Herb Kohl

Mr. KOHL

Mr. KOHL. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Generics First Act. This legislation requires the use of available generic drugs under the Medicare Part D prescription drug program, unless the brand name drug is determined to be medically necessary by a physician. Everywhere I go in Wisconsin, I see how prescription drug costs are a drain on seniors, families, and businesses that are struggling to pay their health care bills. They want help now and we can respond by expanding access to generic drugs. Generics, which on average cost 63 percent less than their brand-name counterparts, are a big part of the solution to health care costs that are spiraling out of control. The private and public sectors, as well as individuals, are seeking relief from high drug costs, and Senate Special Committee on Aging has heard some remarkable success stories from some who have turned to generic drugs. Last year, General Motors testified that, in 2005, they spent $1.9 billion dollars on prescription drugs, 40 percent of their total health care spending. Their program to use generics first, when a generic drug is available, saves GM nearly $400 million a year. Last year, millions of seniors exceeded the initial $2,250 Medicare drug benefit and fell into the ``donut hole,'' where they had to pay the full price of their drugs. Using less expensive, but equally effective, generic drugs will keep seniors out of the ``donut hole'' longer and help them survive the gap in coverage. Generic drugs approved by the FDA must meet the same rigorous standards for safety and effectiveness as brand-name drugs. In addition to being safe and effective, the generic must have the same active ingredient or ingredients, be the same strength, and have the same labeling for the approved uses as the brand drug. Generics perform the same as their respective brand name product. Modeled after similar provisions in many state-administered Medicaid programs, this measure would reduce the high costs of the new prescription drug program and keep seniors from reaching the current gap in coverage or ``donut hole'' by guiding beneficiaries toward cost- saving generic drug alternatives. We know generic drugs have the potential to save seniors thousands of dollars, and curb health spending for the Federal Government, employers, and families. And every year, more blockbuster drugs are coming off patent, setting up the potential for billions of dollars in savings. This legislation is one piece of a larger agenda I'm pushing to remove the obstacles that prevent generics from getting to market, and making sure that every senior, every family, every business, and every government program knows the value of generics and uses them to bring costs down. I urge my colleagues to support this legislation. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. KOHL

Mr. KOHL. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Generics First Act. This legislation requires the use of available generic drugs under the Medicare Part D prescription drug program, unless the brand name drug is determined to be medically necessary by a physician. Everywhere I go in Wisconsin, I see how prescription drug costs are a drain on seniors, families, and businesses that are struggling to pay their health care bills. They want help now and we can respond by expanding access to generic drugs. Generics, which on average cost 63 percent less than their brand-name counterparts, are a big part of the solution to health care costs that are spiraling out of control. The private and public sectors, as well as individuals, are seeking relief from high drug costs, and Senate Special Committee on Aging has heard some remarkable success stories from some who have turned to generic drugs. Last year, General Motors testified that, in 2005, they spent $1.9 billion dollars on prescription drugs, 40 percent of their total health care spending. Their program to use generics first, when a generic drug is available, saves GM nearly $400 million a year. Last year, millions of seniors exceeded the initial $2,250 Medicare drug benefit and fell into the ``donut hole,'' where they had to pay the full price of their drugs. Using less expensive, but equally effective, generic drugs will keep seniors out of the ``donut hole'' longer and help them survive the gap in coverage. Generic drugs approved by the FDA must meet the same rigorous standards for safety and effectiveness as brand-name drugs. In addition to being safe and effective, the generic must have the same active ingredient or ingredients, be the same strength, and have the same labeling for the approved uses as the brand drug. Generics perform the same as their respective brand name product. Modeled after similar provisions in many state-administered Medicaid programs, this measure would reduce the high costs of the new prescription drug program and keep seniors from reaching the current gap in coverage or ``donut hole'' by guiding beneficiaries toward cost- saving generic drug alternatives. We know generic drugs have the potential to save seniors thousands of dollars, and curb health spending for the Federal Government, employers, and families. And every year, more blockbuster drugs are coming off patent, setting up the potential for billions of dollars in savings. This legislation is one piece of a larger agenda I'm pushing to remove the obstacles that prevent generics from getting to market, and making sure that every senior, every family, every business, and every government program knows the value of generics and uses them to bring costs down. I urge my colleagues to support this legislation. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. KOHL

Mr. KOHL. Mr. President, I rise today to bid farewell to one of our esteemed colleagues, Mike DeWine of Ohio. It has been my special joy and privilege to work closely with Senator DeWine for the last decade. Since 1997, we have led the Antitrust Subcommittee, each taking our turns as chairman and ranking member. Thanks to Mike's honesty, candor, and cooperative nature, we have forged a productive bipartisan partnership as we have worked to promote competition in many vital sectors of our Nation's economy. This productive, bipartisan working relationship has been a hallmark of Senator DeWine's leadership of the Antitrust Subcommittee since he assumed the chairmanship of the committee in 1997. From the beginning, he reached out to me and established our tradition of setting our agenda jointly, planning our hearings together, and even sponsoring legislation and writing letters to the administration jointly. We tackled together such thorny issues as encouraging competition in telecommunications, health care, the oil and gas, and airline industries, investigating dozens of important mergers ranging from AOL/ Time Warner to ATT/Bell South, and pursuing antitrust reform legislation. While we have not always agreed on every issue that came before our subcommittee although I am happy to say we agreed more often than not--Mike DeWine and I always agreed that we should put partisanship aside and accomplishing practical results for the American people first. On a personal note, our close working relationship has caused me to come to know Mike DeWine very well. I have come learn that Mike is a sober-minded, hard working, and caring person. In my career, I have been privileged to know and work with a few distinguished Members of this Chamber whom I can truly call statesmen, leaders, and friends. Mike DeWine is one of them. He will be missed.

Mr. KOHL

Mr. KOHL. Mr. President, today I rise to commemorate the 65th anniversary of the bombing of the Pearl Harbor naval base, a dark day in our country's rich history, brightened only by the courage and resolve of Americans soundly united to fight tyranny and bring order to chaos. We honor the memory of the service men and women and civilians who fell defending our shores that day, and pay tribute to the thousands who would survive to rebuild, rearm, and lead our war effort abroad. Millions of Americans, young and old, would join these brave men and women in factories, mills, in tanks and in trenches fighting under one flag for a common goal. President Roosevelt's day of infamy has lived on in the minds of those who bore witness to that day and in the hearts of the generations who have followed. Every soldier, sailor, airman, and marine, fighting with our flag on their shoulder, has been passed the strength and courage of the service men and women that came before them. Every generation's sacrifice is selfless and precious. On this anniversary, let us remember properly those who have served our country in times of conflict and peace and those serving our country today.

