Blanche Lincoln

Mrs. LINCOLN

Mrs. LINCOLN. Will the Senator yield?

Mrs. LINCOLN

Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, I come to the floor today to express my support for the education reform package that is now before the Senate. After debating this issue for almost 3 years, I am pleased we have reached a bi-partisan agreement on a package that puts our children's future ahead of the partisan bickering that has diverted our energy and attention for too long. This proposal before the Senate represents an important step in the right direction by recognizing the right of every child to receive a high quality education. I know many of my colleagues played a critical role in fashioning this very important legislation. I especially want to express my appreciation to Senator Kennedy and Senator Gregg for their tireless efforts on behalf of our nation's school children. As someone who has followed the progress of this bill very closely, I think each Member of this body owes the managers of this bill a debt of gratitude for bringing Senators with very different points of view together to find common ground on this critical issue. I applaud their leadership and I congratulate your success. I also want to say a special word of thanks to Senators Lieberman and Bayh who demonstrated real leadership by talking about many of the reforms we are about to ratify before those ideas were very popular. They deserve a lot of credit for the final agreement they helped draft and I was honored to join them in crafting the original Three R's proposals that is clearly reflected in the bill before us. As I noted previously, I support this bipartisan compromise because it contains many of the elements that I think are essential to foster academic success. It provides school districts with the resources they need to meet higher standards. It expands access in Arkansas to funding for teacher quality, English language instruction, and after-school programs by distributing resources through a reliable formula based on need, not on the ability of school districts to fill out a federal grant application. And finally, and most importantly, in exchange for more flexibility and resources, it holds States and school districts accountable for the academic performance of all children. I do want to highlight one component of this legislation that I had a direct role in shaping. During consideration of the Senate reform bill in May, I successfully offered an amendment with Senator Kennedy and others calling on Congress to substantially increase funding to enable language minority students to master English and achieve high levels of learning in all subjects. More importantly for my State of Arkansas, under the approach I promoted, funding will now be distributed to States and local districts through a reliable formula based on the number of students who need help with their English proficiency. Currently, even though Arkansas has experienced a dramatic increase in the number of limited English proficient (LEP) students during the last decade, my state does very poorly in accessing federal funding to meet the needs of these students because the bulk of the funding is distributed through a maze of competitive grants. I am pleased the conferees accepted the funding level and the reforms I advocated. This new approach represents a dramatic improvement over the current system and will greatly benefit schools and students in my State. Ultimately, I believe all of the reforms that are contained in this bill will make an important difference in the future of our children and our nation. So I join my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to urge the adoption of this truly landmark legislation. Unfortunately, I feel compelled to mention one aspect of this legislation that dampens my excitement for its passage. Even though I believe the bill on balance represents a major improvement over the current federal framework, I am very disappointed that we are once again denying the promise we made to our constituents in 1975 to pay 40 percent of the costs of serving students under IDEA. In my opinion, our failure to live up to this promise undermines to some extent the very reforms we seek to advance. I will continue to work in the Senate to reverse this record of inaction which is profoundly unfair to school districts, teachers, and the students they serve. I want to close, by thanking all of my colleagues who spent many weeks and months negotiating this agreement. Even though progress has been slow at times, the way Democrats and Republicans have worked together on this bill is a model I hope we can repeat often in the future. Mr. President, again, I thank the Senator from Massachusetts for his leadership and assistance to me in being able to achieve something on behalf of the people of Arkansas. Once again, I express my support for the education reform package now before the Senate. We have debated this issue for almost 3 years, and we are so pleased we have reached a bipartisan agreement on the package that puts our children's future ahead of the partisan bickering that has diverted our energy and attention for way too long. The proposal before the Senate represents an important step in the right direction by recognizing the right of every child in this great Nation to receive a high-quality education. I know many of my colleagues played a critical role in fashioning this very important legislation, but there are two individuals who have been absolutely incredible in this debate and in this negotiation. I especially express my appreciation to Senator Kennedy and to Senator Gregg for their tireless efforts on behalf of our Nation's schoolchildren.

Mrs. LINCOLN

Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, I rise today to pay tribute to a true American hero from my home State--Mr. Chick Matthews of Greenbrier, AR. Mr. Matthews was born on August 19, 1901, in a one-room house in Bailey Town, AR. Growing up in the most modest of circumstances, Mr. Matthews went on to a distinguished career of service to his country, serving in four wars in the twentieth century. Mr. Matthews served honorably in World War I, World War II, Korea, and Vietnam, either in the uniforms of the Army, the Navy, or the Merchant Marine. It is a service record that he can be proud of, and we are proud of him for it. In 1931, Mr. Matthews married Icie Lee, who served as a postal worker in Greenbrier and a postmistress in Wooster, AR. Icie Matthews passed away in 1999 after 68 years of marriage to Chick. She is deeply missed. Chick Matthews retired from the Merchant Marine in 1970, but since then he has stayed extremely busy. He has been around the world more than a dozen times. According to his count, Mr. Matthews has visited over 100 countries. This past summer, just before his one hundredth birthday, he traveled with his son James on a trip that took him to 18 foreign countries. Today, Mr. Matthews leads an equally energetic lifestyle at home, tending to a one-acre garden and visiting frequently with his neighbors and friends at the Greenbrier Senior Citizen Center, where he regales his companions with tales of his adventures. We should all hope to maintain such a full and active schedule in our senior years. Through his service to his country, his love of family and community, his commitment to making the most of his life, Chick Matthews represents the most admirable qualities in the American spirit. In this new century, in these difficult times, when a new generation of young Americans is taking up arms to defend our freedoms against the threat of international terrorism, let's follow the example set by Chick Matthews in the last century. In this, the one hundred and first year of Chick Matthews' life, it is an honor for me to pay tribute to his example on the floor of the United States Senate.

