Blanche Lincoln

Mrs. LINCOLN

Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, I ask one more unanimous consent request and that is to add Senator Hatch as an original cosponsor to our amendment.

Mrs. LINCOLN

Mrs. LINCOLN. Madam President, I thank Chairman Baucus for his tireless effort here in really portraying what I think is a tremendous priority for so many of us in the Senate and certainly in the Finance Committee. As a mother of twin boys--and I know our Presiding Officer is a mother of a daughter who is a year older than my boys--I know all too well of the importance of reliable health insurance coverage for children. My husband and I have experienced the sleepless nights looking after a sick child. But we also have the comfort of knowing that when dawn comes, we have the opportunity, through health insurance, to seek out health care through a pediatrician or, if it should be worse, to be able to go to the emergency room and know we are covered, to know we can seek that health care for our children when they need it the most, with the confidence that with that health insurance we can continue to care for their needs. In situations such as these, health insurance coverage is critical not only to the lifelong health of a child but also to a family's peace of mind. I think that is what we are about here today--our ability as Senators to be able to step outside the box of being a Senator and really think about what it means to be a hard-working American, to be a parent, and to not just think of what it means to us and our families as Federal employees and what we have access to in health care but translating that to the needs of all hard-working Americans and to understand how important it is to them and to their children too. We have to, in this debate, step outside and put ourselves in the shoes of the hard-working Americans who need health insurance for their children. That peace of mind should not only belong to those families who can afford private health insurance; it should also belong to working families who are struggling to make ends meet in today's world, who are the strength of the fabric of this Nation, those hard-working families who are going to jobs day in and day out--and sometimes more than one job--to keep the needs of their families, as was listed by the Senator from New Jersey, to make sure their families stay whole. Coming to the bottom of that list and recognizing how expensive health care costs are for their children, we need to make sure the fabric of this Nation stays strong. We do so by not only supporting those working families and their children but by establishing priorities in this country. That is why I rise to speak on behalf of the State Children's Health Insurance Program, or SCHIP, a Federal- State partnership which today provides much needed health care coverage for more than 6 million children across this great country. In conjunction with Medicaid, CHIP has been tremendously successful in reducing the number of uninsured children in my State and across our country. Since the program's inception 10 years ago, the number of children without health care coverage has dropped by one-third. That is something we can be proud of and that we can build on. During that time, I am proud that Arkansas has become a national leader in reducing its number of uninsured children from over 20 percent in 1997 to 10 percent today. Now, nearly 65,000 of Arkansas' children currently receive coverage through CHIP or, as we know it in Arkansas, ARKids First. Despite this success, an estimated 9 million children remain uninsured, nearly two-thirds of whom are already eligible for CHIP or for Medicaid nationwide--9 million children, Madam President. Those children belong to parents just like us. Their parents care for them just as we try to care for our children--yet not having the comfort of knowing their health care needs could be and should be covered. I am certainly proud that the Senate Finance Committee has recently taken steps to reach more of these children, and I do wish to commend Chairman Baucus and Senators Grassley, Rockefeller, and Hatch, as well as their staffs, for their incredible dedication, the vision and leadership they have shown on this issue, their tireless energy in sticking with coming together to bring about a compromise--a much needed compromise--and the extraordinary effort they have put forth particularly over the past few months, which has made renewal of CHIP much more of a reality for America's families. The CHIP reauthorization package that was overwhelmingly approved in our Finance Committee--by a vote of 17 to 4--applies the lessons of the past 10 years and builds upon the success of the program by giving States more of the tools they need while preserving their flexibility to strengthen their program and ultimately cover more children. In doing so, it would provide an additional $35 billion over 5 years that will allow States to preserve coverage for the children who are currently enrolled, while reaching an additional 3.2 million uninsured low-income children. This proposal would also provide much needed funding to States for outreach and enrollment efforts to reach many of those who are currently uninsured and yet eligible. It also takes steps to ensure that they get a healthy start by providing care for pregnant women and establishing pediatric quality measures to improve the level and efficiency of the care they do receive. How important that is as we have begun in this country to look at the quality measures of health care, particularly for our elderly. Why is it not equally important to look at the quality measures for the pediatric care that goes to our children? I have long supported improving access to health care coverage for pregnant women, not only because it is vital to the health of mothers and infants, but it also often reduces future health care costs. What an incredible return on our money--to see expectant mothers going full- term to deliver a child that has a much greater opportunity to perform, to be healthy, and to be less costly later in life due to health care needs. In fact, it was reported in 2005 that the socioeconomic costs-- medical, educational, and lost productivity--associated with preterm birth in the United States was at least $26.2 billion. Every year, more than 500,000 infants are born prematurely, an increasing number that now affects nearly one out of every eight babies. This is of particular concern to me because, in recent reports, more than 13 percent of births in our State of Arkansas were premature, ranking it among the States with the highest incidence of preterm babies. So many of us have been faced with those choices. I know when I served in the House of Representatives and my husband and I were so excited to receive the news that we were expecting twins, I also received the news that at my age, and certainly the work environment I was in and all of the pressures, I was also at risk for a premature delivery. I had the wonderful opportunity to make a decision that I would not run for reelection and that I could minimize my job in order to do everything within my power to bring those children into this world in a safe manner. I look across this great country, and not all working mothers have that opportunity. They don't have those choices to be able to step aside and do everything they possibly can with the health care they receive to bring their babies into this world in the healthiest fashion. One thing we can do is to provide them the prenatal care they need and the advice and consultation to be able to do what they can to ensure those babies are delivered after a full term. By taking needed steps to improve access to care for pregnant women, I am confident we can make strides to improve health outcomes for them and for their children. If, in fact, we don't want to do it for the sake of bringing healthy babies into this world, who are going to be future leaders of this country, we should do it as an investment. The long-term investment of a healthier child being born makes so much more sense than the long-term cost of a premature delivery and the health care needs that child would have for the rest of his or her life. The Finance Committee proposal would also provide the Federal authority and resources to invest in the development and testing of quality measures for children's health care. Of the 146 medical schools in this country, every one of them has a department in pediatrics. We can make an incredible investment in quality measures that would give us not only the outcome we want but also the cost savings in overall health care we so much desire. This provision would help ensure that States and other payers, providers, and consumers have the clinical quality measures they need to assess and improve the quality and performance of children's health care services. Additionally, the bill would allow some States to use income- eligibility information from other Federal programs, such as school lunch programs, to speed up the enrollment of eligible children into CHIP or Medicaid. The Senator from New Mexico has done so much hard work on making good common sense out of the mounds and mounds of paperwork people already have to fill out, using the knowledge we already have and those mounds of paperwork to get those children enrolled in the program for which they already qualify. It would simplify the administrative process for States and certainly reduce the paperwork burdens on our families. The bill would also provide greater access to much needed dental care for lower income children and would ensure that children enrolled in CHIP would have access to mental health care that is on par with the level of medical and surgical care they are currently provided. As we look at our children and their growth, understanding the unbelievable essentials in dental care, not only so our children can get the nutrition they need but they can pay attention in school, they can get the education they need, which allows them to grow and be a part of this incredible Nation in a productive way, the success of CHIP over the past 10 years is itself a great example of the things we can accomplish when we reach out across the aisle, when we work in a bipartisan way, when we come together on our priorities and put aside the partisan differences. This bipartisan proposal we are considering today is another. We should all agree that providing health care for our children is certainly one area where partisan politics should be placed aside. There is no room for partisan politics as we address our children. After all, it is a moral issue, an investment in our Nation's most precious resource--our children; an investment in a future of our country, its leadership, and its productivity. Who can disagree with that? As we move forward together to reauthorize this successful program, I am hopeful we can do so in the same bipartisan spirit that was demonstrated in the creation of this program, the 10-year implementation of this program, and in the recent reauthorization of this program in the Finance Committee. It is unfortunate the President and the Secretary of Health and Human Services feel differently. In fact, their proposal to increase the CHIP funding by only $5 billion over the next 5 years falls so short of the funding needed to simply maintain coverage of those currently enrolled in the program. To justify their proposal, the administration actually claimed the number of uninsured children in our Nation was only 20 percent of the estimates calculated by the nonpartisan CBO. Instead of forcing over a million children--a million children--to be dropped from their current health insurance provider, shouldn't we all agree that at the very least absolutely no child should lose coverage as a result of reauthorization? The President has been adamant about leaving no child behind when it comes to their education, but shouldn't we apply this to their health care as well? Shouldn't we recognize the reason, or a part of the reason, our No Child Left Behind in education has been less productive is because we failed to provide the resources--the much needed resources--to implement good policies, basic policies? It is fine to talk about these things, but if we don't put our money where our mouth is, the health care doesn't get to the children who need it. Moreover, shouldn't we all move forward in covering as many of the 9 million uninsured children we possibly can; finding the middle ground, as we have done in the Finance Committee? I wholeheartedly believe so, and that is why I rise in strong support of this legislation. Some of my colleagues have raised concerns about our efforts to expand this successful program. They have argued the $35 billion compromise that was reached in the Finance Committee is too much money. You know what. It is going to cost us something to cover more children. Let us take a step back and get some perspective on how much money we are actually talking about. Our current proposal to reauthorize CHIP provides a total of $60 billion over 5 years--$25 billion in the baseline, with an increase of $35 billion. In contrast, our operations in Iraq are now estimated to cost taxpayers $10 billion per month. So for the amount of money, nonbudgeted money, we now spend in Iraq every 6 months, we can cover an estimated 10 million lower-income children with much needed health care for 5 years--5 years. We are talking about money that is completely offset--a program that is completely paid for. How you spend your money--and this goes for families and for Government--tends to reflect your values and your priorities. We all have to look at where our priorities are in our own family, and we as Senators and stewards of this land and this great country and its resources have to set priorities as well, and they should reflect our values--our values and our priorities. So I ask my colleagues today: What could be a bigger priority than the well-being of our Nation's most precious resource, our children? Look at our families, the families who are the fabric of this country. One of the things they need the most is time--time to be a family, to sit down to dinner with their children, to be able to go to a PTA meeting or a parent-teacher conference, to take a small vacation, to care for an aging parent. They need time to do that. It is not easy to find that time. If you are a single parent, perhaps a single mom, but even if you are a working family, a lower income working family, working two or three jobs to be able to hit that budget the Senator from New Jersey talks about, to make sure you can hit all those issues you have to deal with, whether it is rent or groceries or certainly any type of health care you could access, it takes time--time away from our families, the time needed to build strong families, to keep their children whole and focused on the good values we want our children to have. Minimum wage was a great example. Minimum wage was much needed, with over 10 years of not having seen that increase. What an important role it plays in providing our families greater time to be a family. At a time when more and more Americans are struggling to find affordable health care, CHIP has allowed us to make coverage more accessible for millions of children, coverage that is critical to the lifelong health of a child and to a family's peace of mind. I urge each and every one of my colleagues to explore your own conscience, not just thinking about your family but thinking about the millions of American families out there today who want nothing less for their children than what we want for ours. Let's set aside partisan influences and support this critical effort to invest in the health care of our children, not only for the future of our Nation but for the well-being of millions of American children in working-class, lower income families. They are depending on us, the stewards of this body, the stewards of this country, and it is time we fulfill our commitment to them. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting legislation to expand health care coverage for children. I have been proud to work with Chairman Baucus and Senator Grassley and others in this effort, and I certainly commend them for their leadership and good work. I look to this body to stand up and to show who it is we are and what it is we are made of on behalf of America's children. I yield the floor.

