and emergency medical personnel serve in some of the country's most dangerous, strenuous, and stressful jobs. They are frequently asked to risk--and sometimes give--their lives to protect the safety of others. We have a moral obligation to do whatever we can to increase the safety of these critical jobs--and thereby to add to the Nation's defense against threats to the public's health and safety. It is clear that this amendment will help us to meet these goals. The men and women who serve on the front lines in providing firefighting services, law enforcement services, and emergency medical services know what it takes to create safer working conditions. Ensuring that these professionals have a right to collective bargaining will give them a voice in decisions that can literally make a life-or-death difference on the job. Making such a difference for our country's public safety officers will, by definition, improve our collective safety. Available data prove that collective bargaining enhances safety. These data show that States that lack collective bargaining laws have death rates for firefighters that are nearly double that of States in which bargaining takes place. In States with collective bargaining, there were 1.5 firefighters killed in the line of duty for every 10 thousand firefighters. In States without collective bargaining, 2.5 out of every 10 thousand firefighters were killed on the job. Similarly, in 1993, firefighters in 9 of the 10 States with the highest firefighters death rate lacked collective bargaining protection. This amendment will also save money for States and local communities. A study by the International Association of Fire Fighters shows that States and municipalities that give firefighters the right to discuss workplace issues have lower fire department budgets than States without such laws. When workers who actually do the job are able to provide advice on their work conditions, there are fewer injuries, better morale, better information on new technologies, and more efficient ways to provide the services. The amendment also accomplishes its goals in a reasonable and moderate way. The amendment requires that public safety officers be given the opportunity to bargain collectively; it does not require that employers adopt agreements. Nor does it regulate the content of any agreements that are reached. Where States have collective bargaining laws that substantially provide for the modest minimum standards set forth in the bill--as a majority of States already do--moreover, those States will be unaffected by the legislation. Where States do not have such laws, they may choose to enact them or to allow the Federal Labor Relations Authority to establish procedures for bargaining between public safety officers and their employers. This approach respects existing State law and gives each State the authority to choose the way in which it will comply with the requirements set by this amendment. States will have full discretion to make decisions regarding their implementation and enforcement of the basic rights set forth in this proposal. This approach respects existing State law and gives each State the authority to choose the way in which it will comply with the requirements of this proposal. States will have full discretion to make decisions regarding the implementation and enforcement of the basic rights in this amendment. This amendment will not supersede State laws which already adequately provide for the exercise of--or are more protective of--collective bargaining rights by public safety officers. This amendment is intended to ensure that public safety officers have a role in addressing their wages, hours, and terms and conditions of employment; and to improve the safety and welfare of public safety officers and the communities they serve. It is a matter of basic fairness to give these courageous men and women the same rights that have long been enjoyed by other workers. They put their lives on the line to protect us every day. They deserve to have an effective voice on the job, and improvements in their work conditions will benefit their entire community. I commend my cosponsors for their leadership on this important proposal, and I urge the Senate to approve it. I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. KENNEDY

Mr. KENNEDY. Madam President, it is a privilege to take this opportunity to commend the efforts of artists and cultural organizations across the country during this difficult time. October has been National Arts and Humanities Month, and this year, in communities across the country, artists have participated in numerous public programs and performances to help families cope with the concerns they have. In Boston, musicians from the Boston Symphony joined in a poignant tribute to the victims of the World Trade Center attack. Here in Washington, the Kennedy Center hosted the ``Concert for America.'' So, too, in other cities across the country, performing artists have donated their time and their talent to raise funds to support those who have suffered the most because of the terrorist attacks, and to help with the healing process for all Americans who share their sense of grief and loss. The arts represent the highest levels of human achievement. They give expression to the deepest human emotions, and they are an indispensable part of the Nation's recovery and future strength. Last week, President Bush issued a strong statement commemorating National Arts and Humanities Month and acknowledging the special role of the arts in these challenging times. I commend the President for his eloquent statement, and I ask unanimous consent that it may be printed in the Record.

Mr. KENNEDY

Mr. KENNEDY. Madam President, on October 11, 2001, I filed Report No. 107-83 to accompany S. 1533, a bill to amend the Public Health Service Act to reauthorize and strengthen the health centers program and the National Health Service Corps, and to establish the Healthy Communities Access Program, which will help coordinate services for the uninsured and underinsured, and for other purposes. At the time the report was filed, the estimate by the Congressional Budget Office was not available. I ask unanimous consent that a copy of the CBO estimate be printed in the Record.

Mr. KENNEDY

Mr. KENNEDY. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that Debra Whitman and Mahdu Chagra, two fellows in my office, be given privileges of the floor during the debate of this amendment.

