Herb Kohl

Mr. KOHL

Mr. KOHL. Mr. President, I rise today to express my strong support for the Breast and Cervical Cancer Treatment Act and urge that it be brought to the Senate floor for a vote. Sadly, breast and cervical cancer will afflict nearly 200,000 women this year, and take the lives of more than 45,000. Women in every State and every community in the country are today facing the daunting challenge of overcoming these diseases. They are not strangers; they are our sisters, mothers, aunts, and grandmothers. They are people we love and care about. The statistics are disturbing. The family stories are sobering. But let us find hope in the strides that we have made so far. In 1991, Congress created the Early Detection Program at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which provided low-income, uninsured women with breast and cervical cancer screening services. It was a positive first step toward ensuring that every woman, regardless of her annual income and insurance situation, could request a screening for breast and cervical cancer. I wholeheartedly support the program, and I know many of my colleagues do as well. However, just as critical as guaranteeing universal access to cancer screening is the need to provide treatment options following a diagnosis of cancer. While the CDC Early Detection Program supplies participating women with an evaluation, it offers nothing in the way of treatment should that evaluation reveal cancer. The very same women who are not expected to pay for a screening are somehow expected to finance their own treatment program. It simply does not make sense. We must, therefore, draw a line from A to B, from screening to treatment. The Breast and Cervical Cancer Treatment Act, a bill I am pleased to co-sponsor, does just that. It gives States the option of offering Medicaid coverage to women that participated in the CDC Early Detection Program and were diagnosed as having breast or cervical cancer. In so doing, it provides a much-needed complement to the Early Detection Program. We have broad bipartisan support in the Senate to pass this bill. Nearly 80 Senators have cosponsored it. The program was included in the President's fiscal year 2001 budget. But we need a vote. As time in this Congressional term wanes, we are increasingly forced to make difficult choices about which bills to address. But I believe this bill must be a top priority. It is unacceptable that women who are diagnosed with cancer often go without life-saving treatment simply because they cannot afford it. Congress has the responsibility to act quickly on this issue. In the spirit of the CDC Early Detection program, which is approaching its 10th anniversary, I urge the leadership to bring S. 662 to the floor as soon as possible, and advance America's fight against breast and cervical cancer.