Mr. KOHL

Mr. KOHL. Mr. President, I am grateful for the opportunity to join with my colleagues on the vitally important topic of Darfur and the entire humanitarian crisis facing that part of the world. When we look at a current map of Africa, we are looking, for the most part, at national boundary lines that were formed by the arbitrary dictates of Western European nations during their primacy as colonial power brokers in the 19th century. Those lines were, essentially, simple longitude or latitude lines that had no relevancy, at all, to the social, cultural, or tribal structures that had existed on those lands for centuries. Suddenly, the simple, clean-cut decisions of 19th century Europeans have become, in the late 20th and early 21st centuries, far more complex than any diplomats in London, Paris, Berlin, or even Washington, could have imagined in those relatively distant times. Darfur is serious. Clearly, it is not the only place on this planet with unspeakable atrocities and unbelievable conditions. People who once farmed wheat in western Afghanistan are now facing desperate consequences due to the confluence of floods and drought. There are countless people--women, children, and the infirm--in camps like Dadaab in eastern Kenya who are not only trying to cope with the political and military chaos streaming out of Somalia but also the natural calamity of floods bringing food shortages, waterborne disease, and other human heartbreaks to our attention. We cannot ignore these other tragedies. Darfur is not the only place in need of assistance. But there remains Darfur. It is etched in our conscious because of the pictures we see on television, the stories we read in the paper, and more importantly, what we know to be true. The facts are before us. The crisis in Darfur is an outgrowth of a decades-long struggle within Sudan extending back nearly to 1956 when Sudan gained independence from Britain and Egypt, resulting in an estimated 2 million deaths due to war and famine in the last two decades alone. Millions more have been displaced. In February of 2003, the conflict spilled into Darfur with tragic consequences when local rebel militias determined to challenge the Khartoum Government on grounds related to discrimination of ethnic groups in the region. The central government's response was to unleash a harsh policy against the people of Darfur, including use of armed militias against civilians. The U.S. Congress and the Bush administration pronounced these actions in 2004 as genocide. In 2005, condition in Darfur only got worse. Attacks by the Khartoum Government-backed jingaweit against civilian populations continued unabated. U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan announced that abduction of national staff of humanitarian relief NGOs had reached alarming proportions. In June of 2005, the International Criminal Court formally began an investigation into charges of atrocities in Darfur. And in recent months, reports indicate that atrocities in Darfur are peaking again. Slowly, the African Union began exercising limited authority in Darfur. Further attempts by the United Nations to introduce peacekeeping forces or a similar presence met with continuing resistance from the Khartoum Government. Just last week, the Peace and Security Council of the African Union adopted a proposal concerning a hybrid force for peacekeeping in Darfur. The African Union will extend its mission for another 6 months beginning January 1, 2007, in order to provide additional time for clarification and implementation of how a hybrid force will be composed and deployed. Progress may be seen in these actions, but it moves very slowly. To date, since the Darfur crisis began in 2003, an estimated 450,000 people have been killed and more than 2 million displaced. In addition, some 220,000 Sudanese have been forced into refugee camps in neighboring Chad, and an additional number are in refugee camps in Kenya. Even though the Bush administration has declared that acts of genocide have occurred in Darfur, such declaration has not resulted in any major shift in U.S. policy. A shift should occur. We must intensify pressure on the Khartoum Government regarding its policies toward Darfur, and we must firmly pursue the Addis protocols that were achieved last week. As the current ranking member of the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Agriculture, Rural Development, and Related Agencies, and during the tenure I hope to continue in the next Congress, I know that humanitarian food assistance is a very large piece of the solution to the crisis in Darfur. Under the jurisdiction of the Agriculture Subcommittee is an array of programs of importance to food insecurity-- what in this country we once called hunger--such as Public Law 480 and reimbursements to the Bill Emerson Humanitarian Trust. In fact, a little more than 1 month ago, my appropriations staff was sent on a mission to Sudan which would have brought them to within a few kilometers of the border of South Darfur. Unfortunately, the El Bashir government in Khartoum refused to issue them the appropriate visas, but they were able to participate with the World Food Program on an air drop of food over Southern Sudan that, at least, gave them a firsthand experience of the hardships in that country. They also met with refugees from Darfur in the U.N. camp at Kakuma in northwestern Kenya, where the original ``Lost Children'' of Sudan found shelter in the early 1990s. While at Kakuma, my staff was presented with the following written request by Darfur refugees: October 13, 2006. The current situation in Darfur was not acceptable and every day getting worse and we Darfurian we have worried and we don't know how our future will be and what are you planning for us. Mubarak Suleiman, Darfur Committee. I have watched, and I will continue to watch with keen interest the developments in this part of the world and take to heart the charge that these things shall not occur ``on our watch.'' To the extent that I can continue to direct food aid programs in the coming Congress, this part of the world, and all the other parts in dire need, will have my full attention, and I will seek the support of fellow Senators when the time comes to make emergency assistance available.

Mr. KOHL

Mr. KOHL. I thank the Senator for her attention to this issue. I appreciate all of the important facts she has raised, and look forward to working with her.

Mr. KOHL. Mr. President, although it does not appear that we will be able to complete action on the Agriculture appropriations bill this evening, I would like to take a quick moment to thank Senator Bennett and his staff for their hard work. I have had the pleasure of serving with Senator Bennett on this subcommittee for the last 4 years, and every year he and his staff have worked very hard to write a responsible, bipartisan bill that spends the American citizens tax dollars wisely. They have also worked very closely with my staff, and I remain grateful for that. Once again, I would like to thank Fitz Elder, who did a great job in his first year as clerk, Dianne Preece, Stacy McBride, and Graham Harper. Senator Bennett, you have an exemplary staff, and I am grateful for all of their, and your, hard work and professionalism.

Mr. KOHL. I agree with my colleague, the chairman of our subcommittee. This project appears to be a well-established enterprise worthy of consideration for rural development program assistance, so we thank the Senator for his work in this regard.

Mr. KOHL. I concur with the distinguished subcommittee chairman.

Mr. KOHL. I appreciate the remarks of the Senators from California and assure them that I will work to address these items. VHS Testing Facilities

Mr. KOHL. As ranking member of the Senate Agriculture Appropriations Subcommittee and a member of the Great Lakes Task Force, I share in my colleagues' efforts to restore and protect the Great Lakes. I am aware of the risks associated with the spread of this virus within the Great Lakes and understand the need to limit its spread. It is my hope that we can help the Great Lakes states address this challenge and enhance their ability to ensure the safe movement of live fish within the region. I look forward to working with my colleagues on this issue.