Mr. KENNEDY

Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, first of all, I congratulate and thank our two leaders in this extremely important bill in the area of health policy--Senator Domenici and Senator Wellstone--for ensuring that the Senate will have an opportunity to address one of the most compelling health care issues we are faced with in our society. I thank them for their constant support on this issue over the years. We have had debates on mental health parity on a number of different occasions, but with the shaping and the fashioning of this amendment, this really is the moment of truth on this issue. This is the time to take action. Senator Domenici and Senator Wellstone deserve all of our thanks for their leadership and the work they have done. I would also thank those who have been a part of the process in helping us develop the legislation, the scores of families who came and testified and shared some of the great personal challenges they have faced as they have dealt with the challenges of mental illness in their families, deserve a great deal of credit. We express to them that the best way we can ever thank them for being willing to share some of the great challenges they have faced over a lifetime of care and dedication and commitment--and in a number of instances financial ruin--is to have real parity in our health care system. This legislation will do that for us. I was listening to both of our colleagues and remember so much of the similar debate we had back in 1996 on the HIPAA legislation, when both Senator Domenici and Senator Wellstone brought these matters to the floor of the Senate at that time. A number of our colleagues spoke with great passion and great commitment, and we thought we had made a substantial downpayment in moving us irrevocably in that direction. But, nonetheless, we were not able to do so because there were those who were able to find ways of circumventing the legislation and finding ways of subverting both the intent and, for me personally, even the letter of the law. The Senate voted for it overwhelmingly, Republican and Democrats alike. Over the years, this body has been somewhat slow in finally responding to science rather than ideology. For years, those who were challenged mentally were too often put aside in our society and denied a position of respect and dignity. They were shunned. They were looked down on. They were pitied. They were, in many instances, abused. Their lot was not a good one in America. Then, more recently, that attitude has changed. I would like to believe there has been a new sense of respect for the valuing of individuals on the basis of their character rather than, as was used with these words, ``the color of their skin'' or their gender or their ethnicity or their disability. We have made important progress. What we have seen over time is corresponding progress in being able to deal with the challenges of mental illness. We have made real progress. Now there is really no excuse whatsoever. Now there is no reason whatsoever to deny the Senate the opportunity this afternoon to move toward true equality and true parity in terms of mental health. If we look at some of the mental disorders that are most common in terms of challenges to our communities, one is bipolar disorder, another is depression. Compare those to the physical disorders of hypertension and diabetes, common illnesses, common challenges we face; you find that the treatment success rates for these chronic diseases of bipolar disorder and depression far exceed those for hypertension and diabetes. This is true across the board. Not everyone understands it; not everyone believes it. But increasingly, the medical information and testimony and results indicate that mental illness is treatable. It is such a statement of hope for families to know that, if they get the appropriate treatment, they can free the individuals facing these challenges from some of the torments they are facing in the course of their lives. We have made enormous strides. We are making enormous strides. Our two colleagues share my belief that we are at the time of the light science century--with the mapping of the DNA, stem cell research, and all sorts of recent exciting medical breakthroughs. We view the opportunities for continued progress in this area, such as in the year of the brain, where we have had very profound research and discoveries on what impacts thought process in people's minds. We have made enormous progress, not only in understanding but also in dealing with these issues. The question is, why not have parity? It is so compelling and so necessary. I will digress for a moment and thank our colleagues for bringing this to our attention at this time in our country's history. All of us still are sensing the powerful emotions we felt on September 11. We know anxiety still exists for so many families, not only as a result of the particular enormous tragedy that was so devastating to so many families but also its impact on our Nation as a whole and, more recently, the challenges we are facing in terms of the dangers of Anthrax. We know it has only directly affected some 15 of our fellow citizens, but we know that the fear and the anxiety among our fellow citizens is significant. I dare say, this anxiety has impacted no group more than the children of our country. They are feeling this enormous anxiety. They are feeling it not only as a result of September 11; they are also feeling it with regard to the threats of Anthrax and the whole threat of bioterrorism. There is a lot of anxiety in America today. We don't expect this bill to solve all of the problems, but what it will do is give the stamp of the U.S. Senate. Any fair review in the reading of the record is going to reflect very clearly that there are ways of providing assistance to those who need the attention and the care and the guidance and the support and the treatments that are out there for American families. The most obvious ones are those that have been involved in the current rescue efforts at ground zero and their families. Having had an opportunity the other evening to talk to the head of the firefighters union and to listen to him for a short period of time, I could already see that the challenges that are going to be faced by so many of the families involved are going to be severe. We know that challenges still exists. We know now in recent years enormous progress has been made in understanding the very challenge of mental illness and mental disease. We know extraordinary progress has been made. The only reason for not accepting this amendment may be the issue of cost. It always comes around to the issue of cost. At least it comes around so often by those who want to resist legislation. That argument does not stand up in this case. We have experience in a number of the States on this issue. In our committee, this was raised as an issue. And we agreed to raise the exemption from companies with 25 employees or less up to companies of 50 employees or less. That means approximately half of all working families in this country will effectively be covered, but there will still be many others left out. I regret that, quite frankly. But I am satisfied that if we get this in place and we have the results that I know will come, we will be right back in a very short period to extend the exemption from employers of less than 50 down to 25. The fact is, 23 States have passed parity laws. There is absolutely no evidence that any of them have experienced any significant increase in costs. We know that now as fact. We are not dealing with theories, estimates, or judgments by those who are opposed to it. We are dealing with facts. The facts are as I have stated; there has not been a significant increase in cost. The Senators from New Mexico and Minnesota would agree with me that with an effective program providing mental health parity, you are probably going to see a reduction in the cost of health care because when you treat the mental health challenges and the illnesses for individuals, more often than not, it has a very positive impact in terms of other physical disabilities. Those studies have been presented before our committee, and I am absolutely convinced that even though this is going to provide additional kinds of treatment for individuals who need it, the overall bottom line is going to be savings in health care expenditures. We have seen examples of it. I won't take the Senate's time right now to go into those studies, but a very compelling case has been made. If you think back to it logically, you will see the reasons for it. The first reason is to assist families and individuals by increasing the nation's capability to provide mental health services to Americans who need it. It is a grave mark on our national consciousness if we have the ability to assist these families and we do not do so. This legislation will ensure that we are going to do it. Secondly, with the progress that has been made with these breakthrough treatments and medicines, we have the chance to make a important difference to our fellow citizens in their lives and the lives of their families and to have an enormous positive impact on our fellow citizens. Finally, this is not going to be an additional burden in terms of cost. This is a compelling case. It has been made eloquently and passionately by two of those who have given their commitments and the force of their arguments--Senators Domenici and Wellstone. They have made this case time in and time out. It is time for the Senate to act. It is essential that we act, and I hope this will pass overwhelmingly.

Mr. KENNEDY

Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that a joint memorandum on the immigration provisions of H.R. 3162 be printed in the Record.