Mr. KOHL

Mr. KOHL. Mr. President, 56 years ago today, the United States Marine Corps landed on the island of Guam to liberate its people from Japanese occupation. One of the marines involved in that action was William Grant Smith Neal who subsequently received the Purple Heart for wounds sustained during action on that island the following day. William Neal died on July 9, 2000 and one more American veteran of World War II has been taken from us. To honor Mr. Neal, and all veterans who served during that war, I believe it is fitting to outline the life of this man as a tribute to his generation which offered every full measure to keep this country safe. On January 22, 1923, in Utica, Kansas, was born the first child to Glenn and Bessie Neal. As evidence of close attachment with family (which has become a Neal trademark) Glenn and Bessie wanted to name their son William Grant Neal after his grandparents, William Neal and Grant Smith. In the excitement, the doctor became confused and the name affixed to the baby's birth certificate was William Grant Smith Neal. However, to family and friends, he became known simply as Bill. In fact, it was not until Bill entered the Marine Corps 18 years later that a document search revealed the complete scope of Bill Neal's full name. Bill's father was employed by the Missouri Pacific Railroad and his job relocated him and the entire Neal family in the late 1920's to Horace, Kansas, a community located nearly on the Colorado border and right in the middle of the coming Dust Bowl. As a child, Bill soon became familiar with athletics and was a member of the Horace Elementary Basketball Team during the 5th and 6th grade. While playing in a double elimination tournament, Bill's team won the final game, but with only three players remaining; all others had fouled out. Just like life in the West Kansas plains during the 1920's and 30's, playing basketball there was tough stuff, and Bill proved he had what it took: he was one of the final three. By the mid-1930's, the Neal family was moving again, this time to Hoisington, Kansas, where firm roots were put down. At Hoisington High School, Bill again excelled in sports as the football quarterback and in basketball and track. Naturally, his little sisters were very proud of him and anytime they would see Bill in downtown Hoisington, they would rush to his side and try to engage him in conversation. Being the big brother, however, Bill's response to such attention was normally the command, ``Go Home!" Other girls were more successful. On one occasion, a girl in Bill's class appeared at the Neal home, knocked on the door, and asked for Bill. When Bill stepped outside, she quickly kissed him and ran away. She wasn't taking the chance of being told to go home. After High School, Bill pursued higher education at Wichita University, known today as Wichita State University, on a football scholarship. But world events were soon to disrupt Bill Neal's formal education for 4 years and, instead, provide him a role in one of the most important events of the 20th Century. The December 7th attack on Pearl Harbor stirred the hearts of many young Americans intent on protecting our nation's shores and interests from evil forces then afoot in the world. Bill Neal was no exception. Although not yet of age to enlist without parental consent, Bill immediately sought to join the U.S. Marine Corps and asked his father for approval. However, his father, himself a veteran of the First World War, was not eager to watch his young son march off to what he knew awaited on distant battlefields and, instead, sent him back to school in Wichita until such time that Bill would otherwise have to sign up for the draft. That time soon came and on July 11, 1942, Bill Neal entered the United States Marine Corps and set off from Kansas by rail to Marine boot camp in San Diego, California. Bill had never before stepped foot outside the state of Kansas, but now he was about to enter a far and dangerous world. After boot camp, Bill was sent to New Zealand, which was then a staging area for hostile activities in the South Pacific. On his first Sunday there, Bill attended service at a local Methodist Church where he met the Craig family: Bob, his sons Bruce, Wallace, and Russell and Auntie Maggie. Following service, the Craigs invited Bill home for dinner and in a short time, he had become their ``adopted son''. Auntie Maggie taught him to drink tea in her kitchen and Wallace took him to rugby games. The friendship which developed between Bill and the Craigs continued through the years and Bill and his wife Natalie recently made a trip to New Zealand to renew that friendship. Just last year, Russell Craig and his wife Iris made a trip to America where Bill and Natalie served as their guide from one coast all the way to the other. But, the South Pacific in the 1940's was no vacation spot. Before long, Bill embarked from New Zealand for less hospitable receptions on Bouganville and Guadalcanal. The taste of Auntie Maggie's tea was soon replaced with the stench of hot, wet jungles. On July 21, 1944, Bill Neal came ashore at Guam in the second wave landing on Asan Red Beach. One day later, July 22nd, Bill was in a foxhole with four other marines when the direct hit of a Japanese shell fell right on their location. Three of Bill's companions were killed instantly. Bill would oftentimes say that every day of his life after that foxhole was a gift. It was a gift, to him and to all of us. The wounds Bill suffered on Guam placed him in a Honolulu hospital, and after recovering he went home to Hoisington for what was to be an extended leave. But meanwhile, the storming of Iwo Jima and its resulting high number of casualties forced the military to call available servicemen back into the theater of operations. So ended Bill's home leave and once again, he was kissing his mother goodby and boarding a train for the Pacific and a ship back to Guam where he was made pack-ready to invade Japan. Bill was under no allusion. Everyone knew that an American invasion of the Japanese home islands would be very grim work and the chances of survival not promising. But that was exactly the breach into where Bill Neal was about to step when word came of the flight of the Enola Gay, the dropping of two Atomic Bombs, and the surrender of Japan. Bill often acknowledged that Harry Truman, in making the momentous decision to use atomic weapons, not only ended the war, but also saved his life. With the war's end, Bill returned to the beloved homeland for which he had risked his life, and nearly paid the ultimate sacrifice. He readjusted to civilian life and was by 1946 enrolled at Manhattan, Kansas, in the Kansas State College, now Kansas State University, with a major in Agriculture Education and a membership in the Acacia Fraternity. He was heard to claim that he had returned to his native soil to ``marry a little Kansas farm girl''. He was soon to get his wish. One September night in 1946, Bill and a group of his friends drove out into the Riley County countryside with the less-than-noble intention of appropriating some watermelons from a nearby farm. The car in which they were riding was not properly large enough for the task and Bill found that someone was going to have to sit on his lap. Not to his dismay, that someone was a little Kansas farm girl from near Elbing, who, though an accomplice in the affair, was probably far more innocent than anyone else involved. But watermelons aside, Bill Neal had met his ``little Kansas farm girl'' and it is doubtful if any other raid has been ever so successful. Two days before Christmas of the following year, Natalie Baker's mother put her daughter on a bus in nearby Newton, Kansas, and within a number of hours, Natalie had arrived in Bill's hometown of Hoisington to meet the entire Neal family for the first time, visit the minister's house, and get married, all in one day. At the wedding there was only one guest, uninvited at that, by the name of Rex Archer who was one of Bill's fraternity brothers in Manhattan. After the ceremony, Bill's mother prepared a feast and sitting at the table, Rex demanded Natalie's attention and told her to take a good look at the man she had just married. ``Just look at that,'' he told her, ``just see what your kids are going to look like!'' Bill's father thought that was pretty funny. To Natalie it may have been a little sobering, but it was too late to back out, not that she would have anyway. Less than a year later, it was time to test the prediction. On September 29, 1948, Bill and Natalie Neal had their first child, Candi, born in Manhattan, Kansas. The following night, Bill's fraternity brothers gathered outside Natalie's room in the hospital to serenade her and her infant daughter with the Acacia Sweetheart Song. By January of 1950, Bill had graduated from college, but jobs were hard to find and his first post-graduation employment was in the form of temporary jobs in eastern Colorado and Salina, Kansas. It was in Salina on August 19, 1950, that Bill and Natalie's second child, a son named Bill, Junior, was born, known to all of us now as Billy. The Neal family was now complete. Not long afterward, Bill was offered a position as an instructor in Ellsworth, Kansas, teaching veterans skills related to agriculture. To Bill, this was a very rewarding experience and one which gave him many long lasting friendships with his students. However, another vocation was calling. In 1953, Bill was offered a job as claims adjuster with the Farm Bureau Insurance Company, which began a career that lasted more than 30 years. After a short training session in Great Bend, Bill was assigned to the Farm Bureau office in Garden City. The early 1950's were particularly brutal in western Kansas where dry, hot, windy days would kick up dust storms from which it was nearly impossible to escape. One Spring day in 1955, Bill was on the phone to a Farm Bureau office in eastern Kansas talking about the possibility of him taking a position in that part of the state. Bill asked if the wind was blowing in eastern Kansas that day and was told no, the sun was shining, the sky was blue, and the birds were singing. Bill looked out his window in Garden City, couldn't see across the street for all the dust, and at that moment the decision was made to move the Neal family across the state to settle in Altamont, which has remained the Neal home ever since. Always quick to adopt the local community spirit, Bill for a time taught Sunday School at the Altamont Presbyterian Church to high school-age and young adults. He even held briefly the position there as Assistant Sunday School Superintendent. One Sunday both the Superintendent and the pianist were gone leaving Bill fully in charge. He arranged for a substitute pianist and all seemed to be going well. When someone in the class suggested a particular hymn, Bill joined in with enthusiasm, but didn't notice that his hymnal was missing a page and he was singing a different song. Not long after that, Bill decided to pass on the role of Assistant Superintendent to another. All of us, in our own way, have our own cherished memories and stories of Bill Neal. Some of the remembrances of his former coworkers and friends include those of Jim Cerne, who described Bill as simply, ``his mentor''. Also, Paul Schmidt, former Cherokee County Farm Bureau Agent, recalls the time his wife was concerned about his health and was pressing him to get a check-up at a clinic in Ft. Scott. Bill thought the best way to get Paul to see a doctor was to agree to see one as well. He told Paul, if you go, I will go along with you for the same treatment, and it worked. Although they were tempted to sidetrack their trip from Ft. Scott to a Missouri golf course, they did get the check- up. However, the results were a little unexpected. Paul got a clear bill of health and Bill ended up getting gall bladder surgery. Slick Norris, while the Altamont Grade School Principal, learned of Bill's former achievements in field and track and one day asked him to give a demonstration to the students on pole vaulting. Young Billy Neal was quite proud when his ``old dad'' was able to top 8 feet in prime form at the age of 39. Bill's love of history was well known. Billy and others often noted how Bill always managed to land on ``yellow'' in Trivial Pursuit. But beyond that, Bill was a serious student of history and served well as the family genealogist. In fact, on a recent trip to Illinois and Indiana, he uncovered some interesting and long-forgotten tales of his mother's ancestors. For others of us there are differing impressions. Grandchildren will be quick to remember their grandpa's booming voice and hearty laughter. And, it will be easy to imagine Bill still making the rounds at the Parsons Country Club. Honesty was a standard Bill lived by every day of his life. On a recent tour of the New York Metropolitan Museum of Art, Bill promptly provided the full suggested donation price posted on a museum table, even after a local artist informed him it was just fine to offer only 50 cents. Similarly, during a tour of a Mexican border town, Bill was walking down the street and came upon a young woman selling tablecloths on a display. He asked her the price and she said $7. When he asked her for a sack to put them in, she misunderstood and said, $6. Anyway, Bill was never one to dicker. But, maybe, it was his never-failing optimism that was Bill Neal's greatest calling card. To him, every morning was a ``glorious good morning'' and every day brought his greeting of a most deliberate ``rise and shine''! Aside from family and friends, though, it was perhaps the U.S. Marine Corps and his experience during the war years that best shaped the qualities and character of Bill Neal. For many veterans, the horrible experiences of war are not the subject of comfortable conversation, and such was the case with Bill. Not until 1992 would Bill discuss many of his war experiences with even members of his immediate family. In 1992, Bill and Natalie attended the 50th Anniversary of the founding of the 3rd Marine Division in San Diego. That event, coupled with his reunion of old friends and sojourners of harms way, served as an invitation for Bill to release many of the memories he had held for half a century. He began to open up and talk about those years and let us all share in the pride of what he and others did for his country and for us. Nearly every year since then, Bill and Natalie attended these annual reunions where ``Semper Fidelis'' is demonstrated in a big way. In July 1994, Bill and Natalie participated in a charter flight where a large contingent of former fellow Marines, and their families, returned to Guam for the 50th Anniversary of the American landing on those shores. As they approached the island, the pilot slowly circled the beaches below where in 1944, Bill and his comrades slogged ashore toward a hostile enemy and an uncertain fate. Its not hard to imagine the rush of emotions everyone aboard that plane experienced either remembering or imagining what it had been like. Once on the ground, the people of Guam came out to cheer the return of the liberators who marched onto their shores all those years ago and where every year since, July 21st is celebrated as ``liberation day''. While the image of hero is real, it is not necessarily as a liberator, a warrior, or even as the recipient of the Purple Heart that we recall in the person of Bill Neal. Instead, it is of a loving husband and father. The relationship shared by Bill and Natalie for more than 50 years has been more than a model marriage. It is unlikely there has ever been another couple more dedicated to each other, more in tune with each other, and more deeply in love with each other than Bill and Natalie. Bill and Natalie have given us two extremely intelligent and talented children, 8 grandchildren, and 2 great grandchildren, so far. Other surviors include two brother, Cecil Neal of Oregon, Wisconsin and Willis Neal of Overland Park, Kansas; five sisters, Glenna Schneider of Tribune, Kansas, Twyla Miller of Broken Arrow, Oklahoma, Sally Hager of Dighton, Kansas, Phyllis Luerman of Hoisington, Kansas, and Penny McClung of Attica, Kansas. Bill was preceded in death by a sister, Jessie Kasselman. In many ways, Bill Neal lived the American dream. Rising from humble origins in the still untamed plains of western Kansas, he went on to accomplish a challenging career, marry a lovely and talented woman, and produce loving and dedicated children. He offered everything, including his very life, in the protection of those things most important. He met the challenge of his generation when foreign oppression threatened our very way of life. He came to adopt and live by the creed of his fellow Marines, the one which it is not now too difficult to imagine him using to salute those most dear to him. Semper Fi!