Mr. KOHL. Thank you, Mr. President and Chairman Bennett. I rise today in support of H.R. 5384, which is the fiscal year 2007 appropriations bill for Agriculture, Rural Development, and Related Agencies. This year, the Agriculture Subcommittee received an allocation of $18.2 billion. While this was an increase of approximately $1.1 billion over last year, the increase was largely absorbed by scorekeeping adjustments driven by the 2006 budget reconciliation bill. However, the increased allocation, while certainly not a windfall, was certainly a help in writing a good bill, allowing us to restore programs the administration proposed to eliminate and provide other critical programmatic increases. I believe that Senator Bennett and his staff did an excellent job of balancing limited funding with important priorities, and I strongly encourage all Senators to support this bill. I will briefly discuss some of the highlights of the bill. Avian flu, while it has not maintained the level of public attention that it commanded earlier this year, is nevertheless, still a threat to our agricultural sector and to public health, and this bill provides an increase of more than $110 million in various accounts for research, regulatory programs, and vaccine-related funding for highly pathogenic avian flu. This funding is essential to helping prevent the spread of avian flu, as well as increasing research in order to contain it where necessary. The Food Safety and Inspection Service, charged with ensuring that the United States continues to have the safest food supply in the world, received the full funding amount requested by the President. This includes increased funding for food safety inspections, the food emergency response network, and information technology costs. The Food and Drug Administration received an increase of approximately $100 million above last year's level, including increases of more than $5 million for food defense, nearly $4 million for drug safety, and $50 million for pandemic flu preparedness. I thank Senator Bennett for working with me on one of my highest priorities for this bill, to give the Office of Generic Drugs at FDA a $10 million increase over the President's budget, which brings total funding for the Office of Generic Drugs to nearly $40 million, and total funding for generic drug approvals within FDA to nearly $75 million. I believe this increase is an important step and I will continue to work to ensure that FDA has the resources necessary to decrease the growing backlog of generic drug applications within the FDA and to make lower-cost generic drugs available to consumers as early as possible. In the area of nutrition, the bill provides $5.264 billion, an increase of $64 million above the President's request, for the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children,WIC, Program. This will fully fund WIC; and the committee did not accept the President's plans to limit WIC eligibility and to reduce funding to carry out the program. The bill also restores funding for the Commodity Supplemental Food Program, which the President proposed to eliminate. For the foreign assistance programs, the committee included an increase of $86 million for international humanitarian food assistance--providing U.S. commodities to fight hunger throughout the world--under Public Law 480 title II. With major crises facing us throughout the world and emergency relief demands continuing to rise, it is extremely important that this program is funded at the highest possible level. Mr. President, $100 million is provided for the McGovern-Dole Food for Education Program. This program provides what is oftentimes the only meal a child receives in a day, and is used to encourage children, especially girls, to come to school in developing countries. In conservation accounts, no limitation is provided on the Conservation Security Program or the Wetlands Reserve Program. The Natural Resources Conservation Service also received a slight increase. Funding for Conservation Operations was increased by $4 million over last year's level; Watershed and Flood Prevention Operations received over $62 million; the Healthy Forests Reserve Program received $5 million; and funding for Watershed Surveys and Planning, the Watershed Rehabilitation Program, and Resource Conservation and Development was maintained at last year's level. Agricultural research accounts within USDA also received an increase of approximately $30 million. This includes increases for both competitively awarded research grants and formula-based funding for land grant universities and minority serving institutions. In rural development, the Rural Community Advancement Program received an increase of nearly $20 million over last year's funding-- and $114 million over the President's request--to provide assistance for infrastructure and essential community facilities in rural communities. This includes restoring significant cuts for water and wastewater utility systems in rural communities. The Renewable Energy Program was funded at twice the level proposed by the administration, allowing for critical work on ethanol and other alternative fuels. The committee did not accept the President's proposal to eliminate the section 515 Direct Rental Housing loan program which since 1963 has provided construction and rehabilitation of affordable housing for rural families and elderly residents with very low to moderate incomes. That administration budget submission is the first proposal to dispose of this program since its inception. Overall, as I said earlier, I think that Senator Bennett has done a good job in making sure that this bill balances limited funding and multiple priorities. I would like to thank Senator Bennett, for putting together an excellent bill, as well as Fitz Elder, IV, who has done a superb job during his first year as clerk of the subcommittee, Dianne Preece, Stacy McBride, and Graham Harper. Senator Bennett has assembled a smart, hard-working staff who are always professional and work seamlessly with my staff, something for which I am very grateful. I strongly support this bill, and I encourage all Senators to vote in favor of it. Thank you, Mr. President. I yield the floor.

Mr. KOHL. I thank my colleague for her kind words and would be happy to engage in a colloquy with the Senators from California.

Mr. KOHL

Mr. KOHL. Mr. President, today I pay tribute to Mr. Dennis Cochrane, a Wisconsin resident who last Thursday concluded his term on the board of directors of the Northeast-Midwest Institute. The Northeast-Midwest Institute is a Washington-based, private, non-profit, and nonpartisan research organization dedicated to economic vitality, environmental quality, and regional equity for Northeast and Midwest States. During his tenure on the institute's board, Dennis has provided exceptional counsel and guidance, and in the process has helped to improve the economic development and environmental quality of the Northeast-Midwest region. Dennis is a partner in the law firm of Marcovich, Cochrane, Milliken and Swanson in Superior, WI. Prior to his law practice, he served as assistant district attorney for Douglas County, WI, and city Attorney for the city of Superior. He has served as a member of the city of Superior Harbor Commission and was active in the founding of the Head of the Lakes Council of Governments, which evolved into the Metropolitan Interstate Committee of the Duluth-Superior Region. I thank Dennis Cochrane for his leadership on the Northeast-Midwest Institute's Board. His valued service and council will not easily be replaced.