Mrs. LINCOLN. I hope I can have somewhere between 15 and 20 minutes.

Mrs. LINCOLN

Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, Arkansas lost another great young patriot last week when Sergeant John R. Massey of Judsonia, AR, died from combat wounds after an improvised explosive device detonated near his vehicle in Baghdad. Sergeant Massey was a member of the Arkansas National Guard's C Battery, 2nd Battalion, 142nd Fires Brigade based in Ozark, AR. Sergeant Massey was remembered by friends and family as a good father who enjoyed playing with his kids, spending time with his family, and riding his Harley-Davidson motorcycle. Major General William D. Wofford also shared stories about Sergeant Massey's dedication to serve. According to the Arkansas Democrat Gazette, Wofford had been told by Sergeant Massey's father that he had always wanted to be in the military and that ``this is the way John would have wanted to go out-- as a soldier.'' A fellow soldier noted, ``All you needed to tell him was when and where, and it would be done.'' In fact, Wofford recalled once asking Massey if he would like to give up his spot manning a .50 caliber machine gun in the turrets of his armored patrol vehicle. According to Wofford, Sergeant Massey said, ``You can order me out of the turret . . . That's the only way I'm leaving.'' When it was all said and done, Major General Wofford said that ``Sergeant. Massey stayed in the turret until the very end.'' Sergeant Massey was posthumously awarded the Bronze Star and Purple Heart, as well as the Arkansas Distinguished Service Medal. He is survived by his wife Amanda ``Mandy'' Massey; two daugthers, Monica and Emily; son Joseph; mother Deborah Massey; and father Ray Massey; as well as other relatives and friends. specialist robert d. varga Mr. President, I also rise to recognize SPC Robert D. Varga of Monroe City, MO, who died on July 15, 2007, from noncombat related injuries in Baghdad. Rob and his wife, Ellie Madder Stone, called Little Rock, AR, home and were married last year on September 5, 2006. According to Specialist Varga's mother, Cecilia Varga, he was in the Army to serve his country and further his education. He came from a military family: his father served in Vietnam, grandfather served in World War II, and two brothers-in-law served in Iraq. Specialist Varga joined the Army in 2003 and was originally deployed as a cook with the Headquarters and Headquarters Detachment, 759th Military Police Battalion. After his first deployment, he switched duties and trained with the military police. He was then assigned to the 984th Military Police Company in October 2005. He received many military honors, including the Combat Action Badge, Army Commendation Medal, Army Good Conduct Medal, Iraq Campaign Medal, Global War on Terror Service Medal, Army Service Medal, Army Service Ribbon, and National Defense Service Medal. Family members remembered him for his outgoing personality and his love of cooking and drawing. He is survived by his wife Ellie; his father and mother, Frank and Cecilia Varga; sisters Pamela Poelker, Carey Noland, and Amanda Reimann; paternal grandmother, Marge Varga; maternal grandparents, Glen and Charlotte Little, as well as numerous nephews and nieces.