Mr. KOHL

Mr. KOHL. Mr. President, I rise in strong support of the amendment which I am cosponsoring with my colleague from Pennsylvania. As you know, this amendment will allow Amtrak to continue leasing vehicles from GSA through 2003. We are all eager to see Amtrak continue progressing toward self-sufficiency. Without this amendment, we will be jeopardizing their ability to achieve that goal. In my own State, half a million people from Wisconsin ride Amtrak every year. It is very important not only to Wisconsin but to every State that Amtrak continue its progress toward viability. We must continue to allow Amtrak to transition to self-sufficiency by 2003. This amendment is very crucial to that effort. I urge my colleagues to support the amendment.

Mr. KOHL. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. Several Senators addressed the Chair.

Mr. KOHL

Mr. KOHL. I agree with the Senator from Michigan that bovine TB constitutes an agricultural emergency.

Mr. KOHL. Mr. President, I congratulate Senator Cochran, my chairman, and his fine staff for the efficient completion of S. 2536. My friend from Mississippi has conducted this debate--as he always does--in a balanced, fair, and non partisan manner. He is a gentleman and a friend, and it is an honor and a pleasure to work with him. The bill we just passed includes funding for a wide variety of programs important to the American people. This is especially true now due to economic conditions in rural America which have not kept pace with the general prosperity enjoyed by most Americans. The bill also responds quickly and adequately to the very real crisis that has hit the dairy industry across this nation. Last December, milk prices dropped unexpectedly and dramatically. Today, the base price farmers receive for their milk is $9.46. The average base price for 1998 was $14.21, and the average for 1999 was $12.43. Those cold numbers cannot express the hard damage that has been done to dairy farmers and their families throughout my State, and throughout the nation. They add up to families that have stopped milking after generations, and rural towns that are collapsing as farms disappear. America's dairyland is in real danger of becoming a wasteland. And today with this bill, the Senate has responded with emergency payments to the small farmers hardest hit by this disaster. I am proud of this institution for putting aside regional differences and interests, and for seeing this provision as--not just helping Wisconsin farmers, or Vermont farmers, or Pennsylvanian farmers--but as helping American families. I also thank the Senator from West Virginia, the distinguished ranking member of the Appropriations Committee, for his vital assistance in securing these emergency dairy payments. At the end of last year, when we spent a great deal of the Senate's time on dairy issues, he listened to me and to the unique struggles of Wisconsin dairy farmers. He said then he would do whatever he could to help. And he has. He is a man who speaks some of the most inspiring and powerful words spoken on the Senate floor--and he is a man of those words. It is an honor to serve with him. This is a good bill and, again, we should all congratulate Senator Cochran for his fine leadership of our subcommittee. I also want to thank the members of my staff who have helped make this process run as smoothly as it has this year: Paul Bock, my chief of staff, and Ben Miller, who is new on my staff this year, have done a fine job. Special thanks goes to the subcommittee's minority clerk, Galen Fountain, without whom I do not believe there could be an Agriculture bill in the Senate. His knowledge of the subject, his patience, his loyalty, and his work ethic are legendary around here, and deservedly so. I look forward to moving this bill through conference quickly, and having a solid Agriculture budget in place well before October 1st. I yield the floor.

Mr. KOHL

Mr. KOHL. Last night, as we began consideration of the Agricultural appropriations bill, we were informed of the death of Senator Coverdell. The bill officially is still on the floor this morning for Senators who wish to speak on the bill but more appropriately for Senators who wish to speak about Senator Coverdell, who we all remember as an outstanding Senator, a good, a kind, and a decent man, a great patriot, and a great American. We will be officially in session on the bill but more appropriately here to listen to remarks by fellow Senators in his behalf. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. KOHL. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. KOHL

Mr. KOHL. Mr. President, on rollcall vote No. 215, I voted ``nay.'' It was my intention to vote ``yea.'' Therefore, I ask unanimous consent that I be permitted to change my vote since it would not change the outcome of the vote.