Mrs. LINCOLN

Mrs. LINCOLN. Madam President, before I begin my remarks I would, as the distinguished Senator from Virginia did, compliment my colleague from Louisiana who has tirelessly involved herself with the issue of adoption, making it more acceptable, more reasonable, and easier to work through in this Nation. She has done a fabulous job. She has provided leadership and compassion in this area, and I have been delighted to work with her, to learn from her, and to share in the experiences that she can bring back to us in this body to help us, in this great Nation, improve the laws of the land that can reach out to the smallest of our constituents to make their quality of life just that much better, providing a loving home and the support they need. I wanted to compliment her on her work and encourage her as she has rededicated herself today. I, too, rededicate myself to the issue of adoption and working with our States and families across this Nation and other legislators to improve the approach this government takes on adoption, and to making it a much easier, simpler and encouraging process. Madam President, I rise today to add my voice to those in support of this year's farm bill, and to encourage my colleagues to join me in bringing this bill to the floor as quickly as we can. For the last 5 years, our farmers have worked to make ends meet under incredibly difficult circumstances. As prices for equipment, fertilizer, energy costs, and other inputs have skyrocketed, the returns have plummeted. Every year they have harvested their crops without knowing if they will be able to afford to plant another crop in the next growing season. When I was in the House of Representatives, I opposed the 1996 Freedom to Farm bill because it did not provide adequate support for our farmers. It provided flexibility, and it provided policy--but policy that was dependent on other areas of government for which we did not have the wherewithal to provide the support. Since that bill passed, farmers in Arkansas and around the country have been in limbo every year waiting for Congress to pass emergency spending bills because the existing farm policy was absolutely inadequate. The United States has the safest, most abundant and affordable food supply in the entire world. But if we are going to ensure that safety and abundance, we must invest in our farmers and rural communities, and we must do it immediately. We desperately need a farm bill to provide a dependable safety net that ensures not only the financial viability of our farmers but also the viability of local bankers, merchants, and other rural and small town institutions that depend on a safe farm economy. We need a farm bill that will improve and stabilize farm income by continuing fixed income payments and creating a countercyclical income protection system. We need a farm bill that creates new conservation incentives and increases acreage for existing programs, such as the CRP, our Conservation Reserve Program; the WRP, the Wetlands Reserve Program; the Equip Program; and many other proven programs that allow us to take marginal lands out of production to use our own resources in our farming operations to be better stewards of the land, and to be more productive in our production. Rural communities across the Nation will see the benefits of a new farm bill. As we move forward, we need a farm bill that will spur rural development and expand broad-band access to our rural communities so they, too, can compete in this global economy, and so our producers can access the very Government programs that we want to provide them. As we have tried to minimize Government in bringing it down and making it more efficient, we are dependent on technology. Yet many of our rural communities can't access the very technologies we are expecting them to use for the programs that the Government provides their producers. We need to increase funding to land-grant colleges. And we desperately need to improve nutrition and food aid programs, energy conservation programs, and forestry initiatives. We need a comprehensive package for our farm economy and for rural America. We have produced a good, solid, comprehensive package out of the Senate Agriculture Committee. This past year, I begged my Senate colleagues to focus on our desperate need for new agriculture policy in this country. This past year, I have also urged my colleagues on the Senate Agriculture Committee to work hard together to deliver a new farm bill this year--something on which producers can depend, something with which they can go to the financial institution to ask them for the ability to put next year's crop in the ground. It is time for us to make that happen, and we can. In these few short days that we have left, we can bring about good, comprehensive, constructive agriculture policy that will help the producers of this country and that will allow them to continue to be the producers of the safest, most affordable and abundant food supply in the world. But it is going to take us coming together, working hard, and focusing on what we need to complete before we break for the holiday. I am proud to stand up today for American farmers. I am proud to stand up before my colleagues and beg them to come together and bring about a comprehensive policy that will allow the agricultural producers of my State and other States across this country once again to go back to doing what they do best; that is, producing that safe and abundant food supply in a way that they can be assured their Government is providing them the safety net they need to be competitive with other farmers, and particularly other governments across the globe. As we look at the export assistance numbers across the globe, we can see that the European Union is consuming about 80-plus percent of the export subsidies worldwide. Our farmers are not competing with other farmers. They are competing with other governments, and it is now time for our Government to stand and say we are going to provide the safety net, and we are going to provide the Government assistance in working with our agricultural producers so they, too, can be competitive. Today, I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting a farm policy that works for working farmers--a farm policy that we can conference with the House and get a good, solid, comprehensive bill to the desk of the President so we can once again have good, solid, agricultural policy on behalf of the many hard working men and women on family farms today and across this Nation. Thank you, Madam President. I yield the floor.

Mrs. LINCOLN

Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, I am pleased to join my colleague Senator Thomas today in introducing the Seniors Mental Health Access Improvement Act of 2001. This bill would expand Medicare coverage to licensed professional counselors and licensed marriage and family therapists. One result of this expanded coverage will be to increase seniors' access to mental health services, especially in rural and underserved areas. Licensed professional counselors and marriage and family therapists are currently excluded from Medicare coverage even though they meet the same education, training, and examination requirements that clinical social workers do. The only difference is that clinical social workers have been covered under Medicare for over a decade. Why do we need this legislation? The mental health needs of older Americans are not being met. Although the rate of suicide among older Americans is higher than for any other age group, less than three percent of older Americans report seeing mental health professionals for treatment. And going to their primary care physician is simply not enough. Research shows that most primary care providers receive inadequate mental health training, particularly in geriatrics. Lack of access to mental health providers is one of the primary reasons why older Americans don't get the mental health treatment they need. Not surprisingly, this problem is exacerbated in rural and underserved areas. Licensed professional counselors are often the only mental health specialists available in rural and underserved communities. This is true in my home State of Arkansas, where 91 percent of Arkansans reside in a mental health professional shortage area. Since there are more licensed professional counselors practicing in my State than any other mental health professional, this legislation will significantly increase the number of Medicare--eligible mental health providers in Arkansas. Licensed professional counselors are already serving patients who have private insurance or Medicaid. It is time for Medicare patients to also have access to these professionals. The bill we are introducing today is an important first step in expanding access to good mental health. By including licensed professional counselors and licensed marriage and family therapists among the list of providers who deliver mental health services to Medicare beneficiaries, we will help ensure that all seniors, no matter where they live, have the opportunity to receive mental health treatment.