Mr. KENNEDY

Mr. KENNEDY. Madam President, one of the most important provisions in this legislation conditions assistance to the Colombian Armed Forces on improvements in human rights. It is essential to ensure that U.S. military aid does not contribute to human rights abuses in Colombia. Allegations of human rights violations by military personnel there have decreased, but the State Department's 2000 Country Report on Human Rights Practices concluded that the Colombian Government's human rights record ``remained poor'' and that ``government security forces continued to commit serious abuses, including extrajudicial killings.'' Many of us are particularly concerned about persistent links between the Colombian Armed Forces and illegal paramilitary groups. On September 10, Secretary of State Powell included the largest of these groups, known by its acronym as the AUC, on the State Department's list of terrorist groups. According to the State Department's Human Rights report, the Colombian military has repeatedly reassured our government ``that it would not tolerate collaboration'' with such groups and that ``the army would combat paramilitary groups.'' However, the report concludes that such links persist and that ``actions in the field were not always consistent with the leadership's positions.'' The report says: Members of the security forces collaborated with paramilitary groups that committed abuses, in some instances allowing such groups to pass through roadblocks, sharing information, or providing them with supplies or ammunition. Despite increased government efforts to combat and capture members of paramilitary groups, often security forces failed to take action to prevent paramilitary attacks. Paramilitary forces find a ready support base within the military and police, as well as among local civilian elites in many areas. A report recently released by Human Rights Watch titled ``The Sixth Division: Military-Paramilitary Ties and U.S. Policy in Colombia,'' states that the Colombia military and police detachments continue to promote, work with, support profit from, and tolerate paramilitary groups, treating them as a force allied to and compatible with their own. Paramilitary groups continue to be linked to most human rights violations committed in Colombia, including massacres. The State Department's Human Rights report cites a sharp increase in the number of victims of paramilitary violence in the last year. Just two weeks ago, a new and ruthless massacre was committed by the AUC in Colombia. At least twenty-four men were forced to lie on the ground and then were executed one by one in cold blood. Many of us are deeply concerned that a majority of the armed forces personnel who collaborate with the paramilitary organizations and who are responsible for human rights abuses are not prosecuted effectively. According to the State Department's report, ``impunity for military personnel who collaborated with members of paramilitary groups remained common.'' Although the Colombian government claims to have dismissed more than 500 members of the military, the State Department says that it does not know how many were dismissed for collaborating with illegal paramilitary groups. The conditions included in this legislation are intended to address these concerns. They require the Secretary of State to certify that the Colombian Armed Forces are suspending members who have been credibly alleged to have committed gross violations of human rights, including extra-judicial killings, or to have aided or abetted paramilitary groups, and are providing to civilian prosecutors and judicial authorities requested information on the nature and cause of the suspension. The conditions require the Secretary of State to certify that the Colombian Armed Forces are cooperating with civilian prosecutors and judicial authorities, including unimpeded access to witnesses and relevant military documents and other information, in prosecuting and punishing in civilian courts members of the armed forces who have been credibly alleged to have committed gross violations of human rights, including extra-judicial killings, or to have aided or abetted paramilitary groups. Finally, the conditions require the Secretary of State to certify that the Colombian Armed Forces are taking effective steps to sever links, including denying access to military intelligence, vehicles, and other equipment or supplies, ceasing other forms of active or tacit cooperation with paramilitary groups, and carrying out existing arrest warrants. These conditions will help ensure that U.S. assistance does not contribute to human rights violations in Colombia. I urge my colleagues to support these important provisions. Another important provision is intended to improve the lives of the Dalit in India. India's 160 million Dalits, who are also known as ``untouchables,'' suffer severe hardship and face a unique form of discrimination. As victims of economic exploitation rooted in the caste system, they are virtually excluded from Indian society and endure some of the worst health conditions in the world. Dalits are born poor and landless and face discrimination at almost every stage in life. Wages from their jobs rarely provide enough income to feed their families or educate their children, and so the cycle of poverty and illiteracy continues from generation to generation. In rural areas, where sewer systems are virtually non-existent, many Dalits make their living cleaning human waste. These workers, known as scavengers, use little more than a broom, a tin plate and a basket, they clear human waste from public and private latrines, and carry the waste long distances in porous wicker baskets to disposal sites. In urban areas, they often work neck-deep in pits filled with human waste and risk asphyxiation in city sewers. Health conditions are appalling. Nearly all of these workers are women, and some are children. A Dalit in India once described their existence: When we are working, they ask us not to come near them. At tea canteens, they have separate tea tumblers and they make us clean them ourselves and make us put the dishes away ourselves. We cannot enter temples. We cannot use upper-caste water taps. We have to go one kilometer away to get water. . . . Dalit communities are frequently punished for individual transgressions. With little knowledge of their rights, limited access to attorneys, and no money for hearings or bail, they are easy targets for criminal prosecution. Police single out Dalit activists for persecution and frequently abuse and torture Dalit suspects. While the Indian Constitution and the 1955 Civil Rights Act abolished untouchability, and subsequent laws allow for affirmative action, hiring quotas and special training funds, discrimination against Dalits continues to flourish in Indian society. As the great author of the Indian constitution--and Dalit--statesman Dr. Ambedkar once said: ``Mahatmas have come, Mahatmas have gone but the Untouchables have remained as Untouchables.'' While there are many people of goodwill in India, discrimination and poverty are widespread in the Dalit community. The foreign aid we provide to India should contribute to easing the hardship and misery suffered by this community and to addressing the disparity between Dalits and others in India. To advance this objective, a provision in this legislation requires the executive director of the World Bank to vote against any water or sewage project in India that does not prohibit the use of scavenger labor. Precious and limited resources should be used to provide incentive to communities in India to abolish this kind of labor and to reward those that do so. Additionally, the report accompanying the Senate bill highlights the important role an organization called the Navsarjan Trust in India is building a civil society in India by promoting the rights of the Dalit community. The report encourages AID to provide funding for the Trust, which is run by Martin Macwan, who received the Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights Award in 2000 for his work on behalf of the Dalit. Founded in 1989, the Navsarjan Trust seeks to end discrimination against the Dalit. Since it was founded, it has become a highly respected force that focuses on five issues for the Dalit community: bringing about the land reforms promised fifty years ago in the Indian Constitution, improving the working conditions and wages of farm workers, abolishing scavenger labor, improving educational opportunities for children, and reducing violence. The Trust achieves its goals through non-violent protest and the judicial process. In eleven years, it has grown to 187 full-time organizers and has a presence in more than 2,000 villages. It is widely viewed as one of the most effective Dalit advocacy groups in India today, and it has filed a class action suit to abolish manual scavenging. Although our assistance program in India is limited, the Navsarjan Trust would be an important ally and a useful way to help the Dalit community. Supporting the trust will demonstrate America's commitment to ending the discrimination faced by India's Dalits. I urge USAID to make funding available for the organization to advance its worthwhile objections. I commend the subcommittee chairman, Senator Leahy, and the other members of the Appropriations Committee for including these important provisions to reduce the discrimination faced by the Dalit community in India. Senator Leahy is an effective champion of human rights throughout the world. I commend his leadership on this issue, and I look forward to continuing to work with my colleagues in Congress to improve the lives of the Dalit community in India.

Mr. KENNEDY

Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I join with my colleagues in welcoming the opening prayer this morning and say how much all of us appreciate this very important expression and how we value the message that was given to all of us today. I thank our leadership for giving us the opportunity to listen to this voice of peace and restraint and wisdom. I am personally very grateful to the guest Chaplain for his presentation.