Mrs. LINCOLN

Mrs. LINCOLN. Madam President, today I rise to recognize three Arkansans who served our country with dignity and honor and gave their lives to our country in Iraq: MAJ Michael Taylor, 1SG Tom Warren, and Army SFC John Gary Brown. They will be remembered by their friends and family as men who lived lives full of passion and love. Their Nation will remember them as men who dedicated themselves to protection of our freedom. Michael Taylor's father-in-law described him as ``a good guy'' with a personality that attracted everyone to him since his childhood days in North Little Rock. As a National Guardsman, who worked at the Veterans' Administration, he soon learned that his true passion was in flying. He had spent a lot of time working with computers, and the relationship between modern helicopters and computers gave him a leg up when it came time to enter flight school. He retired from the VA to become a pilot with the Arkansas National Guard flying Black Hawk helicopters. Taylor eventually reached the Bravo Company's top position and commanded the company. The second member of the flight team was First Sergeant Tom Warren. 1st Sgt. Warren grew up in Jacksonville, AR, near Camp Robinson. He attended North Little Rock High School in 1976 and married his wife Doris on January 17, 1983. He raised five children and throughout his life was very active in church. He was a Mason, including being past master at his lodge in Levy, which was the same position his father had held. He also served as deacon at Lifehouse Christian Fellowship, where he was an active member. Outside of church, Warren loved to golf, but nothing besides his family could match his love for aviation. Warren reached the position of first sergeant, making him the top ranked enlisted soldier in the company. Gary Brown hailed from the small town of Nashville, AR. He was born and raised there and attended Nashville High School, where he was on the track team. He graduated in 1982 and spent a year at Ouachita Baptist University. During his time in Little Rock, he was a member of Agape Church and was active in the church's children's bus ministry and men's Bible study. His twin brother said that everything Brown did in his life meant something to him, whether it was easy or hard, and he could always be found with a smile on his face. To him, serving his country meant something, and he served for 20 years in the National Guard. Most recently Brown was the crew chief of the Arkansas National Guard's 77th Aviation Brigade. He pursued perfection and was truly dedicated to his job. The UH-60 Black Hawk helicopter that First Sergeant Warren flew was what he called a limousine service. They ferried others around Iraq as part of ``Task Force Dragon,'' but they became known as the ``Catfish Air.'' Serving their fellow soldiers, these men risked their lives every day to make sure people got to and from dangerous areas as safely as possible. Tragically these three men's lives intertwined on January 20, 2007, when their helicopter crashed in the area northeast of Baghdad in one of the deadliest moments of the war for our National Guard. I offer my condolences to their families, and I pray that they can find comfort in the knowledge that these three men died serving others and doing what they loved on behalf of a grateful Nation. My thoughts and prayers go out to the many people whose lives were touched by these men. Specialist Jeremy Stacey Private First Class Bruce Salazar Madam President, it is with great sadness that I also rise to honor two young men with Arkansas ties who died on back-to-back days during the July 4 recess. Specialist Jeremy L. Stacey was killed on July 5 by a roadside bomb in Baghdad, and Army PFC Bruce Salazar Jr., was killed on July 6 by an improvised explosive device, IED, in Muhammad Sath, Iraq. Specialist Stacey spent a large portion of his life growing up in Amarillo, TX, and later moved with his mother, Betty Click, to Bismarck, AR, where he graduated from Bismarck High School in 2003. Shortly after graduating from high school, he enlisted in the Army. Specialist Stacey was remembered by those in Bismarck as a great guy that everyone loved. He had been called a prankster with a quick wit by those who knew him well, and his death has been devastating for his family and the Bismarck community. Specialist Stacey was the first fatality of the Bismarck graduates serving in Iraq. Specialist Stacey was an M1 armor crewman with the 1st Cavalry Division stationed in Fort Bliss, TX, and had received the National Defense Service Medal, Global War on Terrorism Service Medal, Army Good Conduct Medal, and the Army Service Ribbon. He was posthumously appointed to the rank of corporal and awarded the Bronze Star and Purple Heart. After his graduation in Arkansas, Stacey's mother moved to Los Chavez, NM, and although he reenlisted in December for another 3-year term, he talked of moving to New Mexico to be near his mother once his service was complete. A talented writer who wrote fiction, Stacey also dreamed of going to college one day. He is survived by his mother and four sisters: Jessica Stacey, Shaila Stacey, Lisa Close, and Erica Close. Just one day after Specialist Stacey was killed, Arkansas lost another one of its sons when Army PFC Bruce Salazar was killed. Salazar moved to Fayetteville, Arkansas, in 2003 when he followed his best friend Ronnie Jacques from Davis, CA, to Northwest Arkansas. Salazar's father, Bruce Salazar Sr., lives in Springdale, and the younger Salazar worked in Springdale while completing his general equivalency degree. The 24-year-old joined the Army and planned on being a career solider, according to his mother and his friend. After the war, Salazar planned on helping his mother, Suzie Ruiz of Modesto, CA, buy a house, and he looked forward to moving to Florida. His mother remembered him as a good kid who was always there when she needed him. He was an avid baseball fan and wanted to be a fighter pilot. A few weeks before his death, Salazar spoke to his mom about family and friends and asked for a baseball glove to play catch. Ms. Ruiz mailed the glove and a book on becoming a pilot. Private First Class Salazar was an infantryman with the 1st Battalion, 30th Infantry Regiment, 2nd Brigade Combat Team, 3rd Infantry Division based in Fort Stewart, GA. He is survived by his mother Suzy father Bruce sister Alicia Salazar and four half-sisters in Southern California. The deaths of these two young men, like the thousands who have already given their lives defending our freedom in Iraq and Afghanistan, touch many families and many communities across our State and throughout this great land. Our Nation is grateful for their service, and in the days and weeks ahead, our thoughts and prayers are with their families and loved ones during this difficult time. Corporal Zachary D. Baker Madam President, I also wish to remember a young Arkansan who paid the ultimate sacrifice by giving his life for our freedom in Iraq earlier this year, CPL Zachary Baker. Coporal Baker was 24 years old and is survived by his wife Christina and seven-year-old son Andrew, as well as his mother, father, brother, sister, and other relatives. Known affectionately to his family as ``Bubba,'' Baker was serving his second tour of duty in Iraq. He was originally sent to Iraq in 2005 and volunteered to go back after completing that tour. His family described him as a good Christian man who thought about others before himself. He was killed with five other members of the First Cavalry Division based out of Fort Hood, TX, when a roadside bomb exploded near the Bradley fighting vehicle they were in. His team was responding to a helicopter that Iraqi insurgents shot down north of Baghdad after two crew members radioed for help. Both crew members died in the crash. I extend my deepest sympathy to his family. My thoughts and prayers, as well as those of so many Arkansans, are with you during this difficult time. Staff Sergeant Justin Estes Madam President, Arkansas lost a fine young American this past year when SSG Justin Estes of Sims was killed while trying to assist a wounded soldier near Samarra, Iraq. According to reports, Sergeant Estes was in the third vehicle of a convoy when another vehicle was struck by an improvised explosive device, IED. Without regard for himself, Sergeant Estes left his vehicle and rushed to pull an injured comrade out of the burning vehicle. He began administering first aid to the wounded soldier when another IED detonated. He died in the arms of a second soldier from the explosion. Sergeant Estes was remembered as a fine soldier, ``The Best of the Best,'' who put others before himself. He was serving his second tour for the 82nd Airborne and was set to return to the United States after his first tour. However, he gave his slot to a fellow soldier so that he could see his newborn son. Family and friends also recalled his fun- loving spirit. Sergeant Estes was awarded three medals: the Bronze Star, the Purple Heart, and the Combat Infantryman Badge. He is survived by his parents, Don and Kathy Estes of Kentucky and John and Diane Salyers of Sims. He also has two older sisters, Norma and Kelli, in addition to other family. My thoughts and prayers go out to the Estes family during this trying time. Specialist Erich Smallwood Madam President, it is with great sadness that I also rise today to pay tribute to a Arkansan who served his country with honor, SPC Erich S. Smallwood of Trumann, AR. Specialist Smallwood died on May 26, 2007, from injuries suffered when an improvised explosive device detonated near his vehicle outside of Balad, Iraq. Erich was a member of Company B of the 87th Troop Command's 875th Engineer Battalion based in Marked Tree, AR, and served with the battalion's Company A based in Jonesboro, AR. He was the first loss for the 875th during Operation Iraqi Freedom. A 2002 graduate of Trumann High School, Smallwood was a beloved member of his community. He was selected ``Mr. Trumann High School'' by his classmates and was a good athlete who played football, baseball, and ran track for THS. He was also selected ``Most Involved'' his senior year in high school and was a member of Future Farmers of America and the Spanish Club. In the days following his death, friends and loved one remembered Smallwood for the person he was and the examples he set. In an interview in the Trumann Democrat, his high school principal, Jim Montgomery, recalled that Specialist Smallwood had a great sense of humor. ``He liked to kid around, but he never got into any trouble. . . He was always doing something to make people laugh . . . He was a good student and a good person.'' At his funeral on June 4, his brother-in-law, Jon Redman of Jonesboro, noted that he was an inspiration to others. ``He was a special kind of person. He always had that smile on his face. . . He was the greatest brother anyone could have. He was a friend to many people and never met a stranger. He was the heart and soul of his unit.'' Arkansas National Guard Adjutant GEN William B. Wofford remembered him as ``a soldier both inside and outside the wire. He wanted to be an encouragement to someone. He was a true patriot, was intelligent, and loved his fellow soldiers.'' At a Memorial Day service in Trumann, just 2 days after his passing, Mayor Sheila Walters read a proclamation recognizing the sacrifice of Specialist Smallwood. It read: ``We honor all soldiers and their commitments to this great country by their legacy of patriotism and sacrifice. We honor our very own Erich Smallwood for giving his life in the cause of freedom. He is one of the many heroes who have protected and inspired us all.'' Madam President, Specialist Smallwood was a unique person who paid the ultimate sacrifice in serving his country and protecting our freedoms. My thoughts and prayers are with his fiancee, Amanda; father, James; mother, Pamela; sister, Terah; brother J.T., who is also currently serving in Iraq; and the rest of the Smallwood family during this trying time. sergeant robb rolfing

Mrs. LINCOLN

Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, I rise today to discuss an issue of enormous importance the health and safety of our children. Although we have made great strides in recent years to combat youth cigarette smoking, a few in the tobacco industry have found a loophole which allows them to classify certain cigarettes as ``small cigars'' thereby avoiding higher cigarette taxes that have been implemented, at least in part, to deter children from smoking. The trend of small cigar use is growing at an alarming rate. Small cigar sales for 2006 were at the highest level ever reported and have increased by more than 100 percent since 1998. This increase has occurred at the exact same time that cigarette usage has decreased. More specifically, use of cigars among youth is rising. Multiple studies over the last few years have shown that more and more high school students are smoking cigar products while the percentage of high school cigarette smokers is down. What is the reason for this shift in tobacco consumption? It is my belief and I am not alone that the emerging small cigar market has played a significant role in this problem. Tobacco products are self- classified by the manufacturer and labeled as small cigars. As cigarette taxes have gone up in recent years, the flight to cigar classification has become all the more tempting. As a result, there are an increasing number of manufacturers with products that look like cigarettes--the same size and shape as cigarettes--and smoke like cigarettes--many of them are filtered--being marketed and sold as cheaper alternatives to cigarettes simply because they are encased in brown wrapping. Members of the tobacco industry even acknowledge that small cigars are ``a smoking alternative to cigarettes.'' Under current law, small cigars are taxed at significantly lower rates than cigarettes. This tax differential allows small cigars to price themselves at about half of the usual cigarette shelf price. This mischaracterization is costing the Federal Treasury in revenues and, more importantly, having the effect of enabling our children greater access to tobacco products. In addition, these small cigar products are often sold in packs of five or eight, or sometimes even individually, making them even cheaper and more accessible to our children. Research shows that increased tobacco product pricing reduces smoking among children. It is imperative that we implement policy to correct the pricing disparity among similar tobacco products. We must ensure that our laws intended to protect public health are not being circumvented. The legislation I am introducing today would increase the Federal excise tax on small cigars to the same rates as cigarettes. This will level the playing field to ensure that all tobacco products that look like cigarettes and smoke like cigarettes are taxed like cigarettes. I ask my colleagues to join me in working to ensure this loophole is closed.

Mrs. LINCOLN

Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, I rise today to discuss an issue of enormous importance the health and safety of our children. Although we have made great strides in recent years to combat youth cigarette smoking, a few in the tobacco industry have found a loophole which allows them to classify certain cigarettes as ``small cigars'' thereby avoiding higher cigarette taxes that have been implemented, at least in part, to deter children from smoking. The trend of small cigar use is growing at an alarming rate. Small cigar sales for 2006 were at the highest level ever reported and have increased by more than 100 percent since 1998. This increase has occurred at the exact same time that cigarette usage has decreased. More specifically, use of cigars among youth is rising. Multiple studies over the last few years have shown that more and more high school students are smoking cigar products while the percentage of high school cigarette smokers is down. What is the reason for this shift in tobacco consumption? It is my belief and I am not alone that the emerging small cigar market has played a significant role in this problem. Tobacco products are self- classified by the manufacturer and labeled as small cigars. As cigarette taxes have gone up in recent years, the flight to cigar classification has become all the more tempting. As a result, there are an increasing number of manufacturers with products that look like cigarettes--the same size and shape as cigarettes--and smoke like cigarettes--many of them are filtered--being marketed and sold as cheaper alternatives to cigarettes simply because they are encased in brown wrapping. Members of the tobacco industry even acknowledge that small cigars are ``a smoking alternative to cigarettes.'' Under current law, small cigars are taxed at significantly lower rates than cigarettes. This tax differential allows small cigars to price themselves at about half of the usual cigarette shelf price. This mischaracterization is costing the Federal Treasury in revenues and, more importantly, having the effect of enabling our children greater access to tobacco products. In addition, these small cigar products are often sold in packs of five or eight, or sometimes even individually, making them even cheaper and more accessible to our children. Research shows that increased tobacco product pricing reduces smoking among children. It is imperative that we implement policy to correct the pricing disparity among similar tobacco products. We must ensure that our laws intended to protect public health are not being circumvented. The legislation I am introducing today would increase the Federal excise tax on small cigars to the same rates as cigarettes. This will level the playing field to ensure that all tobacco products that look like cigarettes and smoke like cigarettes are taxed like cigarettes. I ask my colleagues to join me in working to ensure this loophole is closed.