Mrs. LINCOLN

Mrs. LINCOLN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that Senator Helms from North Carolina and Senator Cleland from Georgia be added as cosponsors to S. 1278, the United States Independent Film and Television Production Incentive Act of 2001.

Mrs. LINCOLN

Mrs. LINCOLN. Madam President, this is a bill I introduced awhile back. It is a good way to reinvest in America, looking at our films that have gone offshore because of the incredible incentives that other nations are giving them. We want to keep our film industry in the United States. We want to keep the jobs in the United States, and that is why we introduced this bill in order to direct the incentives according to the jobs that are created. We are hoping we can move this bill along, and we are delighted to have two more cosponsors.

Mrs. LINCOLN

Mrs. LINCOLN. One of the other issues that was brought up by my colleagues earlier was the issue of our agricultural policy in this country, which, in my opinion, in the last 4 years has been less than what our farmers deserve. It is time now to give them some predictability and some understanding of where their Government is going to be for them. It has been said the only constant is change, and that certainly has been true with our national farm policy. For the last 4 years or better, farmers--certainly Arkansas farmers--have harvested their crops without knowing if they would be able to afford to plant another crop in the following growing season. They had no predictability, no understanding of whether their Government was going to be for them. As they looked at what was happening in the global economy with the fact that the European Union was consuming well over 80 percent of export subsidies worldwide, they said they were not competing with other farmers across the globe. Our farmers are competing with other governments. Where has their Government been in terms of a solid agricultural policy they can depend on, particularly when they go to their financial institutions to get the backing they need to put seed in the ground? Of course, many remember that Congress passed the Freedom to Farm Act back in 1996. For farmers in Arkansas, Freedom to Farm has been a disaster because they depended too much on the ability to be able to negotiate trade. We put our farmers in a position where, as we said we were going to ratchet down the Government support and the Government safety net, were they going to have to depend on the market. We gave them flexibility. Flexibility was great, but flexibility without the backbone in trade does them no good, particularly in a time when we are seeing record lows in commodity prices. Farmers are getting paid right now the same they were being paid in the early 1940s, and yet their input costs are the highest they have ever been. They are making the same they were in 1940 when a combine probably cost them about $15,000 to $25,000, and now they are paying anywhere from $180,000 to $200,000 for a combine. Arkansas farmers and farmers around the country have been in limbo year after year, waiting for Congress to pass emergency spending bills. The existing farm policy is absolutely inadequate. A farmer cannot just go to the banker and say, I think Congress is going to provide us an emergency spending bill this year so you need to make sure you go ahead and give me that loan and maybe wait for another 9 to 12 months to find out whether or not it will be backed by the Government. As has the senior member of the Senate Agriculture Committee, I have worked with my colleagues on that committee to write a bill this year, to get out of the Agriculture Committee a good, positive, and comprehensive bill to address the needs of our farmers. I have been increasingly concerned and dismayed as the Senate rushes to complete its business by the end of the year that farmers again will be left behind. That is why, again, I was so proud to see the majority leader come to the floor today to say we are going to take up a farm bill on the Senate floor. The Senate Agriculture Committee, under the leadership of Chairman Harkin, has done its work to come up with a good bill that is comprehensive, that will provide the safety net, as well as far- reaching, new, and innovative issues we need in a farm bill. They have done their job. We will bring it up on the floor. The House has done their job in passing a bill. We can compromise on these bills because they have been created in a way that they have many similarities. We can get a bill to the desk of the President this year so our farmers, once again, do not have to go into the new year with the uncertainty and the complete unpredictability of not knowing where their Government will be. The Senate must pass this bill before we adjourn for the year because it is imperative, as the farmers go into this next planting season, they have something they can bank on, one with a solid safety net that ensures not only the financial viability of our farmers but also the viability of local bankers, merchants, seed dealers, fertilizer dealers, implement dealers, and rural institutions that depend on the stability our farmers provide. The Senate bill also provided much needed funding for rural development and nutrition programs for disadvantaged families to help those parts of our Nation where the needs are the greatest. An unbelievable conservation title helps in new and innovative ways, placing the resources and efforts into proven conservation practices that our farmers know they can use to mitigate those marginal lands on which it is more costly to produce. It includes funding for research and development to ensure that America remains a technological and economic powerhouse in the coming century. It provides funding for forestry, biofuel development, and credit financing programs to guarantee sound farm financing. The economy in this great Nation is in a delicate state. There is nothing that we can do here that will guarantee we will not go into a recession. But there is one thing we can do that will absolutely guarantee a recession. We have seen it in our history's past. That is that we allow the rural economy to collapse. If that rural economy collapses, we will be assured not only of a recession but much greater problems in our economy in coming years. I applaud the majority leader for bringing up the issues on which we have worked. We have worked out the details. It will be of great assistance to the American people, particularly in rural America. As we begin with a farm bill that will be a great stimulus package to rural America, we can also work out the details of an economic stimulus package that will be comprehensive in helping workers in transition and also provide the tax relief that industries need, particularly small businesses, to be able to grow and thrive and increase a growing economy. I hope that in the several days we have ahead of us and the work there is yet to be done we can continue along the road that the majority leader has paved for us in putting out these issues, that we can get some agreement that will be beneficial to the American people, and that we can all go home at the end of these 2 weeks to a holiday and know we have done our very best. That is what we owe to the people. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mrs. LINCOLN