Mr. KENNEDY

Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, since September 11, the courageous acts of countless Americans have set a new standard for the Nation. As the whole world watched the horror on television, it also witnessed what is best in our country and our character. As buildings collapsed, the American spirit soared. The indelible images of the first days will live on in all the days of our history. Firefighters and police risked their lives and gave their lives to save others, and hundreds of rescuers paid the ultimate price. The brave passengers of flight 93 fought and defied the terrorists, and in the face of their own inevitable death, they prevented the killing of so many others. Construction and health workers went into the shadow of constant danger to search for the missing and help the survivors. The mayor of New York City went everywhere sustaining the city. New Yorkers lined up for blocks to give blood, and so did thousands more across the country. Hundreds of millions of dollars poured in for the families of the victims, as valiantly, tearfully, and quietly they said goodbye to a mother, father, son, daughter, or friend in funeral after funeral. And through it all Americans have begun to think deeply about our country again. We have a new sense of the precious nature of our freedom which, in the years after the cold war, we have increasingly taken for granted. We have learned anew to prize the experiment called America--a nation based not on sameness, but on diversity--a nation of different races, backgrounds, and faiths, defined not by an accident of geography or history, but by the high aspirations for a better life and greater opportunity that brought so many millions to these shores from every continent and country on the Earth. Now, we have seen, perhaps more clearly than ever before in our lives, how we are all in this together--how, if even one of us is hurting all of us hurt. Our first thoughts on September 11 were about others, not ourselves. That spirit must now live on. It is the new standard by which we must measure everything we do. Today, brave young Americans are on the front lines of the fight for freedom from fear. Here at home, we must stand together to face and defeat the terrorists who would poison our people, panic our society, and paralyze our democracy. An essential point of protecting our homefront is protecting our economy--because the state of our Union cannot be strong, if the state of our economy is weak. We need to speak honestly and directly about the choices we face--and we need to do so in the same spirit which has rallied Americans sine September 11. The standard is clear--to seek what is right for our country, and not just for ourselves; not to strive for private advantage in a time of national need. And that standard should be bipartisan--not the false bipartisanship of merely going along, but true bipartisanship, which is a two-way street, where we genuinely seek and respectfully debate what course is best for our economy, for rebuilding and restoring, and especially for all those who have been hurt in the downturn. As President Bush eloquently said when he spoke to the Congress. ``We will come together to strengthen America's economy, and put our people back to work.'' Now all of us, in both parties, in both Congress and the administration, must live up to that all important responsibility. Fundamentally, this, too, is a question of national security. For a strong economy is the basis of a strong Nation. It assures opportunity for all. It is the foundation of a decent and free society at home, without which we cannot fight for decent and free societies abroad. Before September 11, the Nation's economy was already weakening. The unemployment rate had been climbing for months. Relatively few new jobs were being created. Companies were announcing successive rounds of layoffs. Business investment was being drastically reduced, and profits were rapidly falling. Many economists believed we were in a recession, or that a recession was inevitable. And then came September 11, which was an attack not just on our cities and citizens, but on the entire American economy. No one can truly weigh the loss of life. But the loss of property amounts to tens of billions of dollars. We can redress that, and we will. But the loss and the risk went far beyond Ground Zero--in New York or at the Pentagon. Americans stopped flying and stopped buying. Corporations put investment decisions on hold. Hundreds of thousands lost their jobs in companies across the economy, from airlines and hotels, to restaurants, retailers, and manufacturers of high-technology equipment. Never before has it been so clear how inter-connected our society is. Two buildings go down tragically in New York City, and the entire economy suffers across the land. Economic models do not account for this. The most important of all our resources, our national confidence, has been more damaged than anyone initially realized. It is crucial to recognize that once underway, a recession has no clear bottom. Unless we respond, it can spiral downward out of control, raising unemployment to higher and higher levels, and sharply reducing the flow of revenues for both government and business. Consider this: Americans on average were saving very little of their income before September 11. If they now increase their savings by only 1 percent because they are afraid to spend, they will withdraw more than $100 billion from the economy. It is not enough just to tell people to go out and spend and live normal lives. This is an extraordinary time--and we cannot talk the economy out of recession. Congress must act. This week, as the Senate and the House continue the very important debate on what must be done to revive our economy, there is at least one overriding principle on which Republicans and Democrats both agree: Urgent action is required. We all know that cutting interest rates is the first line of defense in a downturn. But we also know that in this time of clear and present danger, lower interest rates alone cannot reverse the decline in confidence, consumer spending, and business investment. Consumers and companies will not buy more and invest more in a time of great uncertainty simply because borrowing costs are lower. We need a direct and sizable injection of resources by government to stimulate the economy. But if we do this in the wrong way, a stimulus package could actually harm the economy. Some would rely almost exclusively on permanent tax cuts that will do little or nothing to promote growth when we need it most--which is right now. Their proposals are neither fair nor will they work. They do not measure up to the new and honest standard of this time. A true stimulus package cannot be a disguise for special interests. Nor can it run the risk of imposing large new long-term deficits on the Federal budget. Permanent new tax cuts--on top of nearly $2 trillion in tax cuts enacted earlier this year--would actually hurt the economy by increasing the cost of long-term borrowing. Such cuts would deter the kind of business investments we need most. Instead, a true economic stimulus program for our time must meet three criteria: First, it must have an immediate impact on the economy. Every dollar of the stimulus package must be spent in the economy as soon as possible. The best way to accomplish this goal is to target the dollars to the low- and moderate-income families who are most certain to spend, rather than save it. When it is spent, its impact will be multiplied as it flows from consumers to business and back to workers. In fact, every dollar given to unemployed workers in unemployment insurance payments expands the economy by $2.15. Second, all the tax cuts and spending provisions in the plan must be temporary. They must focus on the immediate need to generate economic activity. They must not impose substantial new long-term costs on the Federal budget. Third, the package must be fair and compassionate. It must focus on those who need and deserve the help, who are suffering the most in these difficult days. It must reflect the renewed spirit of taking care of each other. Let us here in Congress set a standard for our work equal to that set by so many after September 11. Leave no American behind--no victim of the terrorist attack, and no victim of its economic aftershocks. The House Republicans have proposed a stimulus package that fails all three of these criteria. Sadly, this House Ways and Means Committee proposal does not rise to the higher standard required in this time of national crisis. It fails the economy. It merely repackages old, partisan, unfair, permanent tax breaks, which were rejected by Congress last spring, under the new label of economic stimulus. The American people deserve better. The long-term cost of the House plan is much too high. More than half of the dollars would not even reach the economy for more than a year. The stimulus is needed now--not in 2003, 2004, or later. The House package spends $46 billion on permanent new tax breaks for multinational corporations and large businesses. It gives many large businesses a $25 billion windfall, not only by permanently repealing the corporate minimum tax, but also by refunding the minimum taxes already paid by them over the past 15 years. It also permanently reduces the tax on capital gains. It provides $60 billion in permanent new tax cuts for upper income taxpayers--only a small percentage of which would even go into the economy in the next year. The wealthy individuals and big businesses that would receive these tax breaks will not spend most of the windfall. They will save it. Corporations will not invest more unless business itself improves. We cannot afford to waste valuable Federal dollars in ways that will not have a full and immediate impact on economic growth. The House package also runs a grave risk of frightening financial markets and driving long-term interest rates up, because investors will expect future federal deficits to rise as a result of additional, permanent and unaffordable tax cuts. Already, mortgage rates have stayed stubbornly high in response to the tax bill passed earlier this year. The House proposal is plainly unfair. In contrast to more than $115 billion in permanent new tax cuts for wealthy individuals and corporations, it provides less than $14 billion in tax cuts for lower and moderate-income families. While the tax cuts for these corporations and wealthy individuals are permanent, the cuts for working families are limited to just one year. After passing nearly $2 trillion in tax cuts heavily slanted to the richest taxpayers 4 months ago, it is wrong to give the wealthy still more tax breaks when there is a better, more effective way to move the economy. It makes no sense to offer indiscriminate long-term tax breaks, when what is needed are realistic incentives to invest now. And, if this Congress chooses to violate that basic stimulus principle, it would be grossly irresponsible and grossly unfair not to include the fair increase in the minimum wage that has been delayed for too long already. The new standard set by September 11 calls for a new course of action--one that places national need above personal interests, one that will truly stimulate our economy. We need a Government stimulus package of $71 billion, a package of targeted and effective support for middle and lower income working families that would be immediate, temporary, and fair, and that should include the following essential steps: We must immediately extend unemployment insurance coverage an additional 13 weeks. The unemployed are on the front line of the economic battle, and they will spend their money immediately. We must also extend unemployment insurance coverage to part-time and low-wage workers, who often do not qualify for any benefits at all, and who can least afford to lose their wages. We must raise unemployment benefits by 15 percent for all workers. An average payment of $230 a week is not enough. We must add $2 billion to job training programs to help workers prepare for and find new jobs. These changes will cost $18 billion, but an economy returning to prosperity will more than repay the expense. We must protect health insurance for working families by having the Federal Government cover 75 percent of the cost of insurance premiums for 12 months after a worker loses a job. We must also support coverage for workers who do not qualify for such a plan. We know that when workers lose their jobs, they lose their health insurance, too. This program would provide an additional $17 billion of stimulus that will help keep the health care sector strong while keeping our workers healthy. These