Mr. KOHL

Mr. KOHL. Mr. President, I understand that tonight the Senate will move to passage of the reauthorization of the Older Americans Act. I support passage of this legislation, which funds nutrition, health, elder abuse prevention, caregiver support, and employment programs that are critical to our Nation's seniors--so critical, in fact, that delegates to the White House Conference on Aging ranked reauthorization as their No. 1 priority. Today, people over the age of 65 make up over 12 percent of the population, but they will make up 20 percent in the next 45 years. That means one out of every five Americans will be a senior by the year 2050. Just in the past 5 years, Wisconsin has experienced a 6 percent increase in people over the age of 65. It is clear we need a strong Older Americans Act that provides real help if we are to serve the seniors of today and tomorrow. As ranking member of the Special Committee on Aging, I applaud the bipartisan efforts of Senator Enzi and Senator Kennedy in producing a bill that preserves the programs in the Older Americans Act. This is not a perfect bill, and in future reauthorizations we must continue to strengthen OAA for both today's seniors and the coming tidal wave of baby boomer retirees. But I am pleased that this reauthorization rejects attempts to dismantle the OAA programs and instead preserves them. This OAA reauthorization bill includes several pieces I strongly support. First, it strengthens the Senior Community Service Employment Program--now renamed the Older American Community Service Employment Program. Many seniors expect to work past traditional retirement age. Some will do so because they enjoy the physical and mental benefits of work, but others need additional income to be financially secure. That is why the OACSEP program is so important. It is the only Federal workforce program specifically targeted to older people, providing community service and job training to low-income adults age 55 and over. Many of us were concerned that the administration proposed a major overhaul of this program that would have disrupted both grantees and participants. Instead, this bill wisely preserves OACSEP and builds on its success. In particular, the bill maintains OACSEP's role in allowing seniors who have a disability or poor employment prospects to do community service jobs. Instead of turning seniors away, this bill recognizes that seniors who give back to their communities help not only the organizations and families they serve but also help themselves become more self-sufficient. I thank the HELP Committee for working with me to improve OACSEP. Specifically, the bill expands eligibility to ensure that people who have some income but are still very poor can get OACSEP services. It also requires the Department of Labor to evaluate the performance of OACSEP grantees by hours of community service employment, placement into and retention in paid jobs, earnings, and the number of people served--including the number of people from hard-to-serve populations. And it requires Labor to use performance on these measures as one of its criteria in awarding future grants. At an Aging Committee hearing in April, the GAO testified that even though thousands of seniors need training and jobs, Labor has restricted OACSEP eligibility so much that grantees can't find enough people to enroll. The bill returns to more realistic eligibility criteria, such as ensuring that SSI benefits no longer count as income in determining whether you are poor enough to qualify for the program. This reauthorization also recognizes the importance of engaging our next generation of seniors in community service. While many boomers would like to continue working, others will look to mix work and leisure with volunteerism. Older Americans bring a wealth of talent and experience to their communities, and many are eager to make a meaningful contribution. This reauthorization directs the administration on Aging to develop a blueprint for engaging boomers and authorizes a fund for innovation for community stakeholders to engage boomers. These are two important steps in giving the government and communities the tools needed to harness boomers' leadership skills and abilities. I am also pleased to see several provisions of the Elder Justice Act included in the Older Americans Act reauthorization. I am an original cosponsor of Elder Justice and strongly support its goals. For far too long, our Nation has turned its back on the shame of elder abuse. With these provisions, we are finally saying enough is enough--elder abuse is unacceptable and we are going to put an end to it. For the first time, the bill provides real Federal leadership in the fight to end elder abuse by creating an Office of Elder Abuse Prevention. It also includes programs to assist States and Indian tribes with their efforts to protect seniors. Important research and data collection can now begin so we will know the scope of the problem and the best solutions to prevent, detect, and treat elder abuse, neglect and exploitation. In addition, I am pleased this bill preserves the Long Term Care Ombudsman Program. Although it is a small program, the ombudsman plays a key role in protecting the elderly and disabled in long-term care by serving as an advocate for patients and helping them resolve complaints of abuse, neglect, and mistreatment. A recent report by the Institute of Medicine of the National Academy of Sciences noted the importance of routine onsite presence of ombudsman in detecting problems before they become serious. My home State of Wisconsin has one of the most successful ombudsman programs in the county, and we are proud to have one of the very best ombudsmen, George Potaracke, leading that program. I have worked for many years to ensure that this woefully underfunded program receives increases. These increases are often small, but they improve the lives of people living in long-term care facilities. I hope that future OAA reauthorizations will take the ombudsman's growing caseload into account and increase its funding authorization to match the need. This legislation also maintains strong support for state and community programs authorized under title III. These programs serve over 8.2 million older persons, providing transportation, access to senior centers, home care, adult daycare, and congregate and home- delivered meals like the Meals on Wheels program. These valuable services allow older persons to live in their communities and remain independent. Each year, title III gives seniors almost 36 million rides to places like doctors' offices, grocery stores, and senior centers. It ensures that 6,000 senior centers continue to flourish in our communities. It provides 20 million hours of personal care, homemaker, and chore services, and almost 10 million hours of services in adult daycare. And it serves 248 million meals to our seniors. I am pleased that the Older Americans Act reauthorization preserves these important services. In addition, the Family Caregiver Support program is reauthorized and improved. I was an original cosponsor of this program, which ensures that family members who care for an elderly or disabled relative receive the support and respite services they need. The Family Caregiver Support Program provides access assistance to 585,000 caregivers, conducts counseling and training services for about 300,000 caregivers, and supports respite care services for over 200,000 caregivers. Now that we are poised to pass the Older Americans Act reauthorization, we must make sure we fund it. All of our good intentions will be empty promises if we don't also provide the resources seniors need. As a member of the Appropriations Committee, I have consistently supported increased funding for OAA and will continue to fight for these programs. Again, I applaud the HELP Committee for this sensible and much needed bill.