Mrs. LINCOLN. Madam President, I came to the Chamber after listening to several of my colleagues earlier this morning. The majority leader, Senator Daschle, was visiting with Senator Durbin about some of the important legislation we could be considering in these last couple of weeks in the Senate that would really be good for the American people. First they spoke about the railroad retirement reform package, which was mentioned by Senator Kyl. I think it is absolutely essential we bring up this issue. Last week, when I was in Arkansas celebrating Thanksgiving, I was approached by an older woman who said: Why in the world has this not been done? This legislation has passed the House twice by incredibly large margins. The last time it was 384 to 33. There are 75 Members of the Senate who are cosponsors of this issue. We have the railroad industry, the union members, the workers in agreement. It is absolutely practical and realistic that we should bring up this issue and move it forward because it is going to benefit everybody, and that is what our job is, to bring up legislation that everyone has worked on, that we have come to some agreement on, that we have the majority of individuals in both bodies excited about and willing to move forward. So I applaud the majority leader for bringing up this issue. I think the time is right. I think the work has been done. The debate has been had. People have worked out this issue, and we should be moving forward. We should be productive for the American people and particularly for those in the railroad industry and those who are retired. I applaud the majority leader for his efforts, as well as the other Members of this body, and encourage him to move forward with it. This is something we can do and something we should do before we leave, and I hope we will.

Mrs. LINCOLN

Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, I joined my colleague from Arkansas, Senator Hutchinson, to introduce a bill of the utmost importance to our farmers. Since the passage of the Freedom to Farm bill in 1996, our farmers have toiled under clouds of uncertainty. Quite simply stated, our Nation needs a farm policy that works for working farmers. That is why I and Senator Hutchinson, along with Senator Helms of North Carolina, Senator Miller of Georgia, and Senators Breaux and Landrieu of Louisiana, are proud to offer a new alternative. We offer a farm bill that will ensure a strong safety net for America's farmers and ranchers. We offer a farm bill that will increase investment in conservation programs by 80 percent. We offer a farm bill that provides more effective support for disadvantaged working families through nutrition programs. We offer a farm bill that will increase and improve our Nation's agricultural trade programs, such as the Food Aid program that sends food to the neediest nations. We offer a farm bill that will preserve and protect our Nation's forests and environment while investing in rural America. For too many years, while the American economy at large was posting astonishing and unprecedented gains, our agricultural producers have not benefited from our prosperity. It is not only our farmers who are suffering as a result of failed government policy. The institutions of small-town and rural America local banks and merchants, feed and supply stores, equipment dealers, even corner groceries and family-owned hardware stores are all caught in the web of financial collapse. Here is a letter I received from a young farmer in northeast Arkansas just a few months ago. He says that his family's farm is nearing ``a point of no return,'' and that if the crisis continues, he will have to leave the land that his grandfather worked. Here is a letter from a bank president in southeast Arkansas, who notes that when he moved to his community in 1969, a new John Deere combine sold for about $15,000. Today, a comparable model sells for $220,000. Fuel for that combine cost 15 cents per gallon in 1969, he writes; today, a gallon of diesel fuel costs $1.05. He goes on to note that while a farmer could expect to receive $3 for a bushel of rice 32 years ago, today he only gets $2.7 for the same bushel. The costs skyrocket, but the returns on these investments continue to fall. Here is a letter from a young woman in east Arkansas who works a 600- acre rice and soybean farm with her husband and child. Her husband is so depressed that he needs counseling and medication. She can't let her child participate in after-school sports because of the additional costs entailed. She writes that where she and her family once felt pride in their sense of independence and self- sufficiency, today they feel only shame at having to rely on loans and supplemental income payments to get by. These stories are not unusual. In many rural areas, they are becoming the norm. We cannot afford to let our farmers continue suffering like this. They can't wait another year for us to pass a farm bill. Their problems are here today. Our bill will address their problems. Our bill will restore to them a better economic future. Our bill will restore to them their hope, so that they can build a better future for their children. I am proud to be a coauthor of this bill, and I am proud to say that I will take my stand to fight for its passage.