elements--unemployment insurance, job training and health coverage for workers between jobs--are essential to any economic stimulus plan, which is why Senator Baucus and I have come together to propose these key changes to help workers get their feet back on the ground. In addition to the Baucus proposal, an economic stimulus plan must add $5 billion to help our communities: $2 billion to food stamps and WIC, $1 billion to heating assistance for families, and additional funds for expanded community service and opportunities for voluntarism. We must also invest more now in the public works that will expand employment and stimulate the economy. As we make public buildings, airports, and our water supply more secure, we must also build and modernize schools, rail lines, and infrastructure. I propose a new, $10 billion investment for these vital national purposes: $3 billion for highways and bridges; $3 billion for drinking water and wastewater treatment systems; $3 billion for school safety and construction; and $1 billion for our railways and mass transit systems. In addition, it will not do much good to spend more at the Federal level if there are significant cutbacks at the State and local level. We do not want State and local governments, most of which have annual balanced budget requirements, to be forced to either raise taxes or cut essential services. Any such steps would be counterproductive at this critical time. We are seeing State cuts in Medicaid, child care, job training, education, and transportation. Tennessee officials have proposed cuts that could cause 180,000 people to lose health insurance. Florida is debating a reduction in coverage for its medically needy population under Medicaid. Mississippi, Ohio, and South Carolina have already cut spending across the board. Other States are convening special sessions of their legislatures to address the crisis in their State budgets. All this is hurting the very people who need help the most today-- working families, single parents, poor children. And such cutbacks will clearly undermine the effects of any stimulus package. The answer is for the Federal Government to provide an additional $7 billion in the stimulus package to help the States to continue their existing human services programs. The most timely and effective way to accomplish this goal is to temporarily increase the Federal contribution to programs where there is already a State-Federal partnership. The largest of these is Medicaid. In a recession, the number of families eligible for Medicaid increases substantially. In fact, some estimate that if unemployment rises 2 percent, the number of Medicaid recipients could increase by 2.5 million, dramatically increasing State costs. We should temporarily enhance the Federal matching rate for Medicaid by 2 percentage points for States that agree to maintain their current eligibility standards and benefits. This would serve as an incentive for those States. We should also help States temporarily by increasing the Federal Social Services Block Grant Program, which is used by States to pay for a variety of services to low-income families. It is important that State governments not be forced to curtail assistance when it is needed most--and, once again, these are dollars that will also go directly and quickly into the economy. This spending will lift the economy in the short term; and strengthen it for the long-term. A stimulus package must also include the right kind of temporary tax cuts that actually increase spending and growth. Seventy percent of Americans pay more in payroll taxes than in income taxes. Yet many of them received no tax rebate earlier this year. The rebate unfairly ignored these low- and moderate-income families. A one-time rebate of payroll taxes would immediately inject $15 billion into the economy, placing the dollars into the hands of people who will spend it immediately. I do not see how anyone can defend permanent tax cuts over the next 10 years that primarily benefit the wealthy who will save most of the money, when that same money can and should be used to cut taxes now for middle- and lower-income families who will spend the gains immediately. In the days and weeks ahead, there will be debates and compromises. But surely we can fashion a comprehensive stimulus package that meets America's new high standard--injects needed funds into the faltering American economy as quickly as possible--and that is fair and just. In this case, fairness is also the deepest practical wisdom--the way to get the economy back on its feet as soon as possible and without jeopardizing the foundations of our future prosperity. It would be wrong in principle and wrong economically to pass a false stimulus package of unfair tax cuts that would go largely unspent, giving the largest benefits to the few, with limited benefits to consumption and production, and long-term damage to fiscal and monetary stability. After September 11, we cannot afford businesses as usual, or the clever politics of repackaging previous goals as if they were a real response to the need for national renewal. We need a real response and real results--now. But this stimuls is only a first step in a new and greater project--for our economy and our society. Let us be frank. For a long time now, our first thoughts have too often been about ourselves, not others. In the process, we have neglected the future and some of our best ideals. It is time to change that, too. Our wartime leaders have always understood that we cannot ask people to sacrifice and to fight abroad if we fail to fight for a more decent and more just society here at home. Our leaders have always understood that the war front and the home front are really the same front. Never has this been more true than in this new kind of war against terrorism, fought both thousands of miles from our shores and in our own airports, our own mailrooms, and potentially in any American community. In the late 1950s Dwight Eisenhower saw the relationship between our national security and education when he created the National Defense Act. He had the vision to invest in both--through support of local public schools, improvements in math, science and technical education as well as loans so that more people could go to college. President Eisenhower would have met the September 11 standard. As he led the Nation through World War II, Franklin Roosevelt fought to make the home front stronger, too. He demanded progressive income taxes, defended unions, opposed discrimination, and created new partnerships with business. He would have met the September 11 standard. Beyond the stimulus package, how can we meet that standard now? America would not be the America it is today if our nation and our people had not dared again and again to reach higher across our history. Once more today, a new economy demands a new era of public purpose and progress. The first priority is education. The information age requires an ever-more sophisticated work force. I commend President Bush for the new and effective attention he has given to higher standards in our schools. Now, we must get this bill. And this bill is only the beginning of our effort, not the end. We must do more and invest more to improve education and to secure for every person the chance to go as far as their talents can take them. Maximum opportunity for each is the only path to maximum prosperity for all, and maximum strength for America. The next priority is health care. Before September 11, we needed a Patients' Bill of Rights to guarantee that medical decisions will be made by doctors, not accountants, and that people will have access to the best treatments, not just the cheapest. Terrorism is no excuse for delay. We need a Patients' Bill of Rights just as much today as we did before September 11. I urge the Congress to pass it now, and the President to sign it. And I urge the President and Members of Congress to keep the promise we all have made to guarantee all our seniors access to affordable prescription drugs. They need that help now, just as much as they did before. There is something we need now even more than we did then: We must strengthen our fragile public health infrastructure to deal with the clear and present dangers of chemical and biological attack. On Capitol Hill, we know the threat first hand; we must defeat it, and we will. Today, Senators and Members of Congress have the best of the Nation's health care at our disposal. Imagine the millions who do not. Many Americans do not even know where to go to find a doctor's help immediately. We need an emergency health care system sufficient beyond doubt to meet the dangers we may face--not just tomorrow, but over the next decade. The bioterrorist threat should remind us of an ideal too long denied in this country: Health care is a fundamental right, not just when a terrorist attacks, but when cancer or diabetes or any other disease strikes. We have made progress; we must keep moving forward; we must get there. Finally, the new economy has produced vast new wealth and opportunities, and reduced poverty by 25 percent since 1993. But millions are still left behind, and working families have not gained their fair share of this new national wealth. So when prosperity returns, we must ensure that we can all advance together. We must open new doors for every American. We must help 21st century mothers and fathers cope with the stresses of choosing between the jobs they need and the children they love. We must make the workplace more flexible, so that workers cannot only provide for their families, but also care for them. We must also provide a more decent living to the Nation's caregivers, to teachers, nurses, and child care workers, who give so much, yet earn so little. We must make sure the new economy works for all Americans. Some say we cannot fight for a safer society and a more just society at the same time. I say, we weaken ourselves abroad if we do not strengthen ourselves at home. We cannot defend democracy abroad unless we extend democracy at home. In America and Britain, World War II was accompanied and followed by a period of great reform and historic transformation in society. Now, in this time of crisis, we cannot settle for anything else. The spirit of September 11 points the way. In that spirit, we must continue to care about each other, and fulfill the promise and opportunity of America for all our people. This spirit of September 11 has compelled so many of our citizens to do more for our country, our communities and our fellow Americans. This time calls for active citizenship, whether by children getting involved in service learning programs at school or senior citizens signing up for the Retired Senior Volunteer Program. This Saturday is Make A Difference Day, sponsored by America's Promise and the Points of Light Foundation. All Americans should use this occasion to find new ways to make their own contribution. We are one American community. September 11 proved that. Active citizenship will nourish that spirit and sustain us in the challenges ahead. So we must reject any attempt to misuse the terrorist threat as an excuse to deny or delay our obligations to teach our children well, to treat the sick, help the needy, and make the new economy a new foundation for a stronger family life and a higher standard of life for all our families. We have heard such excuses for inaction in the past. We will hear them again in this crisis, that the war on terrorism will deplete our resources and delay our commitment to ``a more perfect union.'' Always in the past, there were doubters in America. But always we kept faith with America's ideals, and came together to fight the hardest battles and respond to the greatest social needs. We mobilized our government and our whole Nation, wisely and well, to defeat our enemies and meet the demands of our best ideals. It has never been more critical to do so than it is today. Let us start with a stimulus package that truly lifts our economy. And then let us finish the great work we are in--which is not just to win a war, but to build a future of ``liberty and justice for all.'' So my message now is fundamental. We need not and we must not sacrifice the home front to the war front. they are one and the same. We are all in this together, as we always have been throughout our great history. If we meet the new standard of September 11, no one will stand in our way, and many more will join us. And the heroes of that day will have left an undying legacy--a proud new chapter in annals of America's greatness. Let us pledge our energies to this cause. Let us show, that as the battle goes on for a world free from fear, the work goes on to move America forward. I yield the floor.