Mrs. LINCOLN

Mrs. LINCOLN. Again, I urge my colleagues--I strongly urge my colleagues--to support these amendments. These are the right things to do on behalf of these unbelievable individuals, these unbelievable Americans, these citizen soldiers who leave their homes and their jobs. They leave their communities and their families to go in the bravest of manners to defend this great country, to defend our freedom. It is the least we can do for those we owe so much and to reassure future generations that a grateful nation will not forget them when their military service is complete. And, more importantly, that we will partner with them to reach the ultimate in their potential, the ultimate in their desire to make themselves the best they can be when they return home. I encourage any colleagues to support both of our amendments. I yield the floor.

Mrs. LINCOLN. Madam President, I have a special thanks to the chairman and ranking member for their leadership on such a critical issue at such a critical time in our Nation. Their leadership and their ability to work together have certainly brought us together here on this issue and many others. I am grateful to them for that. I rise today on behalf of the brave men and women of our National Guard and Reserve who have sacrificed so greatly for our freedom. They are the policemen and the doctors, the schoolteachers and mayors in communities all across our great land. They are also the beloved sons and daughters, fathers and mothers and families in our neighborhoods, in mine and yours, all across this Nation. Our Nation has turned to them in unprecedented numbers to help defend our freedoms around the world. With pride and courage, they have answered their Nation's call. We have seen also in their call to duty the great contribution they give in our communities because, as they are deployed, we see in our communities where perhaps our mayors or our school principals or our fire chiefs have to be replaced temporarily as they are gone. Since the tragic events of September 11, 2001, nearly 600,000 of these citizen soldiers, including several thousand from my home State of Arkansas, have been activated to serve in Iraq and Afghanistan. More than 132,000 have pulled multiple tours of duty. In doing so, they have served and continue to serve with distinction in some of the worst conditions imaginable. It is time, now, for us as a nation and as a body here in the Senate to begin providing them with benefits that are more commensurate with their increased sacrifice. One area in particular is the educational benefits provided under the Montgomery GI bill. These benefits were signed into law in 1984, a time when members of the Selected Reserve were seldom mobilized. Consequently, standard Montgomery GI benefits reflected that reality. But, unfortunately, it is not the same reality we see today. That is why I have offered two amendments to the 2008 Defense Authorization Act. These two amendments are a part of a bill that I have helped work with my colleague from Arkansas, Congressman Snyder, to put together in the Total Force GI bill that we have introduced on behalf of our Guard and Reserve. These two proposals offer two very big steps toward modernizing the Montgomery GI benefit to better reflect the increased commitment our Guard and Reserve are making to protect our Nation. I am extremely proud to be joined by 13 of my colleagues, including the Presiding Officer, from both sides of the aisle and over 40 military veterans and higher education groups, working together as the partnership for veterans education. So many of us all well know how critically valuable education is to each and every one of us, to our families, to the success of our economics and our country, and we want to see a part of that a possibility for our veterans. The first amendment, which is amendment No. 2072, would place both Selected Reserve Montgomery GI programs under the same umbrella in law as the Active-Duty program. Under the current structure, Active-Duty benefits have continued to increase in recent years, while the benefits for our hard-working reservists have remained untouched. As a result, the value of the Montgomery GI benefits has plummeted for members of the Selected Reserve, despite their increased service, from 47 percent of Active-Duty benefits in 1985 to now only 29 percent of those benefits today. This amendment would establish one program with one set of rules that would cut inconsistent and inequitable structuring of benefits by ensuring that all future benefits are upgraded equitably and are easier to administer. An identical provision has been included in the House-passed version of the Defense authorization bill. My hope is that my colleagues will join me in including this amendment in our Defense authorization bill to truly reflect not only our gratitude but certainly, without a doubt, what our guardsmen and reservists deserve after the incredible and courageous commitment they have made to this country. The second amendment is amendment No. 2074, and it is identical to an amendment that was passed unanimously by the Senate last year. This amendment would allow operational reservists to have portability of their Reserve Education Assistance Program--it is called their REAP benefit--for up to 10 years upon their separation from service. In establishing REAP, which is their Reserve Education Assistance Program, Congress took steps to enhance educational benefits for activated members of the Selected Reserve, but we failed to address their lack of readjustment or transition components. As a result, Active-Duty servicemembers have up to 10 years after their separation of service to utilize their Montgomery GI benefit, while operational reservists, whom they are often fighting alongside, without a doubt, must forfeit all of the educational benefits they have earned once they separate from the Selected Reserve. That is incredible. We have guardsmen and reservists who are serving alongside Active-Duty military. They are seeing the same dangers, the same challenges, the same pain, the same separation from family, for relatively the same amount of time. Yet when they come home and they leave the Guard, they no longer have access to those educational opportunities. How unfair. How important it is right now for us, as these returning veterans have an opportunity to begin to transition themselves back into their communities, back into their existing jobs or new jobs--the need for education is paramount, and making sure we make it available for them is absolutely essential. To this day, the Montgomery GI benefits continue to be the only benefits that those who have served Selected Reserve activated duty in the war on terror may not access when they eventually separate or retire. In addition, members of today's Selected Reserve are so busy training and deploying that they have little time to actually use their educational benefits; therefore, their ability to use their benefits while serving is curtailed because of repeated deployment and denied entirely once they finish their service. We are talking about education. We are talking about empowerment. We are talking about something they deserve, they have earned, and we should be making sure we make available to them. I would like to give an example. Take, for instance, Jamaal Lampkin, who is a 28-year-old native of Malvern, AR, whose story was recently reported in USA Today. Jamaal spent 13 months with the U.S. Army Reserve in Iraq. After his distinguished tour of duty, which included a Purple Heart, he did not have time to utilize the enhanced educational benefits he had earned prior to the conclusion of his service obligation. To do so, he had to reenlist and risk the chance of being redeployed at some point. How unbelievable, for someone who had given of himself and offered himself in service to this great Nation to come back and find that after that tour of duty, those benefits were gone. In his records, here in this article, he said: I had the proud opportunity to serve my country in Iraq and I just wanted to move on. He, and those like him, certainly deserve as much. We must act on behalf of these brave Americans because they deserve a policy more reflective of their sacrifice. Jamal fought and was wounded alongside active-duty servicemembers, but because of an inequity of the law, he is denied the same opportunity to utilize those educational benefits he has rightly earned, benefits that serve as a primary means of helping our service men and women make that difficult transition back into civilian life after serving in combat. Some have raised concerns this amendment would have an effect on retention because it would provide a postservice portability of benefits. I wholeheartedly disagree. There are many valid personal and family reasons that influence a volunteer's decision to serve. Military analysts have consistently noted that reenlistment bonuses and lump sum cash payments have been effective in meeting and exceeding reenlistment goals in the Active and Reserve forces, not the educational benefits that are deferred over time. That is why we have seen an unprecedented increase in the amount spent on these bonuses in recent years. At a time when one branch of our military is spending over $1 billion in cash bonuses, the least we can do is provide a fraction of those costs on investing in our citizen soldiers. After all, doing so only serves to enhance our Nation's competitiveness through the development of a more highly educated and productive workforce. Young high school graduates in Arkansas and across this great country thinking about furthering their education and whether to join the National Guard or Reserves should know they will earn Montgomery GI benefits by enlisting, and even more if they are called up to duty. When it is time to reenlist, they can keep all earned educational benefits with the opportunity to earn more by staying in or they can take with them in civilian life the benefits they have earned when they were called up to defend our great Nation. As the daughter of a Korean war veteran, I was taught from an early age about the sacrifices of our troops and the sacrifices our troops have to make to keep our Nation free. I have been grateful for the service of so many of our brave men and women from the State of Arkansas and across this Nation. On behalf of them and their families, I will continue to fight to ensure they are provided with the benefits, the pay, and the health care they have earned. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record letters of endorsement from the Military Officers Association of America, the National Reserve Association, the American Legion, the Air Force Sergeants of America, the Veterans of Foreign Wars, and the Enlisted Association of the National Guard of the United States.

Mrs. LINCOLN. Ten minutes.

Mrs. LINCOLN

Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, I applaud the efforts of the Energy Committee, its chairman and ranking member, in crafting this bill. However, I have concerns about some aspects of the efficiency title specifically as they relate to regional standards for heating and cooling products and the possibility of more than one energy standard such as SEER or EER being applied to these products. I sincerely hope that we can work on resolving these issues following the passage of this legislation.