Mrs. LINCOLN

Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, I am proud to rise to thank my colleague from North Carolina, having had the pleasure of working with him and his staff on this issue. I thank him very much for the leadership he has provided the State of North Carolina and this great Nation and certainly this body. I have had a wonderful time working with him. I join my colleagues in introducing a bill of the utmost importance to our farmers. Since the passage of the Freedom to Farm bill in 1996, our farmers have toiled under clouds of uncertainty. Quite simply stated, our Nation needs a farm policy that works for working farmers. That is why, along with Senator Hutchinson, Senator Helms of North Carolina, Senator Miller of Georgia, Senators Breaux and Landrieu of Louisiana, and Senator Sessions of Alabama, I am proud to offer a new alternative. We have offered a farm bill that will ensure a strong safety net for America's farmers and ranchers. We have offered a farm bill that will increase investment in conservation programs by 80 percent. We have offered a farm bill that provides more effective support for disadvantaged working families through nutrition programs. We have offered a farm bill that will increase and improve our Nation's agricultural trade programs such as the Food Aid Program that sends food to the most needy of nations, many of which are aligned with us in our conflicts today against terrorism across the globe. We have offered a farm bill that will preserve and protect our Nation's forests and environment while investing in rural America. For too many years, while the American economy at large was posting astonishing and unprecedented gains, our agricultural producers have not benefited from our prosperity. It is not only our farmers who are suffering as a result of failed Government policy; the institutions of small-town and rural America--local banks and merchants, feed and supply stores, equipment dealers, even corner grocers and family-owned hardware stores--are all caught in the web of financial collapse in rural America. From a letter I received from a young farmer in northeast Arkansas a few months ago, he said his family's farm is nearing ``a point of no return,'' and if the crisis continues he will have to leave the land that his grandfather worked before him. Our family farmers are farming away their equity. They are farming away their heritage. Their Government has not provided them the safety net they need to be competitive in a global marketplace in order to continue to provide us, the American people and people across the globe, the safest, most affordable and most abundant food supply in the world. Here is a letter from a bank president in southeast Arkansas who notes that when he moved into his community in 1969, a new John Deere combine sold for about $15,000. Today, a comparable model sells for about $220,000. Fuel for that combine was 15 cents per gallon in 1969, he writes, but today a gallon of diesel fuel costs about $1.05. He goes on to note that while farmers could expect to receive $3 for a bushel of rice 33 years ago, today he only gets $2.70 for that same bushel. As the costs continue to skyrocket--the input of resources demanded of farmers to be put into their crops--the return on these investments continues to fall below the levels they were paid over 40 years ago. Here is a letter from a young woman in east Arkansas who works a 60- acre rice and soybean farm with her husband and child. Her husband is so depressed because of his lack of ability to be able to provide for his family he needs counseling and medication and she can't let her child participate in afterschool sports because of the additional costs that are entailed. She writes that where she and her family once felt pride in their sense of independence and self-sufficiency, today they feel only shame because they have to rely on loans and supplemental income payments to survive. These stories are not unusual. In many rural areas, they are becoming the norm. We cannot afford to let our farmers continue to suffer this way. They can't wait another year; their problems are real and they are here today. Our bill will address their problems. Our bill will restore them to a better economic future. Our bill will restore to them their hope so they can build a better future for their children and for the rest of the children in this great Nation. I am proud to be a coauthor of this bill, and I am proud to say I will take my stand to fight for its passage for the men and women who toil day in and day out as agricultural producers in this great land. We owe them no less. I yield the floor.

Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to address the Senator as in morning business.

Mrs. LINCOLN

Mrs. LINCOLN. Madam President, I rise today along with my colleague from Maine, Senator Collins, to express support for the TRIO Programs that are funded in the Labor-HHS-Education appropriations bill. Before I discuss the specifics of these important programs and the legislation before the Senate today, I would like to commend Senator Harkin for his lifelong commitment to making quality education available to every student through TRIO and other federal programs. I am grateful for his leadership in this arena. I look forward to working with him in the months and years ahead to continue the progress that is represented in the bill we are debating today. I also thank Senator Specter for his bipartisan approach over many years as both chairman and ranking member on this subcommittee. The willingness he has demonstrated to work with Members of both parties to meet our Nation's most pressing needs in education and health care funding is impressive and demonstrates a level of understanding and foresight we should all strive to achieve. I know there are many vital initiatives funded in this bill and I want to briefly highlight one that is particularly important to my state of Arkansas. As many of my colleagues know, the TRIO Programs were authorized under Title IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965 to support our Nation's commitment to providing educational opportunities for all Americans. The TRIO programs are designed to help low-income, first-generation college students prepare for, enter, and graduate from college. While student financial aid programs help students overcome financial barriers to higher education, TRIO Programs help students overcome class, social and cultural barriers. Considering Arkansas has one of the lowest percentages of citizens with a 4-year college degree, the 52 TRIO programs currently serving participants in my State provide a critical source of encouragement and support to thousands of students who might otherwise never receive their college degree. To demonstrate our support for these programs, Senator Collins and I are leading a campaign in the Senate that would expand the population served under these programs from 6 percent to 10 percent of eligible students over the next 5 years. As an important step toward this goal, we circulated a letter earlier this year that gained the support of 35 Senators to increase funding for TRIO by $190 million each year over the next 5 years. Even though the Senate bill did not meet the level of funding we requested in our letter, I understand that the chairman and ranking member received more than 1,000 requests for funding from Senators this year. So I know I speak for all TRIO participants in my State in expressing appreciation for the healthy $75 million increase over last year's level that is provided for in the Senate bill. This additional funding is an important step in the right direction and will expand access to TRIO services to thousands of students in my State and throughout the Nation. As appropriators work to iron out differences between the House and Senate versions of this bill in conference, I want to work with the chairman and ranking member to fight for the higher level of funding included in the Senate bill. Also, I want to encourage the appropriations committee to provide an even larger increase for TRIO should additional funding be made available in the budget and appropriations process this year. In closing, I thank Senator Collins for joining me in this effort. It has been a pleasure working with her and I look forward to joining forces with my colleague from Maine in the future on this and many other important initiatives.

Mrs. LINCOLN

Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, I think it is so important for us to make sure we understand what we are talking about tonight and what some of our colleagues have expressed. We do not oppose a standard which was mentioned earlier by the Senator from Illinois. What we do want is a good standard. This body requested studies this time last year as we debated this whole issue. Since then, through hearings, everyone has agreed--even USDA agreed, as they testified to that as they effect--that the standard, the current standard, is flawed. Basically what we have been trying to say is that enforcing a flawed standard is, in effect, codifying a bad standard. We do not want to do that. This issue was debated last year. We worked with Senator Harkin then at the time, saying the issue was not whether there should be enforceable microbial testing standard for meat and poultry plants, the question was what standard should be used and what should be the scientific basis for that standard. We directed those studies, both from the National Research Council and the USDA Scientific Advisory Committee, to make recommendations regarding microbial testing in plants. These committees were directed to review the appropriateness of the existing salmonella performance standard and to recommend a microbial testing program that will measure food safety performance in meat and poultry plants. We want a good standard. We want a standard based on science, which is exactly what the Senator from Nebraska is asking. Some would claim that food safety would be compromised while we await USDA's recommendation. That is simply not the case. USDA is still conducting salmonella performance tests at every meat and poultry plant in the Nation. USDA still has a wide variety of enforcement tools available, including withdrawal of inspection if meat or poultry plants produce adulterated products or operate in unsanitary conditions. Food safety must continue to be a top national priority. I don't think that is the argument here. We want to see the best standards. But our food standards must be practical, they must be enforceable, and they must be based on scientific evidence, which is exactly what we asked for last year. What we want to see happen is that we use these studies, we use this scientific evidence, that we have worked so hard to get, as it comes out this spring and put it into practice across this country. We don't want to base it on sound bytes or newspaper headlines. I think Senator Nelson's amendment will allow us to achieve that goal. That is why I urge our colleagues to vote for and support his amendment so we can base good standards on scientific findings. I thank the Senator. I yield the floor.