Mr. KOHL

Mr. KOHL. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Citizen Petition Fairness and Accuracy Act of 2006. This legislation will help speed the introduction of cost-saving generic drugs by preventing abuses of the Food and Drug Administration citizen petition process. Consumers continue to suffer all across our country from the high-- and ever rising--cost of prescription drugs. A recent independent study found that prescription drug spending has more than quadrupled since 1990, and now accounts for 11 percent of all health care spending. At the same time, the pharmaceutical industry is one of the most profitable industries in the world, returning more than 15 percent on their investments. One key method to bring prescription drug prices down is to promote the introduction of generic alternatives to expensive brand name drugs. Consumers realize substantial savings once generic drugs enter the market. Generic drugs cost on average of 63 percent less than their brand-name equivalents. One study estimates that every 1 percent increase in the use of generic drugs could save $4 billion in health care costs. This is why I have been so active in the last year in pursuing legislation designed to combat practices which impede the introduction of generic drugs--including S. 3582, the Preserve Access to Generics Act, which would forbid payments from brand name drug manufacturers to generic manufacturers to keep generic drugs off the markets, and S. 2300, the Lower Priced Drugs Act, legislation I co-sponsored to combat other conduct which impedes the marketing of generic drugs. The legislation I introduce today targets yet another practice by brand name drug companies to impede or block the marketing of generic drugs-- abuse of the FDA citizen petition process. FDA rules permit any person to file a so-called ``citizen petition'' to raise concerns about the safety or efficacy of a generic drug that a manufacturer is seeking FDA approval to bring to market. While this citizen petition process was put in place for a laudable purpose, unfortunately in recent years it has been abused by frivolous petitions submitted by brand name drug manufacturers (or individuals acting at their behest) whose only purpose is to delay the introduction of generic competition. The FDA has a policy of not granting any new generic manufacturer's drug application until after it has considered and evaluated any citizen petitions regarding that drug. The process of resolving a citizen petition (even if ultimately found to be groundless) can delay the approval by months or years. Indeed, brand name drug manufacturers often wait to file citizen petitions until just before the FDA is about to grant the application to market the new generic drug, solely for the purpose of delaying the introduction of the generic competitor for the maximum amount of time possible. This gaming of the system should not be tolerated. In recent years, FDA officials have expressed serious concerns about the abuse of the citizen petition process. Last year, FDA Chief Counsel Sheldon Bradshaw noted that ``[t]he citizen petition process is in some cases being abused. Sometimes, stakeholders try to use this mechanism to unnecessarily delay approval of a competitor's products.'' He added that he found it ``particularly troublesome'' that he had ``seen several examples of citizen petitions that appear designed not to raise timely concerns with respect to the legality or scientific soundness of approving a drug application, but rather to delay approval by compelling the agency to take the time to consider the arguments raised in the petition, regardless of their merits, and regardless of whether the petitioner could have made those very arguments months and months before.'' And a simple look at the statistics gives credence to these concerns. Of the 21 citizen petitions for which the FDA has reached a decision since 2003, 20 or 95 percent of them have been found to be without merit. Of these, ten were identified as ``eleventh hour petitions'', defined as those filed less than 6 months prior to the estimated entry date of the generic drug. None of these ten ``eleventh hour petitions'' were found to have merit, but each caused unnecessary delays in the marketing of the generic drug by months or over a year, causing consumers to spend millions and millions more for their prescription drugs than they would have spent without these abusive filings. Despite the expense these frivolous citizen petitions cause consumers and the FDA, under current law the government has absolutely no ability to sanction or penalize those who abuse the citizen petition process, or who file citizen petitions simply to keep competition off the market. Our legislation will correct this obvious shortcoming and give the Department of Health and Human Services--the FDA's parent agency-- the power to sanction those who abuse the process. Our bill will, for the first time, require all those who file citizen petitions to affirm certain basic facts about the truthfulness and good faith of the petition, similar to what is required of every litigant who makes a filing in court. The party filing the citizen petition will be required to affirm that the petition is well grounded in fact and warranted by law; is not submitted for an improper purpose, such as to harass or cause unnecessary delay in approval of competing drugs; and does not contain any materially false, misleading or fraudulent statement. The Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services is empowered to investigate a citizen petition to determine if it has violated any of these principles, was submitted for an improper purpose, or contained false or misleading statements. Further, the Secretary is authorized to penalize anyone found to have submitted an abusive citizen petition. Possible sanctions include a fine up to one million dollars, a suspension or permanent revocation of the right of the violator to file future citizens' petition, and a dismissal of the petition at issue. HHS is also authorized to refer the matter to the Federal Trade Commission so that the FTC can undertake its own investigation as to the competitive consequences of the frivolous petition and take any action it finds appropriate. Finally, the bill directs the HHS that all citizen petitions be adjudicated within six months of filing, which will put an end to excessive delays in bringing needed generic drugs to market because of the filings of these petitions. While our bill will not have any effect on any person filing a truly meritorious citizen petition, this legislation will serve as a strong deterrent to attempts by brand name drug manufacturers or any other party that seeks to abuse the citizen petition process to thwart competition. It will thereby remove one significant obstacle exploiting by brand name drug companies to prevent or delay the introduction of generic drugs. I urge my colleagues to support this legislation. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. KOHL

Mr. KOHL. Mr. President, I rise today to recognize National Employ Older Workers Week, a time to celebrate the many older workers who are redefining retirement and the employers that welcome their talents. Many older Americans do not see retirement as just a period of leisure; they continue to contribute to our nation's businesses, communities, and economy. And some employers, facing a shortage of skilled and experienced workers, have recognized the value of older workers by changing their policies to attract and retain them. One of those employers is Mercy Health System, which is based in Wisconsin and has 63 health care facilities across Wisconsin and Illinois. AARP recently ranked Mercy Health System the top employer for older workers in the country. Mercy Health System attracts and retains older workers by providing flexible work options, like its Work-to- Retire Program, which offers reduced and seasonal work schedules while maintaining health benefits. Yet too few employers have followed Mercy Health System's lead in creating better work options for older Americans. While most older workers want to work past traditional retirement age, many do not want to work a traditional full-time schedule. Today, only about one-third of older workers have flexible work schedules. Even when employers offer flexible work options like part-time work schedules, most do not also offer benefits: only 22 percent of part-time workers have access to health benefits. So while older workers and some employers have begun to reinvent retirement, we have a long way to go. That is why I authored the Older Worker Opportunity Act, which aims to expand opportunities for older Americans to work longer if they so choose. The centerpiece of this legislation is a tax credit for employers that offer flexible, reduced, or seasonal work schedules to older workers while maintaining their health and pension benefits. Such a credit would reward employers like Mercy Health System who are doing the right thing, while encouraging other employers to follow their lead. Greater workplace flexibility would not only benefit older Americans, but would also reduce employer costs by increasing productivity and job retention. Just this week, the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare endorsed the Older Worker Opportunity Act. In its letter of support, president and CEO Barbara Kennelly offered that the bill ``could help pave the way for significant increases in older worker employment.'' I agree, and I am proud to have them join our other supporters, including the National Council on Aging, the National Older Worker Career Center, Watson Wyatt Worldwide, the Committee for Economic Development, the Association of Jewish Family and Children's Agencies, and United Jewish Communities. With their backing, this bill will continue to gain steam. During National Employ Older Workers Week, we also celebrate the Senior Community Service Employment Program--SCSEP--which has provided community service and job training to low-income seniors for 40 years. As our baby boomers age and seniors become a growing share of the population, we must strengthen SCSEP so that all eligible seniors get the help they need. Many of us were concerned when the Administration proposed a major overhaul of this program, which would have been disruptive to both grantees and participants. I am hopeful that the Older Americans Act reauthorization bill will preserve the basic structure of the program and build on its success. I urge Congress to pass the OAA reauthorization as soon as possible so that seniors in need of SCSEP services have the tools to stay active in the workforce and their communities. But beyond reauthorization, we must also boost SCSEP's funding, which is currently only enough to serve less than one percent of the eligible population. As a member of the Appropriations Committee, I will continue to press for additional funding so that all older Americans who want or need to work longer have the opportunity to do so. As older Americans live longer and healthier lives, most have the ability and desire to remain active. Some want to maintain physical and mental health, some need to improve their financial security, and some want to continue to contribute to society. Whatever the reason, it's time to change the way we think about retirement. Older Americans are a valuable asset to our nation's businesses, communities, and economy, and we must tap their reservoir of experience and talents. Our seniors deserve it, and our economic future may well depend on it.