Mrs. LINCOLN. I appreciate the chairman's good-faith commitment to work with us on this issue. I raised these concerns when this bill was being discussed in the Energy Committee, and I continue to have reservations about how the language, as written, can be implemented. rps

Mrs. LINCOLN

Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, I start first by thanking both the chairman and ranking member and their staff for some incredibly hard work to get this legislation ready to come to the floor. It was absolutely no small feat, but it is so very important that we bring this portion of our objective in leading our Nation away from dependence on foreign oil and back to our ability to provide for ourselves. This energy tax package that Chairman Baucus and Senator Grassley have brought together is remarkable--remarkable in its balance, it is remarkable in the engine it provides to drive the incentives industry needs to move us toward renewable fuels. I wish to say how much I appreciate their effort. Throughout the history of our Nation, we have faced great technological challenges that we have confronted and overcome. We didn't put a man on the Moon by talking about how important it was. We developed a plan, and we committed the resources necessary to achieve that plan. We are at that juncture now in this country in regard to renewable fuels and our dependence on foreign oil. I applaud their efforts in what they have done and accomplished. I also wish to point out, in terms of what the Senator from Arizona has brought up, he mentioned this is not a new product. I venture to say how many people have heard of diesel made from animal fat, particularly chicken fat? This is a new product. It is a product that produces a renewable diesel that is very clean burning and very positive for our environment and the overall objective of what we are trying to reach in this underlying bill and that is reducing our CO2 emissions, reducing what is going into the environment, and reducing our dependence on foreign oil. The Senator from Arizona mentions the original intent. The original intent was to promote renewable diesel. In fact, the renewable diesel credit is drafted as technology neutral, regardless of the state of the art or process at the time of enactment. The EPAct statute simply provides that renewable diesel fuel, in order to qualify for the credit, must be produced using a thermal depolymerization process. We have the history on that process. We know what the intent and the purpose of EPAct was and is, and we meet that intent. We meet that intent with the encouragement of making sure we are looking at all the renewable feedstocks in this country to put into the mix to lessen our dependence on petroleum products and to create variety in what it is we go to. I know there are some in this body on both sides who think maybe this is an opportunity to get even with big oil. That is not the intent of this bill, and I hope we would not stray to that. I hope we would not stray to the idea that we are here to get even with big oil but that we are here to encourage those in the oil industry to move into renewable fuels, to move into the opportunities that exist in technology, to push them into an area where renewables make sense. Senator Kyl's amendment does not solve the problem he raises regarding the increase in the price of fat. The credit that Senator Kyl seeks to strike is for a process that is in the very early stages of production. This process has not even been produced in terms of barrels of fuel in this country. So it is difficult to see how it could have had the profound effect on the prices that Senator Kyl claims it has. The fact is, the price of fat has been driven up in part due to its use in the production of biodiesel. Senator Kyl said in our hearing yesterday that if he could, he would try to remove all credits he believes might distort existing markets. If we think we are going to move ourselves as a nation and as a people, with the culture and the amenities to which we have become accustomed, to a society that depends on renewable fuels without making at least some minor changes in the marketplaces of our existing feedstocks, we might as well pack it up and go home right now. If we are going to eliminate all the credits and all the opportunities that exist to go to renewable fuels, and we are going to eliminate them because of some blip they may cause momentarily before we begin to move into the decade where we can balance our needs for renewable feeds with other items, we might as well go home because that is going to happen. What we have done is crafted in this bill a very sensible solution. Senator Kyl mentions the stand-alone renewable diesel facilities need to be protected, they need to be maintained. They are. They have no cap whatsoever in this bill, just as there is no cap on biodiesel. But where we have facilities that are taking the steps in the right direction to coproduce, they are going to get a credit. They are going to get a credit up to the amount where they meet what the small producers are doing, a 60-million-gallon-per-facility cap. It is very reasonable, and it certainly speaks to the efforts of what we are trying to do in this underlying bill. Today's amendment may only affect renewable diesel, but it is entirely possible that next year the target will be biodiesel or ethanol or cellulosic ethanol, if what he wants to do is eliminate credits that protect those underlying feedstocks. While it may be good intention for something that is parochial for the Senator from Arizona, I say let us all remember what the ultimate objective of this bill is: to lessen our dependence on foreign oil, clean our environment, and make sure that we are moving to renewables. That is exactly what the underlying bill does.

Mrs. LINCOLN

Mrs. LINCOLN. Madam President, I thank my colleague from Wisconsin, Senator Kohl, for giving me a few moments. My comments are on a slightly different topic today, and I appreciate my colleague yielding to me. I filed an amendment, No. 1556, to the energy legislation almost a week ago. Since that time, I have pleaded with my colleagues to help reach an agreement where I could come to the floor and offer this important amendment. I offered it several times last week in the latter part of the week so it could be considered by the Chamber and get an up-or-down vote on its merits. Unfortunately, I understand that certain colleagues are unwilling to lift their objection to this amendment being considered on the floor under any circumstances. So I come to the floor today to try to express some of my frustrations in dealing with this bill and particularly my amendment, not only for myself and many of my colleagues who are strongly in support of my amendment but also for the hard-working farm families across our Nation. The amendment I introduced with my good friend and colleague from New Mexico, Senator Domenici, is quite simple. It is identical to the legislation we cosponsored together last Congress and have reintroduced again this year, which is S. 807. The bill already has 26 cosponsors in the Senate and 121 cosponsors in the House. This amendment is particularly timely and appropriate for the legislation we are currently considering in the Chamber today because there is a growing understanding in this countryside that without the clarification provided by this amendment, requirements and liabilities under CERCLA, a law designed to clean up toxic industrial pollutants, could be unfairly applied to America's farmers and ranchers of all sizes, of any size, large or small. These are the very men and women who hold the future of renewable energy production in this country in their hands and in their production operations. The underlying bill we will consider today would take steps to promote the use of biomass, and specifically animal manure, as an important and critical source of renewable energy. It is widely known that farmers are beginning to use their excess manure for energy generation already, through methane digesters and other innovative technologies that are developing on a day-to-day basis. The expanded use of animal manure for energy production not only promotes our Nation's energy independence, it is also a way to control the unavoidable supply of manure and litter from livestock production in an environmentally friendly manner while adding economic value for our farm families and our rural communities. This is a win-win situation for our Nation and especially for American agriculture. Yet as this Chamber stands ready to incentivize these innovative practices and spur the growth of alternative technologies to manage this waste, pending lawsuits threaten the entire viability of this emerging industry, not to mention the viability of the hard-working farm families across our country. We should not stand by and allow a situation where farmers or those who are transporting manure for energy production or other purposes are handling a hazardous waste subject to CERCLA's strict and punitive liability provisions. It is worth noting that CERCLA section 101(14) specifically excludes petroleum. Here we are, looking to lessen our independence on foreign oil and petroleum products, yet they are exempt from CERCLA. We are looking at the possibility of agricultural by-products being included in CERCLA under the definition of hazardous waste substances but petroleum releases are not subject to CERCLA reporting and liability provisions. Why is it these same liability provisions should apply to our Nation's farmers and ranchers, and particularly our dairy farmers? Farmers and ranchers have always been responsible stewards of the land, making great strides to preserve a healthy environment for their food production but also for their families and communities. Keep in mind that agricultural operations are already regulated under the Clean Water and the Clean Air Acts, as well as other Federal and State environmental laws. The larger size operations are subject to management practices. These are the appropriate regulatory tools to manage the environmental impacts of agriculture in this country, and any farmer will tell you that our U.S. producers are already subject to much greater scrutiny in this area than their foreign competitors. That is one reason why Americans continue to enjoy the safest food supply in the world, produced right here at home by our Nation's farm families, working as hard as they possibly can to not only produce that safe food and fiber but to do it in a way that is respectful of the environment under the regulations we put upon them. The last thing we need to do is stand by and allow policies that encourage the outsourcing of food production in this country. On that note, it is my view that Congress never intended for CERCLA to apply to agriculture in the first place. In fact, the idea of including animal agriculture under CERCLA was never raised during the first two decades of this law's existence. If normal animal manure is found by the courts to be a hazardous substance under CERCLA, then virtually every farming operation in the country could be potentially exposed to severe liability and penalties under the law. Clearly, Congress never intended such an outcome, and we should take the necessary steps by taking up and passing my amendment to ensure that the courts clearly understand what our congressional intent is. We should not jeopardize American agriculture by allowing courts to impose CERCLA liability on farmers for their traditional farming practices, including the use of manure as a beneficial fertilizer or an emerging feedstock for renewable energy production. This would be most unfortunate. I hope my colleagues will look at this and be aware. I will continue my efforts to clarify that CERCLA liability does not apply to agriculture, to our livestock, to our ranches and our dairy farms, making sure that agriculture in this country can continue to do what it has always done, and that is to produce a safe, abundant, and affordable food supply under the regulations we provide them. I thank the Senator from Wisconsin for yielding, and I yield back his time.