Mrs. LINCOLN

Mrs. LINCOLN. Madam President, I yield time to the Senator from Nebraska.

Mrs. LINCOLN. I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam President, I associate myself with some of the words from our Senator from Nebraska, very well founded in his conclusion that terrorism is bred in countries with no hope, and absolutely that is something that is very pertinent today as we talk about the engagement of our Nation in a trade agreement with Vietnam. The grasp of the evil we saw in New York, the evil acts, the hatred we saw that was exhibited there, truly came from those who had no hope, from a country that produced those individuals who had no hope. Without a doubt, we are here today to talk about engaging nations in a way where we can help in working with them, building a friendship and a working relationship which in turn gives us the ability to share some of the hopes we have in our great Nation with other nations which then can grow those hopes in a way where we can be good neighbors and we can share with one another. As a young woman growing up in a very small rural community in east Arkansas, I learned many great lessons from my father as the daughter of a farmer. But there was no greater lesson really to have learned than that my father impressed upon me how important it was to reach beyond the fenceposts of Phillips County, AR, to be engaged with other communities across the great river of the Mississippi, to work with individuals in Tennessee and Mississippi, but also to reach across even greater barriers into other countries, recognizing that the importance of what we did as farmers in east Arkansas and the growth of the economy were inherently dependent on the bridges we built with other nations across the globe. That is what we are talking about today, looking at options for not only free trade but, more importantly, fair trade, to establish those relationships and those working agreements with nations where we not only can build hope but we can also build a greater opportunity for economic development in our own home as well as in those countries. I also rise today to add some of my concerns about a very important issue a few of my colleagues have already addressed in this Chamber. The issue I am talking about is catfish. Aquaculture in our Nation has been a growing industry. This country is being deluged by imports of Vietnamese fish known as a basa fish which are brought into this country and misleadingly sold as catfish to our consumers who think they are buying farm-raised catfish. Let us remember this important point: When consumers think of catfish, when we all think of catfish, we have in mind a very specific fish we have all known. But that is not what the Vietnamese are selling. They are selling an entirely different fish and calling it a catfish. This Vietnamese fish is not even a part of the same taxonomic family as a North American channel catfish. This Vietnamese fish that is coming into our country is no closer to a catfish than a yak is to a cow. My Midwesterners will understand that. Why are they doing it? Because the catfish market in America is growing. Americans like catfish. It is wholesome. It is healthy. It is safe. It is the best protein source you can find from grain to a meat. American-raised catfish is farm raised and grain fed, grown in specially built ponds that pass environmental inspection, cared for in closely regulated and closely scrutinized environments to ensure the safest supply of the cleanest fish that a consumer could purchase or want to get at a restaurant. The people importing these Vietnamese fish see a growing market of which they can take advantage. It is irrelevant to them that what they are selling isn't really catfish or that their fish are raised in one of the worst environmental rivers on the globe. The hard-working catfish farmers of my State of Arkansas, as well as Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama, are being robbed of a hard-won market that they developed out of nothing. As we all know, rural America has been in serious decline for years. The ability of family farmers throughout the country to scrape out a living has been disappearing in front of our very eyes. Unfortunately, our rural communities in the Mississippi Delta where much of the catfish industry is now located have shared in this devastating decline. Of course, the decline of the rural economy has many causes, but a powerful force behind this decline has been the disconnect between production agriculture in the United States and the terribly distorted and terribly unfair overseas markets these farmers face. They must compete with heavily subsidized imports that come into this country and undermine their own market. When they are able to crack open a tightly closed foreign market, U.S. farmers must compete again with heavily subsidized foreign competition. In short, the unfair trading practices of our foreign competitors have played a very significant role in the serious damage wrought on America's farmers and has been a primary cause in the decline of rural America. Over the past several years, rather than accept defeat to the advancing forces, farmers in our part of the country decided to fight back. They fought back by building a new market in aquaculture, recognizing the enormous percentage of aquaculture fish and shell fish that we still import into this country today. There is one thing that we can do well in the delta region; it is grow catfish. So many of these communities, these farmers, their families and related industries, invested millions and millions of dollars into building a catfish industry and a catfish market. And they have diversified. It has taken years, but they have done it and done it well. They are still doing it. Now, just as they are seeing the fruit of their years of labor and investment, just as they are finding a light at the end of the rural economic tunnel, they find themselves facing a new and more serious form of unfair trading practices. They saw their financial return on these other traditional crops fall alongside the general decline in our rural economy by shipments of fish that is no more closely related to catfish than you and I--than a yak is to a cow. It is an unfair irony that our catfish farmers find themselves once again in the headlights of an onslaught of unfair trade from another country. But my colleagues from catfish-producing States and I are not going to stand for it. My distinguished colleague from Massachusetts, Senator Kerry, observed earlier this is a problem that can be addressed by attacking the Vietnamese practice itself where it occurs, and that is at the labeling stages. That is exactly what I am here to do today. Today my colleagues and I, my colleagues from the other catfish- producing States, are introducing a bill that will stop this misleading labeling at the source. Our bill will prohibit the labeling of any fish--as catfish that is; in fact, not an actual member of the catfish family. We are not trying to stop other countries from growing catfish and selling it to our country. We simply want to make sure that if they say they are selling catfish, they are doing exactly that. This is about truth in fairness. That is what our bill seeks to accomplish. On behalf of the catfish farmers in Arkansas and the rest of our producing States, I am proud to introduce this bill. We will pursue this bill with every ounce of fight we have. Our farmers and our rural communities deserve it. This is one way we from the Congress can address the issues we see and still maintain the good trading relationships, the good engagement with other nations to help grow that hope, to help build those friendships and relationships that we need in this ever smaller global world in which we are finding ourselves. As we work to make those trade agreements and certainly the trade initiatives that are out there more fair, we want to continue to encourage all of the engagement of opening up freer trade with many of the nations of the world in the hope of finding that hope about which the Senator from Nebraska spoke so eloquently. I reserve the remainder of my time.