Mr. KOHL

Mr. KOHL. Mr. President, I want to take a moment to discuss my opposition to this legislation repealing the federal gas tax of 18.4 cents. The rising gas prices of this past spring and summer have been a great concern to many of us across the country, and nowhere has the burden been greater than in my State of Wisconsin where gas prices at some locations peaked over $2.00 per gallon. Families and businesses have been hard hit by this unexpected strain on their budgets. Everyday activities of work and recreation and summer travel plans have been altered. Fortunately, prices have begun to decline, and we are hopeful that that trend will only continue in the approaching months. This decline is in no small part the result of the bipartisan efforts of our Congressional delegation to provide relief to our constituents. With many forces at play, we worked strenuously to get to the root of the rising gas price problem. First, we requested an EPA waiver from the reformulated gas requirements, which many considered to be a minor, yet still contributing, factor to the price increases. We also took the oil companies to task for gouging the consumer at the pump, while enjoying huge increases in profits. We called for a Federal Trade Commission investigation into the causes of spiking prices in Wisconsin and the Upper Midwest and now await the preliminary report. Lastly, we have attacked the main cause of the problem--the coordinated underproduction of oil on the part of OPEC, the organization of oil-producing nations. Fortunately, under pressure from Congress and the Administration, the OPEC nations have agreed to increase their oil output. All these efforts taken together have yielded positive results, with prices dropping by 30 to 40 cents, and certainly we will continue to be vigilant to ensure this trend continues. Clearly I am very sympathetic to the amendment sponsor's stated goals of providing relief at the pump. But I am convinced that repealing the gas tax is the wrong way to achieve this important goal. Repealing the tax will drastically reduce the funds available for critically needed highway safety and maintenance programs, jeopardizing highway safety and putting other local services at risk by creating budget shortfalls. Moreover, repealing the tax does not guarantee that prices will go down for consumers. In fact, there is a strong likelihood that repealing the gas tax would only deliver more profits to the oil companies without delivering any relief to the consumer. With the TEA-21 highway bill, we worked hard to guarantee that gas tax revenues would go to states for infrastructure improvements and to make the distribution of those monies fair for Wisconsin. We went from a 92 percent to 99 percent return on the dollar for Wisconsin, and those funds are desperately needed for road, bridge and transit improvements. It would be disastrous to lose transportation money just as Wisconsin, with our short construction season, is poised to start a number of road improvement and expansion projects.

Mr. KOHL

Mr. KOHL. Mr. President, I rise in support of final passage of the FY 2001 Labor, Health and Human Services, Education and Related Agencies Appropriations bill. Although I have concerns with the funding levels in some areas, I want to commend Senator Specter and Senator Harkin for again working under difficult budget constraints to put together a good bill that addresses many of our nation's needs. I am pleased that the bill includes significant increases for many vital health and education programs. We've invested in our youngest children, by increasing the Child Care & Development Block Grant by $817 million, and by increasing Head Start by $1 billion. The bill also provides much-needed increases for elementary and secondary education, including Title I, Special Education, After-School programs, and Impact Aid. And the bill ensures that more students will have the opportunity to go to college by increasing funding for Pell Grants, Work-Study, and TRIO programs. It is my hope that when we go to conference, we can find more funds to make an even stronger investment in our children's education. I am also pleased that the bill makes great strides in ensuring access to quality health care. The bill includes a $150 million increase for Community Health Centers, which provide care to many low- income, uninsured Americans. The bill includes a modest increase for nursing home inspections to ensure that elderly and disabled patients receive the highest quality care. And clearly, all Americans will benefit from the $2 billion increase for the National Institutes of Health. This increase in funding for biomedical research will lead us down the path to new treatments and cures for disease. Despite these important provisions, I have several concerns with the bill that I believe must be addressed in conference. First, I am deeply troubled by the cut in the Social Services Block Grant. My State and counties rely on these funds to provide home care, services for the disabled, and child welfare programs. In Wisconsin, the vast majority of SSBG money goes straight to the county level. Without SSBG funds, our counties have no guarantee they will receive enough money to provide these critical services. I am heartened that Senator Stevens, Chairman of the Appropriations Committee, has made a commitment to restore these funds in conference, and I look forward to working with him to make that happen. Second, I believe we must make a stronger investment in programs that serve our nation's seniors. I am very concerned that programs under the Older Americans Act--including Supportive Services and Centers and Nutrition programs--are inadequately funded. I also support the inclusion of $125 million for the Family Caregiver Support Network, which provides support and respite to family members caring for a relative in long-term care. In addition, we must include larger increases for programs that utilize the unique talents of our nation's older citizens, such as the Foster Grandparents and Senior Companions programs. I hope that the conference committee will do what's right and make the necessary investments in programs that serve the elderly. Finally, I was also disappointed that a provision blocking OSHA from pursuing a rule on ergonomics was included in the bill. This move to include legislative riders on appropriations bills has become a common effort to circumvent the rule making process. In this case, opponents wanted to stop the process before we had a chance to see what the final rule would look like. I believe this effort to halt the rule is premature. There are almost 1.8 million ergonomic injuries every year with 300,000 resulting in lost work days. Workers are suffering through painful injuries every day, and we must do something. OSHA has been working on this issue for ten years, and we should delay it no longer. Overall, Mr. President, I believe the Chairman and Ranking Member of the Appropriations Committee have done an outstanding job in putting together this bill under difficult circumstances. I am voting for the bill at this point, despite the concerns I have just outlined, because I believe we must move this bill through the Appropriations process. However, let me make clear that these concerns must be addressed before the bill emerges from Conference. I look forward to working with all of my colleagues to improve the bill as the process continues.

Mr. KOHL

Mr. KOHL. Mr. President, I rise today in support of the Hutchison amendment, which would allow local school districts to use Title VI funds to establish same-gender schools if they so choose. I have opposed a similar amendment in the past because I have been concerned that many of these ``separate but equal'' programs are sometimes not equal in reality. I am pleased that the Senator from Texas has made modifications to her amendment that deal with these concerns, and ensures that single-gender schools will not result in a system where one gender is educationally disadvantaged. I believe this amendment is another important step in our drive toward more flexibility and local control in education. I am pleased to be an original cosponsor of the Public Education Reinvestment, Reinvention and Responsibility Act--better known as ``Three R's''-- which would also provide school districts with the flexibility to design programs that best meets their needs. The Hutchison amendment, which allows local officials to make the decision to set up a single- gender school, is consistent with the ``Three R's'' philosophy. We must continue to move toward a public education system that gives States and local school districts--who are in the best position to know what their educational needs are--the ability to create innovative programs that allow all students to achieve to high standards.