Mr. KOHL

Mr. KOHL. Mr. President, I rise to support passage of H.R. 4954, the Port Security Act. This bill will improve security at our ports and it is a step in the right direction. It will invest more money and coordinate programs to improve cargo screening, hire more personnel to increase physical security at ports, require background checks for port workers, and expedite deployment of radiation detection equipment to prevent the smuggling of nuclear material into our ports. All of these measures represent a better and smarter approach towards port security and homeland security generally. But we need to do much more. It has been 5 years since the 9/11 attacks and sadly we still have much more to do to prevent a repeat of that catastrophe. We are troubled that this Congress has failed to implement many of the changes suggested by the 9/11 Commission more than 2 years after their final report. For example, the Commission urged us to improve border security through a more efficient entry-exit screening system. Despite the national outcry to beef up border security as we have seen during the ongoing immigration debate, we have yet to adequately address this problem. The 9/11 Commission also recommended that we develop smarter plans to secure not only our air transportation system but also our rail and main transit systems. As the terrorist attacks in Madrid in 2004 and London in 2005 taught us, terrorists are more than willing and able to attack our trains, buses, and subway systems. And even though we have spent billions to better protect air passengers, we must better screen for explosives in checked baggage and air cargo. The plot to use liquid explosives uncovered by British intelligence services in August revealed that we are unable to properly scan for all explosives. We can and must do more to protect these vulnerabilities against attack. Unfortunately, what needs to be done to improve homeland security is not limited to the transportation sector. For example, we must also do more to improve security at our nuclear powerplants and chemical factories. Study after study has shown that a tragic attack on one of these facilities could kill thousands of Americans. Such a bleak assessment of what still needs to be done--a full 5 years after 9/11--should gravely concern us. It is no wonder that a majority of Americans do not feel safer. According to an ABC News poll taken last week, 74 percent of Americans said they were concerned about the possibility of more major terrorist attacks in the United States. That same poll also found that 60 percent said more should be done to stop terrorists from striking again. Clearly, public sentiment demands that we improve homeland security. Passage of the port security bill will demonstrate that we can work together to make America safer. While this marks progress, it is just one piece of a much larger homeland security puzzle that we need to tackle. This must be our No. 1 priority and I urge my colleagues to continue working together towards this goal.

Mr. KOHL

Mr. KOHL. Mr. President, 5 years ago, the Nation woke up to a crisp and sunny fall day and went to bed in a world forever changed. We lost so much that day--3000 lives, a skyline, a sense of safety in our homes, our comforting ignorance of the stark face of evil. Since 9/11, we have tried to heal, to remember with honor those we lost. And we have tried to make real the false security we felt that crisp September morning before the first plane hit. We have--and will continue to--debate what America has become since 9/11. We need to figure out if we are safer, if we have sacrificed too much freedom for security, if we have paid too little to bolster the first responders, if we have fought the wrong war in Iraq, if we haven't done the right work in Afghanistan. These questions should and must be answered. But today, we need to put aside our considerable differences and recall the common, deep wound every American suffered on 9/11. Our sorrow, anger, and shock were not partisan; we were united in our outrage and unified in our resolve. As we remember today who and what we lost on 9/11, we must also remember the love we share for who and what we are in America. That is what was attacked that September morning--and that is what can bring us together to build a more secure America.

Mr. KOHL

Mr. KOHL. Given this interpretation, I urge the committee to work with the Army to ensure that funds provided in this title and elsewhere in this bill should be used for upgrading equipment to current production type, model, and series, where determined by the Army Acquisition Executive to be required and cost effective, to include equipment used for predeployment training but not otherwise deployed.

Mr. KOHL. Mr. President, I rise today to ask the chairman and ranking member of the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee for clarification of language that appears in title IX, on page 238 of the committee's report. Under the heading ``Operation and Maintenance'' there is a writeup entitled ``Pre-Deployment and Post-Deployment Training.'' The committee states in part ``The Committee believes that costs accrued at home station for the aforementioned activities are allowable costs for the use of title IX funding. To the extent that such training, maintenance and reset activities displace normal peacetime training events, the amounts provided to the Department in title IX operation and maintenance accounts should be used to ensure full support of pre- deployment and post-deployment operations, as well as for continuing combat and security operations in support of the global war on terror.'' Senator Inouye and Senator Stevens, is it the committee's intent that funds provided in this title for national and field level reset repair be available for the reset of equipment used for pre-deployment and post training but not otherwise deployed?