Mrs. LINCOLN. Before I suggest the absence of a quorum, I might recommend to my colleague from New Hampshire, he might be interested in requesting a unanimous consent to send that bill back to committee. If it went through the process, it might have a better chance of coming up to the floor.

Mrs. LINCOLN. It is just a suggestion.

Mrs. LINCOLN. Madam President, I thank the Senator from Arizona for his wisdom and the thoughtfulness that he brings to this body. I appreciate it very much.

Mrs. LINCOLN. Madam President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mrs. LINCOLN

Mrs. LINCOLN. Madam President, I rise today to express my deep concern with the state of the airline industry in the United States. On Friday, September 21, Congress passed the ``Air Transportation Safety and System Stabilization Act.'' This bill provided the commercial airline industry with $15 billion in emergency aid and loans. The intention of the bill was to ensure that our system of commercial air transportation remained viable nationwide, both in less populous rural areas and in larger metropolitan areas. When this bill came before the Senate, I had reservations about how effective it would be. I was not convinced that it would do enough to help the tens of thousands of workers who were being laid off by the airline companies; I was not convinced that it provided adequate incentives to assist the airlines in correcting the management problems that had forced them into a corner to begin with; I was not convinced that it would do enough to encourage passenger confidence in the wake of the horrible hijackings of September 11; and I was not convinced that we were taking adequate time to consider the ramifications of the package. I expressed my reservations to several of my colleagues, and I was assured that we would deal with those concerns soon after. It would appear my reservations were well-founded. One important provision of the stabilization bill was that the airlines would honor their service commitments so that small communities would not lose scheduled air service. This week, United Airlines announced that they are discontinuing service to Little Rock, AR. The cutback at Little Rock was one component of a sweeping reduction in capacity which will reduce United's service from 2,300 daily flights worldwide to 1,900 daily flights. According to the airline, the cutback is a result of the reduced demand for travel nationwide. Similar cuts were made in Virginia, Washington, and Alabama. The airline claims that service will resume if demand for air travel picks up. The day after the United announcement, other airlines followed suit. American Eagle, USAirways Express, Continental Express, TWA, Delta, and Northwest all curtailed their service to Arkansas as well. Most of these airlines only reduced their schedules, but it is still enough to limit the options for transportation in and out of Arkansas. These cuts are a blow to the economic well-being of rural States. How can rural economies ever grow if we don't maintain transportation to those States? When the airline stabilization bill came before the Senate, there were several legitimate reasons for us to support it. In the aftermath of the September 11 attacks, the federal government had shut down the airlines for nearly three days, dealing a serious blow to their revenues. Furthermore, once the planes were in the air again, the airlines suffered a significant decline in passengers. When we passed the bill, we were looking to ease the blow of the shutdown and subsequent decline in ridership. Now that I see how the commercial airlines are going to treat small- and mid-sized markets and rural States, it is clear to me that we may have rushed the airline stabilization package. Certainly, if I had known that the airlines were simply going to take the money and then announce they would no longer serve my constituents, I might have thought again about the vote I cast in favor of that package. I have contacted the Secretary of Transportation to express my concerns and ask for a full review of these scheduled service reductions. I hope that my colleagues will join me in requesting this review, to ensure that the American people are getting a fair return on the investment they have made in the airline industry. Perhaps the great lesson of the airline stabilization package is that, if we are going to enact policy to build and strengthen our economy, we need to have adequate discussion and debate to ensure that the policies are effective, constructive, and broad-based. In the coming weeks and months, as we take up other matters of economic policy, funding for defense and national security, and agricultural policy, let's take care to consider the ramifications and the realities of what we're dealing with so that we can do what's best for our entire Nation.

Mrs. LINCOLN

Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, I commend my friend and colleague, Senator Carnahan, for her efforts on behalf of dislocated workers in the airline industry. I am proud to be a cosponsor of this legislation which will benefit thousands of workers who have or will lose their job because of the tragic events on September 11. I want to say a special word of thanks to Senator Carnahan and her staff for working with me to clarify that employees of maintenance suppliers to commercial air carriers are covered under the language in the bill. This was an important point for me because of the impact the September 11 attacks has already had on aviation maintenance businesses in my State. Reebaire Aircraft, Inc. located in Mena, AR, is just one example of why the dislocated worker assistance provided for in this bill is so important. Prior to September 11, Reebaire Aircraft had a thriving business with 101 workers and was in the process of expanding its workforce. Today, Reebaire employs only 15 workers and the owner has informed me that Reebaire may have to cease operations by the end of October. Reebaire's fate is directly related to the terrorist attacks because eighty percent of its business was based on maintenance contracts with commercial air carriers who have cancelled future work orders with Reebaire indefinitely. Again, I commend my colleague for her efforts on behalf of our Nation's working families.