Mr. KOHL

Mr. KOHL. Mr. President, we have all watched in the last few weeks as gas prices have skyrocketed across the country, reaching an average price for regular gas of $ 1.68 per gallon. The situation is even worse in Wisconsin and other Midwestern states. The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reported on June 21 that the average price in Milwaukee for regular gas has reached $2.05 per gallon, and reports of consumers paying as much as $2.30 or more are not uncommon. We need to take action, and take action now, to combat this unjustified rise in gas prices that takes hard-earned dollars away from average citizens every time they visit the gas pump. It is for this reason that I rise today, with my colleagues Senators DeWine, Specter, Leahy, and Grassley, to introduce the ``No Oil Producing and Exporting Cartels Act of 2000'', ``NOPEC''. We have all heard many explanations offered for this rise in gas prices. Some say that the oil companies are gouging consumers. Some blame disruptions in supply. Others point to the EPA requirement mandating use of a new and more expensive type of ``reformulated'' gas in the Midwest. Some even claim that refiners and distributors are illegally fixing prices, and I am glad to see that the Federal Trade Commission, at the request of the Wisconsin delegation and Senator DeWine, has now launched an investigation to figure out if these allegations are true. And these are just a few of the reasons that have been offered. But one cause of these escalating prices is indisputable. This is the price fixing conspiracy of the OPEC nations, a conspiracy that for years has unfairly driven up the cost of imported crude oil to satisfy the greed of the oil exporters. We have long decried OPEC but, sadly, until now no one has tried to take any action to put it out of business. NOPEC will, for the first time, establish, clearly and plainly, that when a group of competing oil producers like OPEC agrees to act together to restrict supply or set prices they are violating U.S. law, and it will authorize the Attorney General or FTC to file suit under the antitrust laws for redress. Our bill will also make plain that the nations of OPEC cannot hide behind the doctrines of ``Sovereign Immunity'' or ``Act of State'' to escape the reach of American justice. Even under current law, there is no doubt that the actions of the international oil cartel would be in gross violation of our most basic principles of antitrust law as nothing more than an illegal price fixing scheme if this cartel was a group of international private companies rather than foreign governments. But OPEC members have used the shield of ``sovereign immunity'' to escape accountability for their price-fixing. The Federal Sovereign Immunities Act, though, already recognizes that the ``commercial'' activity of nations is not protected by sovereign immunity. And it is hard to imagine an activity that is more obviously commercial than selling oil for profit, as the OPEC nations do. Our legislation will correct one erroneous twenty-year-old lower federal court holding and establish that sovereign immunity doctrine will not divest a U.S. court from jurisdiction to hear a lawsuit alleging that members of the oil cartel are violating antitrust law. Mr. President, in recent years a consensus has developed in international law that certain basic standards are universal, and that the international community can, and should, take action when a nation violates these fundamental standards. The response of the international community to ethnic cleansing in the former Yugoslavia and action by the courts of Britain to recognize that Mr. Pinochet could be held accountable in Britain for allegations of human rights abuses and torture that occurred when he was President of Chile are two prominent examples. The rogue actions of the international oil cartel should be treated no differently. The most fundamental principle of a free market is that competitors cannot be permitted to conspire to limit supply or fix price. This principle is the foundation upon which the entire body of competition law rests. In this era of increasing globalization, when we truly need to open international markets to ensure the prosperity of all, we should not permit any nation to flout this fundamental principle. Our NOPEC legislation will, for the first time, enable our authorities to take legal action to combat the illegitimate price- fixing conspiracy of the oil cartel and will, at a minimum, have a real deterrent effect on nations that seek to join forces to fix oil prices to the detriment of consumers. For these reasons, I urge that my colleagues support this bill so that our nation will finally have an effective means to combat this selfish conspiracy of oil-rich nations.

Mr. KOHL

Mr. KOHL. Mr. President, we have all watched in the last few weeks as gas prices have skyrocketed across the country, reaching an average price for regular gas of $ 1.68 per gallon. The situation is even worse in Wisconsin and other Midwestern states. The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reported on June 21 that the average price in Milwaukee for regular gas has reached $2.05 per gallon, and reports of consumers paying as much as $2.30 or more are not uncommon. We need to take action, and take action now, to combat this unjustified rise in gas prices that takes hard-earned dollars away from average citizens every time they visit the gas pump. It is for this reason that I rise today, with my colleagues Senators DeWine, Specter, Leahy, and Grassley, to introduce the ``No Oil Producing and Exporting Cartels Act of 2000'', ``NOPEC''. We have all heard many explanations offered for this rise in gas prices. Some say that the oil companies are gouging consumers. Some blame disruptions in supply. Others point to the EPA requirement mandating use of a new and more expensive type of ``reformulated'' gas in the Midwest. Some even claim that refiners and distributors are illegally fixing prices, and I am glad to see that the Federal Trade Commission, at the request of the Wisconsin delegation and Senator DeWine, has now launched an investigation to figure out if these allegations are true. And these are just a few of the reasons that have been offered. But one cause of these escalating prices is indisputable. This is the price fixing conspiracy of the OPEC nations, a conspiracy that for years has unfairly driven up the cost of imported crude oil to satisfy the greed of the oil exporters. We have long decried OPEC but, sadly, until now no one has tried to take any action to put it out of business. NOPEC will, for the first time, establish, clearly and plainly, that when a group of competing oil producers like OPEC agrees to act together to restrict supply or set prices they are violating U.S. law, and it will authorize the Attorney General or FTC to file suit under the antitrust laws for redress. Our bill will also make plain that the nations of OPEC cannot hide behind the doctrines of ``Sovereign Immunity'' or ``Act of State'' to escape the reach of American justice. Even under current law, there is no doubt that the actions of the international oil cartel would be in gross violation of our most basic principles of antitrust law as nothing more than an illegal price fixing scheme if this cartel was a group of international private companies rather than foreign governments. But OPEC members have used the shield of ``sovereign immunity'' to escape accountability for their price-fixing. The Federal Sovereign Immunities Act, though, already recognizes that the ``commercial'' activity of nations is not protected by sovereign immunity. And it is hard to imagine an activity that is more obviously commercial than selling oil for profit, as the OPEC nations do. Our legislation will correct one erroneous twenty-year-old lower federal court holding and establish that sovereign immunity doctrine will not divest a U.S. court from jurisdiction to hear a lawsuit alleging that members of the oil cartel are violating antitrust law. Mr. President, in recent years a consensus has developed in international law that certain basic standards are universal, and that the international community can, and should, take action when a nation violates these fundamental standards. The response of the international community to ethnic cleansing in the former Yugoslavia and action by the courts of Britain to recognize that Mr. Pinochet could be held accountable in Britain for allegations of human rights abuses and torture that occurred when he was President of Chile are two prominent examples. The rogue actions of the international oil cartel should be treated no differently. The most fundamental principle of a free market is that competitors cannot be permitted to conspire to limit supply or fix price. This principle is the foundation upon which the entire body of competition law rests. In this era of increasing globalization, when we truly need to open international markets to ensure the prosperity of all, we should not permit any nation to flout this fundamental principle. Our NOPEC legislation will, for the first time, enable our authorities to take legal action to combat the illegitimate price- fixing conspiracy of the oil cartel and will, at a minimum, have a real deterrent effect on nations that seek to join forces to fix oil prices to the detriment of consumers. For these reasons, I urge that my colleagues support this bill so that our nation will finally have an effective means to combat this selfish conspiracy of oil-rich nations.