Mr. KOHL

Mr. KOHL. Mr. President, I rise today with Senator Schumer to introduce the Prevent All Cigarette Trafficking, PACT, Act of 2006. As the problem of cigarette trafficking continues to worsen, we must provide law enforcement officials with the tools they need to crack down on cigarette trafficking. The PACT Act closes loopholes in current tobacco trafficking laws, enhances penalties for violations, and provides law enforcement with new tools to combat the innovative new methods being used by cigarette traffickers to distribute their products. Each day we delay passage of this important legislation, terrorists and criminals raise more money, states lose significant amounts of tax revenue, and kids have easy access to tobacco products over the Internet. The cost to Americans is not merely financial. Tobacco smuggling also poses a significant threat to innocent people around the world. It has developed into a popular, and highly profitable, means of generating revenue for criminal and terrorist organizations. Hezbollah, for example, earned $1.5 million between 1996 and 2000 by engaging in tobacco trafficking in the United States. Al-Qaida and Hamas have also generated significant revenue from the sale of counterfeit cigarettes. That money is often raised right here in the United States, and it is then funneled back to these international terrorist groups. Cutting off financial support to terrorist groups is an integral part of the protecting this country against future attacks. We can no longer continue to let terrorist organizations exploit weaknesses in our tobacco laws to generate significant amounts of money. The cost of doing nothing is too great. This is not a minor problem. Cigarette smuggling is a multibillion dollar a year phenomenon, and it is getting worse. In 1998, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, BATFE, had six active tobacco smuggling investigations. In 2005, the that number swelled to 452. The number of cases alone, however, does not sufficiently put this problem into perspective. The amount of money involved is truly astonishing. Cigarette trafficking, including the illegal sale of tobacco products over the Internet, costs States billions of dollars in lost tax revenue each year. It is estimated that Federal tax losses to Internet cigarette sales will reach $1.4 billion this year. As lost tobacco tax revenue lines the pockets of criminals and terrorist groups, states are being forced to raise college tuition and restrict access to other public programs. Tobacco smuggling may provide some with cheap access to cigarettes, but those cheap cigarettes are coming at a significant cost to the rest of us. According to the Government Accountability Office, GAO, each year, cigarette trafficking investigations are growing more and more complex, and take longer to resolve. More people are selling cigarettes illegally, and they are getting better at it. As these cases get tougher to solve, we owe it to law enforcement officials to do our part to lend a helping hand. The PACT Act enhances BATFE's authority to enter premises to investigate and enforce cigarette trafficking laws, and increasing penalties for violations. Unless these existing laws are strengthened, traffickers will continue to operate with near impunity. Just as important, though, we must provide law enforcement with new enforcement tools tools that enable them to combat the cigarette smugglers of the 21st century. The Internet represents one of those new obstacles to enforcement. Illegal tobacco vendors around the world evade detection by conducting transactions over the Internet, and then employing the services of common carriers and the U.S. Postal Service to deliver their illegal products around the country. Just a few years ago, there were less than 100 vendors selling cigarettes online. Today, approximately 500 vendors sell illegal tobacco products over the Internet. Without new and innovative enforcement methods, law enforcement will not be able to effectively address the growing challenges facing them today. The PACT Act sets out to do just that by cutting off the delivery. A significant part of this problem involves the shipment of contraband cigarettes through the United States Postal Service, USPS. This bill would cut off access to the USPS by making tobacco products non-mailable. We would treat cigarettes just like we treat alcohol, making it illegal to ship them through the US mails and cutting off a large portion of the delivery system. It also employs a novel approach, one being used in some of our States today, to combat illegal sales of tobacco over the Internet. Specifically, it will allow the Attorney General, in collaboration with State and local law enforcement, to create a list of companies that are illegally selling tobacco products. That list will then be distributed to legitimate businesses whose services are indispensable to illegal internet vendors--common carriers. Once a common carrier knows which customers are breaking the law, this bill will ensure that they take appropriate action to prevent their companies from being exploited by terrorists and other criminals. It is important to point out that this bill has been carefully negotiated with the common carriers, including UPS, to ensure that it does not place any unreasonable burdens on these businesses. Many changes were made to the bill that was introduced in the last Congress to ensure that the legislation was written to conform to the technological capabilities of these companies. In light of these changes, there is no question that private carriers will be able to fully comply with this bill without interrupting their existing delivery practices and procedures. In addition, the legislation makes clear that we are not asking for perfection. For example, carriers will not be held liable for the actions of their employees if they have effective policies and procedures in place to ensure compliance. The key word here is ``effective.'' These policies must be much more than mere words. We are not asking common carriers to ensure that every single pack of cigarettes is stopped before it moves through their delivery system, but we do expect a vigorous effort to ensure that they and their employees do the very best they can to stop doing business with people they know to be using their services to violate State and Federal laws. That is not too much to ask. In addition to these important law enforcement needs, it is important to mention another aspect of this legislation that is equally important. One of the primary ways children get access to cigarettes today is on the internet and through the mails. The PACT Act now contains a strong age verification section that will ensure that online vendors are not selling cigarettes to our children. This provision would prohibit the sale of tobacco products to children, and it would also require sellers to use a method of shipment that requires a signature and photo ID check upon delivery. Most States already have similar laws on the books, and this would simply make sure that we have a national standard to ensure that the Internet is not being used to evade similar ID checks we require at our grocery and convenience stores. The recognition that this is a significant problem, along with the commonsense approach taken in the PACT Act to combat it, has brought together a coalition of strange bedfellows. The legislation has not just garnered the support of the law enforcement community, including the National Association of Attorneys General, and public health advocates, such as the Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids. It also has the strong support of tobacco companies like Altria. These groups, who sometimes find themselves on opposite sides of these issues, all agree that this is an issue begging to be addressed. They all recognize the urgent need to provide our law enforcement officials with the tools they need to combat a very serious threat to our security and protect public health. I urge my colleagues to support this important legislation, and I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. KOHL