Mrs. LINCOLN

Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, on Tuesday a series of terrorist attacks on the United States shook our Nation and left thousands suffering or dead. Almost all of us in this Chamber have risen to express our compassion. Almost everything has been said. But with such a tragic event, each one of us feels compelled to tell our own story. I rise today to offer my continued prayers and condolences to the victims and their families. And I rise to add my voice to those condemning the atrocities committed against the United States of America Tuesday morning, September 11, 2001. The four hijackings, and the deliberate terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, are an outrage against our nation and against human decency. I support the President in his pledge to devote all of our country's resources to the task of determining who is responsible for these acts and of holding them accountable. In the days to come, we will need to reflect on Tuesday's events to determine what we will take from them and how we will respond. To begin with, it appears certain that these attacks will force us to re-define our national defense priorities. According to many reports, the hijackers of the airplanes were armed only with knives and boxcutters. This disturbing detail underscores the reality that the greatest threats against our national security and our well-being may no longer be missiles or tanks or armies. The greatest threat is terrorists or rogue nations armed with simple weapons and a dangerous resolve. It is time that we demonstrate the same resolve in preventing and, when necessary--as now--responding to acts of terror. We need to reconsider how our security apparatus, our intelligence network, and our channels of diplomacy can be strengthened and more effectively employed to ensure that these attacks are never duplicated. Let us begin a new dialogue about our national security that accounts for this changed and changing reality. Let us devote all our resolve to tracking down and destroying these agents of terror. We need to recognize also that Tuesday's events must, by necessity, call us out of our complacency. For too many years, our national character has too often been focused inward. Tuesday's tragedy should remind us of our duty to not only our families and our immediate circles, but of our duty to our neighbors, our communities, and our nation. Still, the reports that we have heard suggest that these terrible attacks have brought out much of the best in the American character-- the courage of the search and rescue team members, the commitment of our law enforcement officers, the generosity of those who have given their support to these efforts, and the sympathy and caring that all Americans have extended to the suffering. I am deeply disturbed, however, by some other reports that are coming to light. Arkansas newspapers reported Wednesday morning that rumors of oil shortages have forced a run on gas stations in the American heartland, and that some station owners have raised prices to exploit this fear. I am pleased that the Attorney General of Arkansas, Mark Pryor, has pledged to investigate the actions of these profiteers. Those who attempt to profit from these events should know that their actions will not be tolerated and that, if necessary, they will face prosecution for their actions. I ask my colleagues to join me in denouncing this sort of profiteering from tragedy. Foremost in my mind is the human dimension of Tuesday's events. It will likely be several days before we have a clear sense of how many lives were lost, but there is no doubt that the total will be in the thousands. Numbers of this magnitude will ensure that the effects of these horrific acts will be felt by all Americans. We now know that Sara Low, a native of Batesville, AK, and a flight attendant on American Airlines Flight 11, was killed when her plane struck the World Trade Center. Sara was a 1991 graduate of Batesville High School and a graduate of the University of Arkansas. Our deepest sympathy and our prayers are with her parents, Mike and Bobbie Low, and her family and friends as they grapple with this horrible tragedy. It is a horrible and saddening reminder of how the shock waves of these events are felt throughout our nation, far beyond New York and Washington. As a daughter, as a wife, as a mother and as an American, I am deeply pained by our suffering today. It has now been over 48 hours since the first plane struck the World Trade Center, and even now it is possible that there are scores of people trapped in the debris and rubble in New York and in Virginia. Our prayers are with them and their families, and it is my great hope that, if there are survivors, they are rescued soon and reunited with their loved ones. We also extend our prayers and sympathy to the families of those who were killed in Pennsylvania, where United Airlines Flight 93 was forced into a crash landing. Tuesday morning, these terrorists made their statement, at a great and unprecedented cost of American lives. Let our statement to them be that this was an act of war, and from this point forward, the United States of America is at war against these kinds of actions. Let them know that although they may strike at the United States, they cannot strike at the freedom and resolve that make our nation great. I join my colleagues in letting these terrorists and anyone else who would take such actions against this great Nation know, it will not be tolerated. I yield the floor.

Mrs. LINCOLN

Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Finance be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Friday, August 3, 2001 to hear testimony on ``The Andean Trade Preferences Act, which is due to expire on December 4, of this year.''

Mrs. LINCOLN

Mrs. LINCOLN. I reject the argument that we cannot stay here and fight for our American producers and our farmers. Farmers themselves say that government is just waiting until they die away, that the family farmer is gone and we can just depend on corporate America to provide us what we need. I look around at some of the fights I have been fighting this year on behalf of aquaculture and fish farmers in Arkansas. They are having to compete with misleading labeling from other countries that are claiming they are producing that kind of product which we produce here, a farm- raised, grain-fed product, when we know what is coming in the country from Vietnam is not that. It is raised on the Mekong River under unbelievable environmental conditions. Yet it has been sent to this country in misleading ways and sold to the consumers here. We are dealing with a crisis in agricultural production. I come to the floor saddened. As I look around at this body, I realize that the Members of the Senate years ago used to travel here from their home farms in faraway States and spend the time that they did to debate the issues of this country, all the while still remembering where they came from, the heartland that they represented, the communities and the agricultural producers. In my home State of Arkansas, when that farmer is out in the field and he is bringing in his crop, he is picking cotton or he is combining beans or he is combining rice and gets to the end of a long hot day, and the Sun is setting and he sees a thunderstorm coming out of the west, do you know what. He doesn't pack it up and go home. He turns the lights on, on his combine, and he keeps going, because he believes in producing for the American people and the world the safest, most abundant and affordable food supply in this world, and he does no less. I, for one, think the Senate could do better. I think we must. I yield the floor.