Mrs. LINCOLN

Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, I rise today to bring to my colleagues' attention and remind them that today, June 5, 2007, is National Hunger Awareness Day. As a founder of the Senate hunger caucus and an original cosponsor of the legislation, I express my heartfelt belief that this cause deserves our full attention. We all move very fast in this world on Capitol Hill. We sometimes forget that outside the beltway bubble there are a lot of hard-working families, as well as other families that may not be quite so blessed, in terms of their everyday needs being met. The resolution that established National Hunger Awareness Day allows for food collection. That is one thing we are doing on Capitol Hill today. We are doing a food collection for the needy, where Members and their staffs can bring food to my office, as well as the offices of the other hunger caucus cochairs, Senator Smith, Senator Dole, as well as Senator Durbin. I appreciate the willingness of my colleagues to participate in such a very important effort. Our collection drive has been going on for several weeks, and we will soon be providing the food donations to the U.S. Veterans, a charity based in Washington, DC, that assists homeless veterans with food and housing during their recovery. Certainly, as we recognize the diversity in the homeless community and those who suffer from food insecurity, as well as poverty, we must not forget, particularly in this time, the number of veterans in our great Nation, those who served our country so bravely and courageously in a time of need, and what a perfect time right now is to be able to recognize that on National Hunger Awareness Day. I have worked with my Senate colleagues to draw attention to this issue because hunger and poverty are not just global issues; they are so pervasive that we all have some experience with them in our local communities, whether it is work we may do with our own houses of worship or whether it is something we do with our community-based organizations or community support activities. But we all can find a way where we recognize how pervasive poverty, and particularly hunger, is in this world. Worldwide, 3 billion people--nearly half the world's population--live on merely $2 per day. In our Nation alone, almost 38 million Americans struggle day in and day out to find adequate nutritional food. More than 13 million are children living in households that are food insecure. That brings it home to me from several different directions: As a daughter raised in a seventh generation Arkansas farm family, watching my dad take an incredible sense of pride in being able to produce crops he knew would feed his fellow man, taking pride in being efficient and effective with what he produced, and knowing what he could do would help sustain his fellow man. To look out on the crops and those farmlands I grew up on, and to think that 13 million children are living in households that are food insecure, with all of the plenty and the bountiful life we have in this great country, breaks my heart. Then I think of myself as a mother of twin boys who are about to turn 11 years old, and I look up and think to myself how grateful I am to be able to know they will get a nutritious meal; to see them when they come home from soccer practice and look up at me and say, ``Mom, I'm starving,'' and how blessed I am to be able to go to a cupboard and provide a nutritious snack to them; yet to think about other mothers across this globe who are not so fortunate, who have to look into the eyes of their own children and say there is nothing here for you, nothing to eat, nothing to nourish your body or your mind or your soul in the form of food. We can do better than that. I feel blessed I have never had to experience what it is to suffer from hunger. But I have tried to put myself in the shoes of those mothers who look into the eyes of their children and have to give them that answer. Now, in conjunction with National Hunger Awareness Day, I have also recently elected to accept the food stamps challenge and live on an average food stamp program payment of $1 per meal. I went to the grocery store the other day, and I went down those aisles looking at what I could find that was economical and nutritious that I could prepare and would have the time to prepare, not just for myself, which I am the only one in my household doing the challenge, but nonetheless, to think of the time that working parents would have to spend to figure out how to put together a nutritious meal for them and for their children on $1 per person per meal. It is my hope that my participation in this event will not only create awareness in myself but also for others in highlighting the difficulties that millions of Americans living at or near the poverty line face each and every day. In addition, I hope to increase my understanding of the limitations of the Food Stamp Program and the importance it plays in assisting the food insecure and the hungry by experiencing what it is like to live it firsthand, to be looking for those foods and what you can afford on $1 per meal. We had a woman--a very courageous woman--who came and testified before the Senate Agriculture Committee on the Food Stamp Program. She brought with her her son who is 11 years old, similar to my boys, who sat there. She said: You know, I don't make it a habit of discussing financial issues in front of my young son, but this is so important to me, to point out that I work hard at a full-time job, and I still do not make enough money to provide for my family. I still am able to accept food stamps. She said: But look at what I have to do to manage that. Then I looked at her testimony and realized that not only was she caring for her own son, she was volunteering with the PTA, the Cub Scouts, and the local library. She was helping her community also, helping raise all those children. Yet she was still subjected to living in food insecurity. We can do better than that. As a Member of the Senate Agriculture Committee, I wish to ensure that we do improve the delivery and maintain the integrity of nutrition programs when we consider the farm bill later this year. I wish to also make sure we maintain the integrity of our ability in this great Nation to produce a safe and abundant and affordable food supply. We pay less per capita than other countries across the globe. Yet we still see that working families are living in food insecurity. Over 60 percent of the farm bill budget pays for important initiatives that directly provide food and nutrition assistance, such as the Food Stamp Program, the fresh fruits and vegetables program for schools; and we are finding now that oftentimes for those children that may be the only access they have to fresh fruits and vegetables; a farmer's market program for low-income seniors, among others, that we are striving so hard to not only eliminate food insecurity but to make sure we are working hard to provide for all Americans, for the needs that exist. We must continue to fund these important programs, and we must look for new and innovative ways to ensure that Americans do not go hungry. I know that when I worked downtown, there was a man regularly at the front door of the office building I would go into. He would sit there, usually with a cigarette and a bottle and, you know, I felt so driven, both by my faith and simply my human nature, and I knew that in my life on this Earth, I should never, ever want to see another human being going hungry. That is when I decided to start giving out food coupons-- not giving out dollars but making sure my fellow man--doing all that I could do, so he and others would not go hungry if I were there. In the coming weeks and months, I encourage my colleagues to become more aware, more educated, and more informed about the effect of hunger and poverty and to find out what impact you can have in your State and in your community. I encourage all Americans to do that. Think about the difference it makes--those 13 million children living in food insecurity--how much better they could perform in school if they weren't hungry; how less likely they would be to get sick if they were getting nutrition; how much more confident they would be in who they were and who they could become if they knew that their country was there to nurture them in the most basic and essential need: food. There is no quick solution to this problem. Government alone cannot provide all the answers. We know that. As we look across these strong communities in our country and we see food banks sponsored by our faith-based organizations and the outreach of volunteers that provide Meals on Wheels and all kinds of other programs, we know that Government cannot do it all. But we also know that, as Americans and as an American family, the values we hold dear are values of being a good neighbor. That is a critical part of what this is all about. Together, we must work to reach out to organizations in our communities that are committed to this cause and develop a public-private partnership that provides resources and the manpower to combat food insecurity in this country. Yes, we must teach our children. We must teach our children to become engaged in recognizing food insecurity, poverty, and hunger where it exists and to recognize that they, too, have a responsibility. I noticed my son the other day when he came home, and he said: Mom, I am responsible for bringing some lunch meat to school because our student government is going to provide sack lunches to the homeless shelter out here in our community. The student government got together and made the lunches and put them together and then delivered them where they could visit the individuals they were actually helping, assisting, and giving notice. In closing, I would like to leave my colleagues with just a few thoughts. I know many of you all read the same Scripture I do. First and foremost, I believe my faith calls me, and it calls all of us, regardless of faith, to care for those who are less fortunate; to feed the poor and the hungry. I can tell you I am proud that our current nutrition program works toward that goal, but does it do enough? No. We can all do more. We can all do more in reaching that goal. Today, on National Hunger Awareness Day, we need to begin by asking ourselves what more can we do to eliminate hunger and poverty in our community and in our world. It has been said: To those to whom much is given, much is required. We live in this great country. Such a blessing to each and every one of us. The opportunity to do for our fellow man is an incredible responsibility. To us, much has been given, and much will be required in giving back. I appreciate my colleagues' attention to this issue, and I ask each and every one to reflect on what it is that we can do collectively as a government that reflects the values of who we are as an American family and what each of us has to do individually that reflects the values that we hold dear. One of the things we must remember, hunger is something that has a cure. There are many diseases and many things we debate on the floor of this body for which we don't yet have a cure. We don't know how we are going to solve those problems. Hunger has a solution and it has a cure and it is our responsibility to strive hard each and every day to find that cure for our fellow man. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mrs. LINCOLN

Mrs. LINCOLN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent to speak as in morning business for 5 minutes.

Mrs. LINCOLN. Madam President, I join my colleagues in expressing my heartfelt condolences to Susan, the entire Thomas family, and the people of Wyoming over the passing of our dear friend Senator Craig Thomas. We have lost one of the truly great statesmen from this body who always had a kind word and a smile for me in the hallway or here in the well or in this body and anyone else he came across during the day. He had a wonderful way of calming people down and making people feel at home. I personally felt a kinship with Senator Thomas. Our offices were not merely located in the same corner of the third floor of the Dirksen building, we were neighbors in every sense of the word. We also had the distinction of serving together on both the Senate Finance and Energy committees. Not a day would go by that we didn't share a ride in the elevator or cross pathways in the hall or stand and visit with our staffs together. We also both came from rural States with similar needs, and we worked together to address many of the same issues the citizens of Wyoming and Arkansas face. As one of the cochairs of the Senate rural health care caucus, Senator Thomas was a true leader and a fighter, consistently fighting to improve access to health care for rural communities, especially for seniors. We worked on several issues together to make sure our rural constituents had a voice on health care and many other important issues. Senator Thomas and I also were delighted to work together to improve tax fairness for the numerous disabled veterans who served our country with dignity and honor and call Arkansas and Wyoming their home. Senator Thomas was a tireless advocate for Wyoming and fought to ensure that the interests of his State were always protected throughout the legislative process. I can't tell you how many times I saw different constituent groups from Wyoming lined up in the hallway to visit with their very respected Senator. He was always accessible and always made time for folks who traveled so far to see him. But he also made time to visit with those who were there in the hallway, oftentimes my constituents or staff members. He was never in too big of a hurry that he couldn't stop and take the time to visit with someone, to share with them a kind word or listen to what was on their mind or in their busy schedule. He has a tremendous staff. They all reflect the Senator's good nature. Working with his staff so closely in the neighborhood of the third floor of Dirksen, they exemplify the courage and kindness of this incredible Senator they have served. He was a tremendous public servant, and he served our Nation courageously as a United States marine. He was a true gentleman and one of the kindest and most genuine people you would ever meet. I am truly saddened by the loss of my friend, and my thoughts and prayers are with his dear wife Susan and the entire Thomas family. This Senate body, the State of Wyoming, and the American people have been truly blessed by his life and his service.

Mrs. LINCOLN

Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, I am sorry, I didn't know I had a restricted time limit. I ask unanimous consent for an additional 2 minutes.