Mr. KOHL. Mr. President, I rise today with Senator Schumer to introduce the Prevent All Cigarette Trafficking, PACT, Act of 2006. As the problem of cigarette trafficking continues to worsen, we must provide law enforcement officials with the tools they need to crack down on cigarette trafficking. The PACT Act closes loopholes in current tobacco trafficking laws, enhances penalties for violations, and provides law enforcement with new tools to combat the innovative new methods being used by cigarette traffickers to distribute their products. Each day we delay passage of this important legislation, terrorists and criminals raise more money, states lose significant amounts of tax revenue, and kids have easy access to tobacco products over the Internet. The cost to Americans is not merely financial. Tobacco smuggling also poses a significant threat to innocent people around the world. It has developed into a popular, and highly profitable, means of generating revenue for criminal and terrorist organizations. Hezbollah, for example, earned $1.5 million between 1996 and 2000 by engaging in tobacco trafficking in the United States. Al-Qaida and Hamas have also generated significant revenue from the sale of counterfeit cigarettes. That money is often raised right here in the United States, and it is then funneled back to these international terrorist groups. Cutting off financial support to terrorist groups is an integral part of the protecting this country against future attacks. We can no longer continue to let terrorist organizations exploit weaknesses in our tobacco laws to generate significant amounts of money. The cost of doing nothing is too great. This is not a minor problem. Cigarette smuggling is a multibillion dollar a year phenomenon, and it is getting worse. In 1998, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, BATFE, had six active tobacco smuggling investigations. In 2005, the that number swelled to 452. The number of cases alone, however, does not sufficiently put this problem into perspective. The amount of money involved is truly astonishing. Cigarette trafficking, including the illegal sale of tobacco products over the Internet, costs States billions of dollars in lost tax revenue each year. It is estimated that Federal tax losses to Internet cigarette sales will reach $1.4 billion this year. As lost tobacco tax revenue lines the pockets of criminals and terrorist groups, states are being forced to raise college tuition and restrict access to other public programs. Tobacco smuggling may provide some with cheap access to cigarettes, but those cheap cigarettes are coming at a significant cost to the rest of us. According to the Government Accountability Office, GAO, each year, cigarette trafficking investigations are growing more and more complex, and take longer to resolve. More people are selling cigarettes illegally, and they are getting better at it. As these cases get tougher to solve, we owe it to law enforcement officials to do our part to lend a helping hand. The PACT Act enhances BATFE's authority to enter premises to investigate and enforce cigarette trafficking laws, and increasing penalties for violations. Unless these existing laws are strengthened, traffickers will continue to operate with near impunity. Just as important, though, we must provide law enforcement with new enforcement tools tools that enable them to combat the cigarette smugglers of the 21st century. The Internet represents one of those new obstacles to enforcement. Illegal tobacco vendors around the world evade detection by conducting transactions over the Internet, and then employing the services of common carriers and the U.S. Postal Service to deliver their illegal products around the country. Just a few years ago, there were less than 100 vendors selling cigarettes online. Today, approximately 500 vendors sell illegal tobacco products over the Internet. Without new and innovative enforcement methods, law enforcement will not be able to effectively address the growing challenges facing them today. The PACT Act sets out to do just that by cutting off the delivery. A significant part of this problem involves the shipment of contraband cigarettes through the United States Postal Service, USPS. This bill would cut off access to the USPS by making tobacco products non-mailable. We would treat cigarettes just like we treat alcohol, making it illegal to ship them through the US mails and cutting off a large portion of the delivery system. It also employs a novel approach, one being used in some of our States today, to combat illegal sales of tobacco over the Internet. Specifically, it will allow the Attorney General, in collaboration with State and local law enforcement, to create a list of companies that are illegally selling tobacco products. That list will then be distributed to legitimate businesses whose services are indispensable to illegal internet vendors--common carriers. Once a common carrier knows which customers are breaking the law, this bill will ensure that they take appropriate action to prevent their companies from being exploited by terrorists and other criminals. It is important to point out that this bill has been carefully negotiated with the common carriers, including UPS, to ensure that it does not place any unreasonable burdens on these businesses. Many changes were made to the bill that was introduced in the last Congress to ensure that the legislation was written to conform to the technological capabilities of these companies. In light of these changes, there is no question that private carriers will be able to fully comply with this bill without interrupting their existing delivery practices and procedures. In addition, the legislation makes clear that we are not asking for perfection. For example, carriers will not be held liable for the actions of their employees if they have effective policies and procedures in place to ensure compliance. The key word here is ``effective.'' These policies must be much more than mere words. We are not asking common carriers to ensure that every single pack of cigarettes is stopped before it moves through their delivery system, but we do expect a vigorous effort to ensure that they and their employees do the very best they can to stop doing business with people they know to be using their services to violate State and Federal laws. That is not too much to ask. In addition to these important law enforcement needs, it is important to mention another aspect of this legislation that is equally important. One of the primary ways children get access to cigarettes today is on the internet and through the mails. The PACT Act now contains a strong age verification section that will ensure that online vendors are not selling cigarettes to our children. This provision would prohibit the sale of tobacco products to children, and it would also require sellers to use a method of shipment that requires a signature and photo ID check upon delivery. Most States already have similar laws on the books, and this would simply make sure that we have a national standard to ensure that the Internet is not being used to evade similar ID checks we require at our grocery and convenience stores. The recognition that this is a significant problem, along with the commonsense approach taken in the PACT Act to combat it, has brought together a coalition of strange bedfellows. The legislation has not just garnered the support of the law enforcement community, including the National Association of Attorneys General, and public health advocates, such as the Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids. It also has the strong support of tobacco companies like Altria. These groups, who sometimes find themselves on opposite sides of these issues, all agree that this is an issue begging to be addressed. They all recognize the urgent need to provide our law enforcement officials with the tools they need to combat a very serious threat to our security and protect public health. I urge my colleagues to support this important legislation, and I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. KOHL

Mr. KOHL. Mr. President, today I wish to honor my friend, James Barr III, a respected citizen of Wisconsin and a distinguished business executive, who has served with integrity and distinction as president and chief executive officer of TDS Telecommunication Corporation since 1990. Mr. Barr is stepping down from his position with TDS later this year. Jim Barr has built a strong business model for TDS Telecom that is widely admired and emulated in the corporate world. Under his leadership, TDS Telecom has become a strong customer-focused organization that has won numerous customer service awards, including the prestigious JD Power and Associates annual award for exceptional customer care. He has created a vigorous and vital business organization with over 3,200 employees serving 1.2 million customers in 29 States. The company is now the sixth largest independent telephone company in the Nation. Jim Barr has given of his personal time not only in his service to several national telecommunications industry boards but to numerous prestigious public service organizations, including the United Way of Dane County, WI. Jim Barr has been an exemplary leader. His efforts have brought a higher quality of life to the people who have served with him and to the community he has served. He is, however, first and foremost, a loving and supportive husband to Joan, his wife of 45 years, a caring and understanding father to his four children, and a proud and devoted grandfather to eight grandchildren. Mr. President, I therefore honor Jim Barr today for his outstanding contributions to the telecommunications industry as well as Wisconsin. He is a visionary and a builder, leader and a mentor, a beloved husband, father, and grandfather, and I am proud to call him my friend.

Mr. KOHL

Mr. KOHL. Mr. President, I rise in support of H.R. 4, the Pension Protection Act. This bill is not a conference report, and I am troubled by the way that the House circumvented the process and endangered swift enactment of this important legislation. However, the bill that will soon be before the Senate does reflect the carefully negotiated agreement of the conferees and enjoys broad bipartisan support. Our goal is to strengthen traditional pensions, which have been an important source of retirement income for hard-working Americans. Unfortunately, these pensions have been on the decline, as companies replace them with 401(k)s that shift risk to individual workers and generally do not guarantee retirement income for life. We must ensure that traditional pensions remain a viable option for companies and at the same time ensure that companies keep their promises and do not dump their plans on the Government at taxpayer expense. This compromise strikes the right balance of requiring companies to contribute enough to their pension plans, without discouraging them from maintaining their plans. The bill enacts the commonsense requirement that companies must fully fund their plans, so that they can keep their promises to the 34 million workers and retirees who rely on their hard-earned benefits. It allows companies to put in more money when times are good. It also provides relief to Delta and Northwest, who have said that they will be forced to dump their plans if Congress does not enact this bill soon. Aside from reforming traditional pensions, the bill also includes important provisions to boost retirement savings. Most importantly, it improves and makes permanent the saver's credit, which helps low- and moderate-income workers save. It encourages companies to automatically enroll workers in 401(k) plans and makes pensions more portable. And it provides protections to workers in the wake of the Enron accounting scandal. While this bill is not perfect, I believe that it will go a long way toward improving the retirement security of all Americans, and I therefore support its enactment.