Mr. KOHL

Mr. KOHL. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation, the Child Support Fairness and Tax Refund Interception Act, with my colleague from Rhode Island, Senator Chafee, as well as Senators Graham and Lincoln. This legislation is designed to increase child support collections across the country by allowing more parents to secure overdue support payments through the tax refund offset program. Child support enforcement is an issue that I care a great deal about. Every day, far too many children in this country go without the resources they need to learn and grow in healthy, nurturing environments. Working to improve the lives and futures of these children in need should count amount our highest priorities, and we can do just that by improving our system of child support enforcement. This legislation that we are introducing today proposes one such improvement by seeking to expand the use of an important enforcement tool. As my colleagues may know, under current law, custodial parents are eligible to use the tax refund offset program if their child support cases involve minors, adult disabled children, or parents on public assistance. The offset program has played a key role in securing overdue support payments. In fact, along with wage withholding, the offset program counts as one of the most effective tools that custodial parents owed support have at their disposal. For the 1998 tax year, the federal government collected a record $1.3 billion in overdue support through the tax offset program, an 18 percent increase over the previous year and a 99 percent increase since 1992. These collections yielded benefits to approximately 1.4 million families. Yet despite these admirable gains, under current law, the benefits of the tax refund offset program are not available to other custodial parents, those who have adult children, who are rightfully owed past- due support. Our legislation would address this issue by allowing all parents who are owed overdue court-ordered support to be eligible for the offset program, regardless of whether their child is disabled or a minor. We believe that this straightforward change will both increase child support collections and help ease the burdens of many custodial parents. It will assist those parents who may have worked multiple jobs and struggled to provide for their children but who may still have difficulty recovering child support debt owed to them without the assistance of the offset program. Our Nation's unacceptably low rate of child support enforcement is a national crisis. Our public system collects only 23 percent of its caseload, and over $47 billion in overdue support is owed to our nation's children. Clearly, we must do all we can to address this very serious problem. I urge my colleagues to join with Senators Chafee, Graham, Lincoln, and myself is supporting this important legislation. It will expand one effective tool in the enforcement arsenal and help increase the resources available to families in need.

Mr. KOHL

Mr. KOHL. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation, the Child Support Fairness and Tax Refund Interception Act, with my colleague from Rhode Island, Senator Chafee, as well as Senators Graham and Lincoln. This legislation is designed to increase child support collections across the country by allowing more parents to secure overdue support payments through the tax refund offset program. Child support enforcement is an issue that I care a great deal about. Every day, far too many children in this country go without the resources they need to learn and grow in healthy, nurturing environments. Working to improve the lives and futures of these children in need should count amount our highest priorities, and we can do just that by improving our system of child support enforcement. This legislation that we are introducing today proposes one such improvement by seeking to expand the use of an important enforcement tool. As my colleagues may know, under current law, custodial parents are eligible to use the tax refund offset program if their child support cases involve minors, adult disabled children, or parents on public assistance. The offset program has played a key role in securing overdue support payments. In fact, along with wage withholding, the offset program counts as one of the most effective tools that custodial parents owed support have at their disposal. For the 1998 tax year, the federal government collected a record $1.3 billion in overdue support through the tax offset program, an 18 percent increase over the previous year and a 99 percent increase since 1992. These collections yielded benefits to approximately 1.4 million families. Yet despite these admirable gains, under current law, the benefits of the tax refund offset program are not available to other custodial parents, those who have adult children, who are rightfully owed past- due support. Our legislation would address this issue by allowing all parents who are owed overdue court-ordered support to be eligible for the offset program, regardless of whether their child is disabled or a minor. We believe that this straightforward change will both increase child support collections and help ease the burdens of many custodial parents. It will assist those parents who may have worked multiple jobs and struggled to provide for their children but who may still have difficulty recovering child support debt owed to them without the assistance of the offset program. Our Nation's unacceptably low rate of child support enforcement is a national crisis. Our public system collects only 23 percent of its caseload, and over $47 billion in overdue support is owed to our nation's children. Clearly, we must do all we can to address this very serious problem. I urge my colleagues to join with Senators Chafee, Graham, Lincoln, and myself is supporting this important legislation. It will expand one effective tool in the enforcement arsenal and help increase the resources available to families in need.

Mr. KOHL

Mr. KOHL. Mr. President, I just wanted to briefly comment on this year's Defense bill, and my decision to support it. Last year I came to the floor and was forced to oppose the bill after the Budget Committee engaged in some accounting hijinks in order to squeeze an extra $7 billion into the Defense budget. Even though the Congressional Budget Office estimated that the bill would exceed the Budget Resolution, the Budget Committee used an accounting gimmick to get around the rules. Budget gimmicks do more damage than just allowing the Congress to engage in irresponsible spending. Gimmicks delude the American people, and destroy their faith in the process. Last year we crowed loudly about the savings in the Budget Resolution, and then quietly added extra money back into the budget all year long. One of the biggest offenders was the Defense Appropriations bill. This year, however, things are different. While I did not support the Budget Resolution, at least this year the Defense bill is abiding by the level set out in the Resolution. At least this year we are being honest about how much will be spent on Defense. There are no gimmicks, no smoke and mirrors. I applaud Chairman Stevens and Senator Inouye for their efforts this year to stay within their budget allocation. It was not easy, it never is, but they were successful. The bill before us is still three billion dollars above the President's request, but I reluctantly support the bill. It is a more responsible bill than years past. Not only do we strengthen our commitment to our soldiers and their family through improvements in the housing allowance and a 3.7 percent pay increase, but we also face up to our overseas commitments. For the first time Congress and the Department of Defense have included funding, roughly $4.2 billion, for our operations in Iraq and Bosnia. Next year we will not be called on to furnish emergency funding for an operation that is not a surprise, not unplanned, and while dangerous, it is not an emergency. I am pleased that we are including these funds in the bill. Like all my colleagues, I am very concerned about how much we spend on our defense and where we spend it. I believe that the greatest assets funded in the Defense budget are our people, and that we need to do more to let them know how much their country values them. This bill moves in that direction, and it does that in an honest and aboveboard manner.