Mrs. LINCOLN. I thank the Chair. Mr. President, as I said, citizenship in this country is not free, and it is something that has to be earned and worked for, and that is what this bill requires. I also believe any plan must consider guest workers. Many business leaders throughout our great State of Arkansas have told me about the valuable contribution that legal immigrant workers have made to the economic growth we have seen. It is my belief these workers are vital to sustained growth and development of many industries and farming communities throughout our land. However, we must ensure that adequate safeguards are in place to prevent guest workers from taking jobs from U.S. workers or driving down wages and benefits for hard-working Americans. We have seen that in this bill, and we will continue to work to strengthen it. I am pleased the immigration reform legislation we are currently debating contains provisions that will improve our agricultural guest worker program which will benefit our Nation's farmers. We stand at a crossroads in this country. Over the last decade and a half, the immigrant population has expanded in every area of our country, many of them coming here legally but some not; some coming illegally, many of them already paying local taxes. Almost half are paying into Medicare and Social Security with no promise of ever receiving any benefits. We are faced with the decision that gets to the heart of what values we hold near and dear as Americans. We have always said: If you work hard and play by the rules, there is a place for you in this great land of America to raise your children and contribute to our great melting pot. We now must consider as part of this debate what to do with those who have broken the rules to come here but have since worked hard to provide for their families. I hope the Senate will give this difficult question the reasoned, thorough debate it deserves. The problems we face today with border security and illegal immigration did not appear overnight, and they will not be solved overnight. It is a difficult and complicated issue, and fixing it will not be easy. But while I am still reviewing the provisions of this legislation and reserve the right to try to improve it through the amendment process, as others will, I believe strongly that we can work to complete an immigration bill this year because we no longer can wait. I thank the majority leader and Senator McConnell. I thank Senator Kennedy and Senator Kyl for their hard work. And I look forward to continuing our work on this bill and hopefully finding a solution to this issue and doing so in a timely way. I yield the floor.

Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, I appreciate my colleague from New Jersey and the passion and value he brings to this debate; it is tremendous, and we are all better for it. I am grateful to him. I rise this afternoon to, once again, discuss the dire need we have in this country and in our communities for comprehensive immigration reform. I do believe the debate on immigration reform has been the kind of meaningful, bipartisan approach in the Senate--with Senators Kyl and Kennedy working together, Senator McConnell and Leader Reid working together--this is a bipartisan approach and the debate the American people expect out of the Senate. I am proud we are moving forward on it because of the immediate need but also the way we are going about this process. Despite the Senate's success in producing a bipartisan bill last year, the issue still has not been resolved. There is still much to be questioned, and we are working through that. The majority of my colleagues will agree that our Nation's current immigration system is badly broken, it is out of date, and it desperately needs to be fixed. I plan to look for any plan that we can support that is tough and practical and fair in dealing with this ever- increasing issue. Without a doubt, the top priority must be the safety and security of our country, as well as the economic needs of industry, U.S. citizens, and immigrants. But most importantly, the security issue is one of our top priorities. I am so pleased the underlying bill includes triggers to require that Border Patrol agents are significantly increased and vehicle barriers and fencing are installed along the southern border with Mexico before any of the other provisions can even begin, making sure that we are taking care of what we know we can do and we can do quickly. I believe this bill is a work in progress, though, just as any other bill we bring before the Senate--working hard through the committee process and through years of debate, but also recognizing that we are not here to create a work of art but to create a work in progress. Through these debates and actually through implementation, we learn what works and what doesn't work, what the current needs of our country are. But as we move forward with implementation, we learn the future needs. If we debate reform in this bill in the coming days and weeks, we must also address other important issues. As I stated during last year's debate, my home State of Arkansas had the largest per capita increase of the Hispanic population of any State in the Nation during the last census. Arkansas has become what is referred to as an emerging Hispanic community, with largely first-generation immigrants. These immigrants have had a dramatic impact on our communities and our economy. The majority of immigrants in my State came to the United States because they wanted an opportunity to work hard and achieve a better life for themselves and for their families. However, I believe it is to the detriment, oftentimes, of taxpaying Americans if we don't address the millions of illegal immigrants living in our communities. We have to do so in a practical way, in a realistic way of how we effectively use the tax dollars we have, along with the rules and regulations and realistic barriers that we can put into place to rein in the problem that exists today in this country. No reform proposal should grant amnesty. Amnesty is total unqualified forgiveness without restitution, and no policy should provide amnesty. This policy does not, nor did the one we passed in the last session of Congress. I don't think it is fair to the citizens of this Nation or to those immigrants who do play by the rules to come into this great land. Those who have broken the law, including employers who knowingly hire illegal immigrants, must face proper recourse. However, I also don't believe it is practical, wise, or even, quite frankly, an economic reality to think that we can simply round up and deport all of the illegal immigrants who are residing in this country today. That is why I support an approach that includes serious consequences for those who are in our country illegally and yet want to remain. We create an earned path to citizenship and tough enforcement policies for businesses and those who are working toward that citizenship. We can eliminate the shadow economy that encourages illegal immigration. According to the bill being debated, all undocumented immigrants who arrive in the United States before January 1, 2007, will be required to pay a hefty fine, a $5,000 fine, go to the end of the line, and wait 8 years before a green card can be issued, putting into place stiff regulations and expectations of those who have come here against the rules and yet want to remain, putting them at the back of the line not at the front. In addition, a touchback provision has been included that will require the head of a household to return to his or her country of origin to apply for a green card before being allowed to return. Many of us know how absolutely precious citizenship in this great land is. When I first ran for Congress, I can remember the first thing my father told me. I was a young single woman out campaigning and pleading with my fellow Arkansans in east Arkansas, people I had known ever since I was born, people who had helped raise me, those I had grown up around. My father said: Never, ever, ever miss an opportunity to ask someone for their vote. He said: When you have something that precious, you want to be asked for it. Citizenship in this great country, just as that vote, is a precious gift, and we, as Arkansans and Americans, know that anything similar that precious is worth working for. That is why these provisions are important because it demonstrates that citizenship is something that must be earned and is not free.

Mrs. LINCOLN

Mrs. LINCOLN. Madam President, today I wish to pay tribute to one of the top companies in the Nation and one that calls Arkansas home, Murphy Oil. In the May 2007 issue of Reader's Digest, Murphy Oil was named one of ``America's 100 Best'' in recognition of the El Dorado Promise scholarship program. Reader's Digest called the program the ``Best Class Act'' and nothing could be more true. El Dorado Promise was created through a $50 million gift from Murphy Oil Company. The advent of the program guarantees that all local high school graduates in the El Dorado community will be able to go to college. To be eligible for the program, students must, at minimum, graduate from El Dorado High School, live in the school district, and attend El Dorado High between the 9th and 12th grades. Depending on how long a student has lived in the school district, eligible students will receive tuition and mandatory fees assistance for up to 5 years and equal to the highest yearly rate charged by an Arkansas public university. Students must enroll in a community college or a 4-year university--public or private, in Arkansas or out of State--and maintain a 2.0 grade point average to remain eligible. What a gift this is for this South Arkansas community and the families that live there. According to the Washington Post, it is one of the most generous scholarship programs in the Nation. When the program was announced in January at a school assembly, many in attendance were brought to tears. I want to commend Claiborne Deming, the president and CEO of Murphy Oil, and the Murphy Oil board of directors for their vision and investment in the children of El Dorado. The commitment they are making to their community will provide wonderful opportunities for many Arkansas families. Murphy Oil's unselfish gift also will elevate the lives of so many young people and allow them to fully participate in our global economy. Many colleges are offering to participate in the program, and El Dorado Promise is already sparking interest as other communities attempt to find ways to offer similar programs. I am also hopeful that this scholarship program will set an example for other corporate citizens to make investments in their communities. It can go beyond dollars and cents, too. The donation of technology or even time in the form of mentoring programs can have a meaningful impact on students and communities in ways that cannot be measured. Education is a national investment in our most precious resource, our children. The knowledge and training they receive will provide them with the tools they will carry with them for the rest of their lives. The Nation's ability to lead responsibility in the world, to effectively confront emerging threats, and to complete in the global economy will depend on providing all our future leaders with a quality education. The El Dorado Promise is a quality investment in those children who will, no doubt, reap Murphy Oil its greatest return for years to come.

Mrs. LINCOLN

Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, I would like to take a few moments to extend my heartfelt condolences to the Virginia Tech community and the families comforting them. The entire Nation obviously is grieving with them over their tremendous loss. We want them to know that all of our States, particularly the great State of Arkansas, stand with them as they cope with this senseless tragedy. We will continue to be with them, keep them in our thoughts and prayers in the coming weeks and months. I attended Randolph-Macon Woman's College just down the road from Blacksburg in Lynchburg, VA. I remember when I was in college, Virginia Tech was well known for its strong and passionate student body. They had tremendous strength. They had a strong will, a strong determination, and a strong and bright spirit. I certainly know that all of those strengths remain in today's student body at Virginia Tech. I also know that their alumni will be there to comfort them and stead them well in the coming months. We hope they know we have them in our thoughts and prayers.

Mrs. LINCOLN

Mrs. LINCOLN. I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, I know the Republican side has additional time remaining. That will be reserved for them. I wish to speak under the Democratic time.