Mr. KENNEDY

Mr. KENNEDY. It was 1962.

Mr. KENNEDY

Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, may I reserve 7 minutes out of that time?

Mr. KENNEDY

Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, early this afternoon, my friend and colleague, Senator Dodd, addressed the Senate about a very significant development that occurred today in the Northern Ireland peace process. I join him and so many others in the Senate, in the House of Representatives, and across the country in welcoming these developments. They are especially welcome at a time when we are still experiencing the dark emotions and feelings from the September 11 terrorist attacks that killed thousands. We have been further disturbed in recent days by the anthrax attacks that have taken the lives of dedicated public servants in this community. In the midst of these tragic events, I welcome this opportunity to bring to the attention of my colleagues an historic breakthrough in the Northern Ireland peace process that occurred earlier today. This afternoon the IRA issued a statement indicating that it had begun the process of decommissioning its weapons. General de Chastelain, who chairs the international group responsible for overseeing the process, has confirmed that the decommissioning of some weapons has has occurred. These actions are unprecedented in scope and are a watershed in the peace process that began a decade ago. In 1994, after 30 years of violence, the IRA announced a historic cease-fire. That cease-fire led to the discussions, ably led by Senator Mitchell and strongly supported by President Clinton, which culminated in the 1988 Good Friday Peace Agreement. As a part of that visionary Agreement, commitments were made by the British and Irish governments and the political leaders on all sides of Northern Ireland to advance the peace process. Each party to the Agreement made important sacrifices to advance the common good and the process of peace. The Agreement provided for a power-sharing local government and cross-border institutions. It called for dramatic reform of the police service in Northern Ireland to ensure that it would be representative of both communities. It called for equal treatment and equal opportunity for all in Northern Ireland. It called for a reduction in the presence of British troops and on all paramilitary organizations to decommission their weapons. This bold and historic action by the IRA to decommission its weapons will liberate the peace process, advance the cause of peace, and enable the issue of IRA decommissioning to take its rightful place as one of many reforms essential to the full implementation of the Good Friday Peace Agreement and the achievement of lasting peace for Northern Ireland. Now the Irish and British governments and the political leaders of Northern Ireland must commit to implement all aspects of the Agreement fairly and fully, especially the critical provisions on reductions of the presence of British troops, reform of the police service, and equal treatment and equal opportunity for all of the people of Northern Ireland. Through this action, the IRA has enhanced the prospect for peace. Sinn Fein President Gerry Adams' public call for the IRA to decommission its weapons was strong and bold, and I commend him for his leadership on this difficult issue at this critical time. This extraordinary breakthrough could never have happened without the skillful and constant leadership of Prime Minister Blair of Great Britain and Prime Minister Ahern of Ireland. I also commend President Bush and his envoy to Northern Ireland, Ambassador Richard Haass, for their skillful assistance in helping to break this extremely serious impasse. I commend as well the leaders in Ireland, and Great Britain, and the U.S. who, over the years, have contributed so much to the beginnings and continuation of this all important peace process. They all deserve great credit for their vision and leadership in the cause of peace. I am mindful of the extraordinary role of John Hume, who shared the Nobel Peace Prize with David Trimble. I can remember many years ago meeting John Hume, who at that time was a local political leader and who had exhibited extraordinary political courage. His life has been one of commitment and dedication to peace. He played an instrumental role in securing the cease-fire. His voice for tolerance and understanding and his call for respect for the two great traditions in the north--the Protestant and Catholic faiths--have been eloquent. He has recently retired as political leader for his party, the SDLP in Northern Ireland. His contribution to a political resolution of the conflict in Northern Ireland will be forever emblazoned in history. All who share the goal of peace should welcome the action that has been taken today. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. KENNEDY

Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I welcome this opportunity to honor Richard Monahan. Mr. Monahan has served the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 103 in Boston, MA, with distinction for over 45 years. He began as an apprentice in 1956 and is retiring this month as an International Representative of the Second District. Mr. Monahan has worked effectively and tirelessly for the working families of Massachusetts and the Nation throughout these years. He will long be remembered for his outstanding commitment and dedication to the Electrical Workers Union. He also served his country with honor from 1960 to 1968 in the United States Coast Guard. Mr. Monahan rose through the ranks of the I.B.E.W., serving on its Executive Board, as its Business Manager, and as the Second District International Representative. He has also been active in his community. His dedication has gone above and beyond the call of duty, and he has given his many talents to charitable groups, including the Knights of Columbus Council 2259, AMVETS Post-0146 and the Quincy Lodge of Elks #943. I know that the men and women of Local 103 and his many friends and admirers in our community are proud of Richard Monahan's outstanding service, and we wish him a long and happy retirement.

Mr. KENNEDY

Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President it's a privilege to introduce this bill to ensure that laid-off aviation industry workers receive first priority when the Federal Government and private security firms under Federal contracts hire new employees. Identical legislation was introduced last week in the House of Representatives by Representative Jane Harman of California, and I commend her for her leadership. Under our legislation, the Secretary of Transportation will develop regulations giving priority in such hiring for aviation-related security positions to qualified airline workers who were laid-off as a result of the September 11 terrorist attacks. Those attacks have had a devastating impact on large numbers of the men and women who work in aviation and related industries. Immense job losses have taken place. Since September 11, layoffs of more than 140,000 aviation workers have been announced, and nearly 80,000 of those workers are already out of work. Clearly, Congress should do all it can to help the men and women in the industry who have lost their jobs. These workers should get preference for training and new employment opportunities. Last week, the Senate passed the aviation security bill that federalizes airport security, including 18,000 baggage screeners and 10,000 other security-related positions. The bill that Representative Harman and I am sponsoring gives first priority in hiring for these airport security jobs to the thousands of men and women who were working in the aviation industry and at airports before September 11, and who have been laid off as a result of the terrorist attacks. The time to help these workers is now. We must help these workers get back to work. One of the most effective ways to do that is by giving preference to those who lost their jobs for these airport security positions. I urge my colleagues to help these dedicated men and women by supporting this important legislation. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. KENNEDY

Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President it's a privilege to introduce this bill to ensure that laid-off aviation industry workers receive first priority when the Federal Government and private security firms under Federal contracts hire new employees. Identical legislation was introduced last week in the House of Representatives by Representative Jane Harman of California, and I commend her for her leadership. Under our legislation, the Secretary of Transportation will develop regulations giving priority in such hiring for aviation-related security positions to qualified airline workers who were laid-off as a result of the September 11 terrorist attacks. Those attacks have had a devastating impact on large numbers of the men and women who work in aviation and related industries. Immense job losses have taken place. Since September 11, layoffs of more than 140,000 aviation workers have been announced, and nearly 80,000 of those workers are already out of work. Clearly, Congress should do all it can to help the men and women in the industry who have lost their jobs. These workers should get preference for training and new employment opportunities. Last week, the Senate passed the aviation security bill that federalizes airport security, including 18,000 baggage screeners and 10,000 other security-related positions. The bill that Representative Harman and I am sponsoring gives first priority in hiring for these airport security jobs to the thousands of men and women who were working in the aviation industry and at airports before September 11, and who have been laid off as a result of the terrorist attacks. The time to help these workers is now. We must help these workers get back to work. One of the most effective ways to do that is by giving preference to those who lost their jobs for these airport security positions. I urge my colleagues to help these dedicated men and women by supporting this important legislation. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. KENNEDY

Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, today I join my distinguished colleague, Senator Bill Frist, and many other colleagues in the Senate to introduce a resolution stating our strong support for strengthening America's defenses against bioterrorism. As our forces continue their actions over Afghanistan, we can expect that our enemies will try to strike against our country again. We must close the gaps in our ability to deal with the possibility of bioterrorism on American soil. Just as we support our armed forces overseas, we should support our front line defenses against bioterrorism--our public health and medical professionals. We want to reassure all Americans that much has already been done to assure their safety from such an attack, and to minimize the spread of biological agents if an attack does occur. The kind of heroism we witnessed from average Americans on September 11 with Americans caring for and protecting their fellow citizens would take place once again in responding to a bioterrorist threat. But every day we delay in expanding our capabilities exposes innocent Americans to needless danger. We cannot afford to wait. Our first priority must be to prevent an attack from ever occurring. That means moving quickly to enhance our intelligence capacity and our ability to infiltrate terrorist cells, wherever they may exist. It also means using the renewed partnership between the United States and Russia to make sure that dangerous biological agents do not fall into the hands of terrorists. We've worked with Russia to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons, and we must work together now to prevent the spread of biological weapons. We must also enhance America's preparedness for a bioterrorist attack. Our citizens need not live their lives in fear of a biological attack, but building strong defenses is the right thing to do. Unlike the assaults on New York and Washington, a biological attack would not be accompanied by explosions and police sirens. In the days that followed, victims of the attack would visit their family doctor or the local emergency room, complaining of fevers, aches in the joints or perhaps a sore throat. The actions taken in those first few days will do much to determine how severe the consequences of the attack will be. The keys to responding effectively to a bioterrorist attack lie in three key concepts: immediate detection, immediate treatment and immediate containment. To improve detection, we should improve the training of doctors to recognize the symptoms of a bioterrorist attack, so that precious hours will not be lost as doctors try to diagnose their patients. As we've seen in recent days, patients with anthrax and other rarely encountered diseases are often initially diagnosed incorrectly. In addition, public health laboratories need the training, the equipment and the personnel to identify biological weapons as quickly as possible. In Boston, a recently installed electronic communication system will enable physicians to report unusual symptoms rapidly to local health officials, so that an attack could be identified quickly. Too often, however, as a CDC report has stated: ``Global travel and commerce can move microbes around the world at jet speed, yet our public health surveillance systems still rely on a `Pony Express' system of paper- based reporting and telephone calls.'' To improve the treatment of victims of a bioterrorist attack, we must strengthen our hospitals and emergency medical plans. Boston, New York and a few other communities have plans to convert National Guard armories and other public buildings into temporary medical facilities, and other communities need to be well prepared too. Even cities with extensive plans need more resources to ensure that those plans will be effective when they are needed. To improve containment, we must make certain that federal supplies of vaccines and antibiotics are available quickly to assist local public health officials in preventing the disease from spreading. Developing new medical resources for the future is also essential. Scientists recently reported that they had determined the complete DNA sequence of the microbe that causes plague. This breakthrough may allow new treatments and vaccines to be developed against this ancient disease scourge. We should use the remarkable skills of our universities and biotechnology companies to give us new and better treatments in the battle against bioterrorism. September 11 was a turning point in America's history. Our challenge now is to do everything we can to learn from that tragic day, and prepare effectively for the future.

Mr. KENNEDY

Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, at 1:35 we will vote on the Carnahan amendment. I am proud to be a sponsor with Senator Carnahan. I thank Senator Carnahan for the thoughtful amendment she has proposed. I join in urging our colleagues to support that amendment. As the opening prayer indicated, we all have a sense as we rise on the Senate floor about the momentous time this is, the 1-month anniversary of the terrorist attack. We are being summoned as a nation to give thoughtful prayer and consideration to those who lost their lives. Our colleagues are doing so at the Pentagon and other services throughout the day. We are all mindful of that, and supportive of it. But we also want to carry on our Nation's business, and we are mindful of the actions that have been taken and will be taken in the very near future. We know that just after the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon that all the airlines effectively were grounded for a period of time, as a direct result of that. We found that the airline industry was compromised and was facing a very bleak and ominous future. Whether the industry itself was going to be able to survive was in question. Those issues were talked about here, discussed, debated on the floor of the Senate. It is unusual that the Federal Government effectively closes down a particular industry, an industry that has very broad implications in terms of our economy. But, the federal government took that action and, therefore, we felt we had an additional responsibility to help, assist, and offset the losses of those airlines, particularly those losses that had been incurred as a result of the Federal action. Of course it is a complicated issue because some of these airlines were facing difficult financial situations at best and those adverse situations were accelerated because of the actions of the Federal Government. But no one questions or doubts that the actions taken by the FAA and Department of Transportation were in the national interest. No one questions that. So we have a responsibility to address that. In a matter of really 2 or 3 days here in the Senate we took action, some $15 billion to make sure the airline industry was going to be preserved and that there were a range of different financial supports for the airline industry. As a result, we took care of an industry and we took care of management personnel, but we failed, in a very serious way, to take care of the workers in that industry who were just as adversely impacted as those who fly the planes and the management personnel who supervise the industry, without which the airline industry would not be able to function. These workers were left out and left behind. That was a critical mistake. The Carnahan amendment is an attempt to remedy that mistake. 120,000 workers were directly affected by the decision regarding the airline industry, which is trying to get back on its feet. As a direct result of the terrorist attack, those 120,000 workers have lost their jobs-- the flight attendants, reservation clerks, baggage handlers, caterers, mechanics, those who make the spare parts and those who service and clean the aircraft--they would be working today. They would have a future of some hope and some opportunity. Now 120,000 of them have lost their jobs. The Carnahan amendment will not restore their jobs, but it will ease the pain that these workers are experiencing by extending unemployment compensation, to which they have indirectly contributed, maintaining their health insurance, and maintaining the opportunity for some training for these workers. They lost their jobs, not because they didn't show up for work, not because they have not worked and had superior job performance over a period of years--one worker who I met on Sunday night before returning to Washington, had worked for the airline for 10 years. Yet they were cutting down, people who had worked there for 10 years--she lost her job. She had been an outstanding employee. All this amendment is saying is, as we took care of the airline industry, as we took care of the management personnel, let us at least show some consideration for the 120,000 workers. We know we have an important responsibility to pass this legislation. I am eager to vote for it and support the position of the Senator from South Carolina, in terms of the federalization of these workers at the airports. We can get through that today. No one is interested in undue delay. We know we are also going to have the antiterrorism bill which we have every expectation will pass this week. Then we know we will have an opportunity to talk about the stimulus package, to try to meet our responsibility to the millions of workers who have been laid off, have lost their jobs and are suffering in all parts of our Nation. We have a responsibility to address those needs. The Carnahan amendment basically addresses an issue of fairness. It is fairness to the workers. We are saying we took care of the industry in those emergency times in a few short days, but we left out the workers. That is unfair. Americans understand fairness. All we are saying, for those particular workers to whom we were unfair at that time when we passed the Airline Security Act, we are going to be fair to them to some extent. We are not going to restore their jobs, which would be something they would want and they would be eager to accept, but we are showing we are not forgetting them. That is why this Carnahan amendment is so important. We have to speak for those workers. I supported the airline emergency legislation. It was important. But we recognize that at that time, as we were looking at the industry and also focused on the victims, those families who had gone through such extraordinary trauma and loss, the workers were left out and left behind. That was wrong. This amendment tries to redress that kind of injustice. It is fair. It is sensible. It is responsible. It is a very moderate amendment in what it tries to do, in terms of the health insurance, training, and unemployment compensation. It would be wrong for this body to reject that proposal. I am hopeful that we will accept it and will vote on cloture and vote to accept this amendment.