Mr. KOHL

Mr. KOHL. Mr. President, I rise today and join my colleague Senator Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania to introduce legislation to provide much needed assistance to our nation's dairy producers who are facing the lowest milk prices in over two decades. Due to the failure of the federal order reform process and the Administration's failure to include a meaningful dairy price safety net in its Fiscal Year 2001 budget, this legislation is an appropriate and necessary response to the ongoing regional milk pricing inequities and the dairy income crisis affecting all producers. In the past, the divisive and controversial dairy compact system has hindered Congress's efforts to achieve a fair and equitable national dairy policy. I am pleased to join with Senator Santorum to introduce this legislation to create a regionally equitable plan will provide a price safety net for small and medium sized dairy producers throughout the country. The National Dairy Farmers Fairness Act of 2000 has two major goals: (1) to create a dairy policy that is equitable for farmers in all regions of the country; (2) provide stability for dairy producers in the prices they receive for their milk. To accomplish these goals, this legislation creates a price safety net for farmers by providing supplemental income payments when milk prices are low. A ``sliding- scale'' payment is made based upon the previous year's price for the national average for Class III milk. In essence, the payment rate to farmers is highest when the national Class III average is the lowest. To participate in this program, a farmer must have produced milk for commercial sale in the previous year. Payments under the program are also capped for the first 26,000 hundredweight of production. Again, all dairy producers would be eligible to participate under this scenario. The fiscal year 2001 Agriculture Appropriations bill includes $443 million in emergency direct payments to dairy producers for losses incurred this year. While this action is absolutely necessary to respond to the current crisis, it is time that an on-going program providing supplemental income payments to farmers when milk prices decline be established. This important legislation represents a bipartisan and national approach in providing predictability and price stability in this otherwise volatile industry. Again, I am pleased to join with Senator Santorum in introducing this legislation and look forward to working with him in passing this important legislation.

Mr. KOHL

Mr. KOHL. Mr. President, I rise today in support of the conference report on the Agricultural Risk Protection Act of 2000. Farmers in Wisconsin and all across the country need improved risk management products to help them guard against adverse weather and market conditions. I also want to express my thanks to Chairman Lugar, Senator Harkin, and other members of the Agriculture Committee for including in this conference report expansion of a dairy options pilot program that will help dairy farmers achieve similar levels of protection afforded other agricultural producers. I also want to mention the fact that this conference report includes $7.1 billion in additional assistance to farmers and ranchers this year and in 2001. This level of spending was made possible due to a budget reserve included in the fiscal year 2001 budget resolution which provided an additional $5.5 billion in mandatory spending to the Agriculture Committee in fiscal year 2000 and an additional $1.6 billion in fiscal year 2001. The budget resolution specified that these funds were to be made available to assistance producers of program and special crops. Senator Domenici, chairman of the Senate Budget Committee, made reference to the action taken by both the Budget and Agriculture Committees in providing for this budgeted approach to meeting the needs of America's farmers. I want to take this opportunity to mention additional assistance for farmers provided in the pending Agriculture appropriations bill which includes, among other items, emergency spending for America's dairy farmers. Senators will note that within the additional $7.1 billion included in the Agricultural Risk Protection Act of 2000, no funds are provided for dairy farmers who are now suffering from the greatest price collapse in history. Dairy farmers in Wisconsin, in Vermont, in the South, in the West, in all parts of the nation are suffering terribly from this dire emergency and it is proper that the Congress take action, as we have, to meet this situation. I mention this in order to remind my colleagues that we will shortly be considering the Agriculture appropriations bill on the Senate Floor and I ask for the support of all Senators in our efforts to help America's dairy farmers. I would also note that to those who may be confusing the funding provided in our bill with the amount provided in the budget resolution, that dairy producers were not included in the description of agricultural producers to receive assistance though the agricultural budget reserve directed to the authorizing committee. The emergency funding for dairy farmers is separate from the actions taken in the bill now before the Senate, is indeed an emergency, and the action taken by the Appropriations Committee in this regard is proper and must go forward.

Mr. KOHL

Mr. KOHL. Mr. President, I have serious concerns about confirming Bradley Smith to fill a vacancy on the Federal Election Commission or the FEC. The FEC is an independent regulatory agency entrusted with administering and enforcing the Nation's campaign finance laws. Yet, Bradley Smith believes that the very campaign finance laws he would be required to administer and enforce should be thrown out. I am not questioning the integrity of this nominee or his fitness for government service in general. I also believe we must be careful not to reject nominees just because we object to their views. However, when a person like Bradley Smith is put forward, a person whose views seem to undermine the very purpose for which he is being nominated, I believe we have a responsibility to speak out. Bradley Smith is not an appropriate choice for FEC commissioner and I will be voting against this nomination.