Mrs. LINCOLN

Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, news from the Pentagon last week hit so many families throughout our great State of Arkansas particularly hard. Four years into the conflict in Iraq, the Army National Guard put 13,000 reservists, including nearly 2,000 from the largest National Guard unit in Arkansas, the 39th Infantry Brigade, on notice that they should be prepared for a second deployment at the end of this year. The Pentagon's decision to potentially deploy these troops marks the first time during Operation Iraqi Freedom that full Guard units would be called up for a second tour of duty. Our Arkansas troops already have performed bravely in Iraq, and we know they will do so again. Today, along with many Arkansans honorably serving in the Active-Duty military, over 1,600 of our citizen soldiers have been activated for service in the Middle East and along our southern border with Mexico. The 142nd Fire Brigade based in Fayetteville, AR, mobilized last week and is expected in Iraq this summer. Eighty members of the 213th Area Support Medical Company are preparing for their mobilization orders in June. Many of these members served in Iraq before with the 296th Ambulance Company. The headquarters company, the 871st Troop Command, is also expected to be mobilized in June. Since the war began, our troops have performed their mission with incredible bravery and skill in some of the harshest conditions imaginable. Their families have supported them and kept them in their prayers, have been there with them each step of the way, both in the harsh conditions and when they have returned. Their communities have supported them, many of which are rural communities. They are communities that, when these soldiers have been deployed, have to find someone else to fill positions while they are gone, positions such as mayor or principal of the school, fire chief or police chief, small businesses that keep the economies in those small rural communities thriving. Because of the sacrifice of these brave men and women, their families, and these communities, we have seen a popularly elected government replace a ruthless dictator. We have seen a democratic constitution approved by the Iraqi people replace the authoritarian rule they had known. Tragically, we also have seen civilian mismanagement of this war which is not reflective of the tremendous sacrifice put forth by our men and women in uniform. Today, more than 3,300 servicemembers, 56 with Arkansas ties, have given their lives-- the ultimate sacrifice in this undertaking--and more than 24,000 have been wounded. Now, as our troops contemplate the thought of returning to Iraq to continue an undefined mission, President Bush has chosen to question the resolve of Congress to provide our troops with the resources they need to finish the job. He has questioned us. I take great exception to the President's comments. I find them disingenuous, and I wish to make clear to the American people that Congress is committed to providing our troops with everything they need to safely and effectively complete their mission. I believe that we have worked diligently to bring about a bill which would provide just that. Last month, I voted with the majority of my Senate colleagues for an emergency spending bill that was above the President's request for our troops and would provide nearly $100 billion for operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. We met each of his requests and provided every nickel he asked for and more. The additional dollars we approved provide for their combat equipment, housing, and much needed health care, particularly addressing mental health issues for those suffering from traumatic brain injuries and post-traumatic stress disorder. Our soldiers in the field deserve no less. Our returning veterans deserve no less. We should be doing everything we possibly can to provide what the President has asked and more. We do just that in the supplemental bill we will send him. Our legislation also sets measurable benchmarks for the Iraqi Government such as assuming control of their own security operations, containing the sectarian violence, and making the tough decisions toward political reconciliation that desperately need to be made--the very same benchmarks the President himself has continually called for. The Senate did this in record time. In the past 2 years, it took well over 100 days to get to a supplemental. This Senate, recognizing the urgency of the issue, moved quicker than we have in the last 2 years. We have been more expeditious, and we acted in less than 50 days to get it passed in the Senate. We now anticipate sending him a bill next week. Despite our best efforts to find common ground, however, the President has threatened to veto this bill once it reaches his desk, although the final language still needs to be negotiated in a conference package. I hope it will be done in a way that does expedite getting the resources and needs to our soldiers. What is so egregious about our approach that the President will not consider signing it and has been so adamant? The President points to two particular issues. First, he claims this bill would impose restrictions on our military commanders and set an arbitrary date for withdrawal from Iraq, giving our enemies the victory they desperately want. I argue that the constantly shifting objectives of this war make it difficult to imagine an end to the U.S. commitment, unless we present the benchmarks the President has spoken about and called for. The American people are exhausted with this war, and the President's justification for staying in Iraq becomes harder and harder to stomach each and every day if we do not call on the Iraqis to step up to the plate and seize their opportunity to create their own security. As Iraq slides deeper into an increasingly violent civil war, the President's high-risk military strategy has increased our military's involvement. This strategy comes at a time when the U.S. intelligence community reports that al-Qaida has become an increased threat to our national security because we have devoted so much manpower, resources, and attention solely to Iraq. We have in a sense spread ourselves so thin in one place that how can we react in the multiple places where al-Qaida is strengthening itself? It also comes at a time when our own military reports that its readiness has dramatically eroded because it has been overextended and underequipped. Listening to my military leaders in Arkansas, my guardsmen and reservists, who know full well what is going to be asked of them, one of the first things on their list of concerns is the lack of medical and dental readiness for their soldiers. They find that when some of their troops get called up, because they are citizen soldiers and they may not have regular health care--which is a whole other issue to be dealing with in this body--they are held back on medical hold because they don't meet medical readiness or, in some of the more horrific stories, they just simply pull that soldier's teeth and send them to Iraq because they don't have time to give adequate dental care to bring them to that medical-readiness status. It is unacceptable and inexcusable that we should be putting those many pressures on the brave men and women who fight for this country. Our bill seeks to address these issues. In the Senate bill, we acknowledge that the conditions in Iraq have changed substantially since we originally authorized the war in 2002. We are no longer fighting an enemy that will one day show the white flag and surrender. Instead, we are now in a referee position of a brutal fight for dominance between two warring religious sects and countless militia who are all hungry for power. Oftentimes, soldiers come home and say they don't even know who the enemy is when they go into these communities and seize what they think are civilians and don't know whether it is a militia that will lash out and cause great harm. While I agree with President Bush that we should not leave Iraq in chaos, we don't have to. That is the point we make in this bill. We don't have to if we make sure, as we do in this bill, that the Iraqis understand what our expectations are of them, the benchmarks we have laid down, and the expectations we have of the Iraqis to stand up so our American soldiers can step down, as President Bush has so frequently said. U.S. troops should not be in the position of policing a civil war with an open-ended commitment. The American people realize that and are clamoring for us to move forward in a positive way to bring our troops home. That is why U.S. policy must focus on policy that encourages Iraqi leaders to take responsibility for their country and attempt to find a political solution to this grave conflict. America is no stranger to that. In looking for our own freedom hundreds of years ago, we realized there were commitments that had to be made. We knew there were steps that had to be taken, courageous steps that had to be taken. The Iraqi people know that, too. We must encourage them now to take those steps. Our efforts are already having their intended effect. On Tuesday, the President's own Defense Secretary, Robert Gates, stated: [T]he debate in Congress has been helpful in demonstrating to the Iraqis that American patience is limited. The strong feelings expressed in the Congress about the timetable probably has had a positive impact in terms of communicating to the Iraqis that this is not an open-ended commitment. The President has also chided Congress for providing much needed emergency funding. This is one of the other areas he brings complaint about our supplemental--for providing this much needed emergency funding for items such as Katrina recovery, agricultural disaster relief, the State Children's Health Insurance Program, known as SCHIP, and firefighting, just to name a few. He has attempted to paint this funding as porkbarrel funding when the reality is these are dollars which will be used to rebuild the gulf region; dollars which will be used for farmers to offset losses over the past several years from drought and hurricanes and other types of natural disasters; dollars which will be used for health care needs for our Nation's neediest children, our most precious blessing; and dollars for our first responders and on and on. I am reminded of a conversation I had with my grandmother one time when she said to me: It is crazy, but some people will sometimes ask you, Which of your children do you love the most? How do you respond to something like that? As the mother of twins, it is impossible. President Bush is the father of twins. He knows how important it is that all of your children--all of your children--know they are loved. Yes, some, though, who are the neediest may need more attention. That is why--that is why--the soldiers, the brave men and women serving in uniform from this country, are the first priority on our list here. But that does not mean we forget the rest of the members of our American family. That does not mean we forget the children who need health care or the farmers who are experiencing disaster or, Heaven forbid, we forget the members of our American family in the gulf region who have yet to get the resources and the help from their Federal Government they need to begin to rebuild their lives. These are people who are a huge part of our American family and who strengthen the fabric of this great country. It is so critically important that they, too, be included as a part of strengthening this country to which our soldiers will one day return home. These are funds which are needed now. The supplemental offers the best opportunity to address these emergencies. It is the typical place where we address emergencies in the Congress. Moving forward, I am pleased President Bush met with Majority Leader Reid and Speaker Pelosi yesterday. I see that as a sign of progress. But I am also very disappointed that the President continues to put veto threats out there about a bill that is so vitally necessary to our soldiers and to our entire American family. For the security of our country and for the sake of our troops, it is time for a new direction. It must be a direction that better reflects the ability, the reality, and the real progress that ultimately lies with the Iraqis taking responsibility for their own future. We know--we know--it can happen if the Iraqis understand what is expected of them. This new direction must also acknowledge we must do more for our troops when they are in harm's way particularly but also when they come home. The love and care--particularly health care--they and their families need is essential to keeping our American family whole. They not only deserve our appreciation and support, they deserve the very best equipment, armor, and other battlefield amenities necessary to complete their mission and to bring them home, as well as the proper care, benefits, and attention once their military service is complete. Our troops are worthy of this commitment from us. We should come together as a Congress and an executive branch to make that expression, to show our troops and to show our entire American family that at this time, at this difficult time in our Nation's history, we come together in a bipartisan way, in an American way, to recognize the needs of this great country and to move us forward. I strongly believe this bill offers the necessary guidelines to bring our soldiers home safely, and as soon as possible, to care for this incredible country--these communities they will return home to, to keep them whole and to keep this incredible fabric of our American family strong. Mr. President, I yield the floor.