Mr. KOHL

Mr. KOHL. Mr. President, I rise in strong support of the nomination of Mary McLaughlin to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. Those of us on the Judiciary Committee know Ms. McLaughlin from her outstanding work as Special Counsel for our Terrorism Subcommittee during the Ruby Ridge investigation in 1995. During those hearings, Ms. McLaughlin demonstrated precisely the qualities we want in a federal judge--she is intelligent, fair-minded, tough, possesses a judicial temperament, and is deeply committed to the cause of justice. Once we put her on the bench, she is going to be a terrific federal judge. Our Ruby Ridge subcommittee ran the ideological gamut. Yet Ms. McLaughlin gained the respect and admiration of all of our colleagues from both parties who worked with her--Senators Specter, Thompson, Abraham, Thurmond, Leahy, Feinstein, Grassley, and Craig--for the skill and professionalism she brought to her work. Let me make special mention of how tough and persistent Ms. McLaughlin was when the Justice Department was ``less than enthusiastic'' about supplying us with documents. Largely as a result of her efforts, we obtained the information that we needed, and our investigation went on to become a true model of bipartisan cooperation. Beyond her service to the U.S. Senate, Ms. McLaughlin has stellar credentials for a judgeship. She is a senior partner in the leading Philadelphia law firm of Dechert, Price and Rhoads, where her practice has concentrated in a myriad of complex litigation matters. She was a recipient of a 1998 ``Women of Distinction'' Award from the Philadelphia Business Journal, the National Association of Women Business Owners, and The Forum of Executive Women. Her career has also included teaching at the law schools of Vanderbilt University, the University of Pennsylvania and Rutgers University. In addition, Ms. McLaughlin served for four years as an Assistant U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia where, Mr. President, she put criminals behind bars. Not surprisingly, given this stellar record, she was unanimously rated ``well qualified'' by the American Bar Association. Unfortunately, a few outside groups have raised questions about her candidacy based on a small portion of Ms. McLaughlin's pro bono work. While it is true that she is a person of strong convictions, none is stronger than her dedication to the Rule of Law. In other words, I am confident that she will in all cases apply the law, not make it. I wouldn't say that about everybody who has been nominated for a federal judgeship in recent years. Mr. President, Ms. McLaughlin deserves the type of strong, bipartisan support from the entire Senate that she has already obtained from those of us who worked with her on Ruby Ridge. ``There's something about Mary's'' record of distinguished public service, her professional experience, her legal talents, and her personal integrity that will make her an outstanding Judge on the Eastern District bench. I urge my colleagues to swiftly confirm her.

Mr. KOHL

Mr. KOHL. Mr. President, I rise today in recognition of 40 years of outstanding reporting by my friend, Frank Aukofer, who is retiring from the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel next week. With his retirement, the Capitol loses one of its finest journalists and Wisconsin loses one of its keenest eyes on Washington. I lose a reporter I admire and trust. Frank is regarded as among the best in his profession, by both his peers and by those he covers. He is respected as a straight-shooter, valued for his integrity and admired as an honorable man. As a journalist, he has reported on virtually every event of consequence in our country over more than three decades. He has an impressive working knowledge of Congress, of policy, and of politics. Frank is usually three steps ahead of the story. He is a journalist who didn't lose sight of the responsibilities of reporting, a professional who is a credit to his occupation. Frank's love of his profession is evident in his long reach beyond the newspaper. He will be honored later this month by the Freedom Forum, a foundation dedicated to free press and free speech throughout the world. He is recognized as a national expert on the media, and has testified before Congress to promote access to government information. He was a visiting professor at Vanderbilt University. He was an early and strong supporter of the Newseum, our country's premier news museum. Frank is also an active member and former President of the National Press Club, and an enthusiastic, if not particularly gifted, performer for the Gridiron Club. Earning the envy of his colleagues and sports car enthusiasts everywhere, Frank has even managed to peddle a legitimate weekly auto column to newspapers around the country. As Frank closes this chapter of his career, I know he looks forward to new adventures and more time to spend with his grandkids. Frank has many more years of ideas and ambitions ahead of him. While I am saddened by his departure from the Capitol, I'm convinced that no one will enjoy a busier retirement than Frank Aukofer. I wish him well, I wish him continued good health, and I will miss him.

Mr. KOHL

Mr. KOHL. Mr. President, I rise to support the long overdue confirmation of Tim Dyk to the Federal Circuit. The Judiciary Committee reported out Mr. Dyk in 1998 by an overwhelming, bipartisan margin. Unfortunately, Mr. Dyk's nomination died a slow death last Congress, as he waited in vain for confirmation by unanimous consent or, in the alternative, at least a floor vote. This Congress, Mr. Dyk has had wait yet another year and a half for Senate consideration after his renomination and second overwhelming Judiciary Committee approval. This delay has been unfair to Mr. Dyk and his family, who have had to put their lives on hold as he awaits confirmation. It has also been unfair to the Federal Circuit, which will be enormously enhanced by his ascension. We are lucky Mr. Dyk was willing to wait; other outstanding candidates, however, may be dissuaded from making the already arduous sacrifices necessary to serve in the federal judiciary. Finally, it now appears that Mr. Dyk is reaching the end of his long road to confirmation and will soon take his deserved seat on the bench. He is an excellent candidate--a graduate of Harvard College and Harvard Law School, a law clerk to Chief Justice Earl Warren on the Supreme Court, and a litigator with a long, distinguished practice and a history of public service. I strongly support this nominee and urge my colleagues to join me in supporting his confirmation. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. KOHL

Mr. KOHL. Mr. President, I would also like to add my comments. Thank you Chairman Hatch for your kind words and all your help and the help of your staff in moving this important legislation forward. Thank you as well to my fellow Senator from Wisconsin and Senators Wellstone and Grams from Minnesota. I am pleased that we were able to work together to reach a compromise and help give the Hmong veterans and their families the chance to become citizens. The Hmong community, particularly the Lao Veterans of America, have worked tirelessly to bring us to this point. As my colleagues have mentioned, no negative inference should be drawn from the compromise language. Last week, I was proud to participate in the Lao Veterans of America National Recognition Ceremonies with so many Hmong veterans from Wisconsin. With this bill, we are attempting to repay them for their tremendous sacrifices and courage. I hope that we can achieve the final steps and send this bill to the President's desk for signature as soon as possible.

Mr. KOHL

Mr. KOHL. Mr. President, this week I join people in Wisconsin and across the nation in celebrating Taiwanese-American Heritage Week. This week of celebration, from May 7 to May 14, honors the many diverse contributions of over 500,000 Taiwanese-Americans in the United States. These Americans have contributed significantly to our social fabric, making notable contributions as medical professionals, Nobel Laureate scientists, business owners, human rights activists, and teachers. While it is important to recognize the achievements of Taiwanese- Americans in the United States, Taiwanese-American Heritage Week also gives us the opportunity to celebrate the success of democracy in Taiwan. Since the lifting of martial law in 1987, Taiwan has made consistent strides toward becoming an open, democratic society where freedoms are respected and the will of the people is observed. To the credit of the many Taiwanese-Americans who fought to bring democratic principles back to the island, Taiwan is now a vibrant democratic member of the international community. With the recent election of opposition leader Chen Shui-bian as President, Taiwan has again reaffirmed its commitment to the open electoral process that is the cornerstone of democracy. While this election bodes well for the future of a democratic Taiwan, many challenges remain. Taiwan must continue to resist internal anti- democratic forces, while also providing for its own security in a region with too few democratic neighbors. However, I am confident that Taiwan will meet these challenges and continue to play a productive role in the international community. Mr. President, Taiwanese-American Heritage Week properly recognizes the longstanding friendship between the United States and Taiwan. Once again, I commend the accomplishments and on-going contributions of the Taiwanese-American community.