Patrick Leahy

Mr. LEAHY

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, the Burlington Free Press recently printed an article about SymQuest Group Inc. in South Burlington. It was especially interesting to me, as I know the cofounders, Larry Sudbay and Pat Robins, very well. In the article, Mr. Sudbay was said to make their success and the honors they have won seem very easy. One would have to know Larry Sudbay to realize that what he makes seem easy can be a Herculean task for most people. The other cofounder is Pat Robins of Burlington. I was privileged to not only be a classmate of Pat's at St. Michael's College, but to have the further privilege of maintaining our friendship for the past 50 years. Vermont is a small State with much to make us proud. People like Larry Subday and Pat Robins make our State even better. I ask unanimous consent that the article from the Free Press be printed in the Record.

Mr. LEAHY

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I wish to pay tribute to June Salander of Rutland, VT. On June 28, 2008, June will celebrate her 100th birthday. June Salander has led a remarkable life. Like many Jewish immigrants, she came to the United States via Ellis Island in 1920 after a journey from Ros, Poland, making the trip with her mother, brother, and sister. Family and a supportive Jewish community were always positioned as cornerstones of June's upbringing. In 1941 she married her husband Lew Salander and moved to Rutland, VT, where she has remained an active community member ever since. A strong believer in the idea that it takes a village to raise a child, June has lent her time volunteering at the Rutland Hospital and teaching Hebrew school classes. June has remained an active citizen into her golden years, earning her real estate license at the age of 62 and taking up tennis at the impressive age of 73. Her commitment to education and community outreach expands to the home with June's famous cooking. June warms the homes and lives of others with her legendary apple strudel which she has shared through cooking lessons. She continues to inspire with her dedication to continual learning and improvement. June Salander inspires with her energy and enthusiasm within the religious community as well. The Rutland Jewish Center has remained an integral part of her social and cultural life. June's daughter, Menasha, accurately describes the center as June's living room, kitchen, dining room, and backyard. Deeply rooted community involvement remains a core value, and to further uphold and solidify the Jewish tradition, June was Bat Mitzvahed at the extraordinary age of 89. It is believed that June is the oldest Rutland resident to complete the significant ceremony. Her commitment to observing Judaism and keeping tradition alive through education is a landmark of encouragement and pride for the Jewish community. I congratulate June Salander as she reaches yet another remarkable milestone, her 100th birthday. The message she has instilled in others through a lifetime of active citizenship is commendable. I am confident that June's spiritually fulfilling and publicly active life will continue to inspire others for years to come. On a personal note, my wife Marcelle and I have cherished her friendship for a third of a century, as we did that of her wonderful husband.

Mr. LEAHY

Mr. LEAHY. Madam President, I would like to bring to the attention of my colleagues an op-ed piece by Bob Herbert that appeared in The New York Times on Saturday, June 14. The editorial, entitled ``Letters From Vermont,'' uses excerpts from powerful letters that Vermonters sent to my colleague and friend, Senator Bernie Sanders. In inviting these personal testimonials from Vermonters, Senator Sanders has illuminated the debate--and, I hope, hastened action--on the struggles that millions of American families are facing in our current economy. Mr. Herbert's column has brought these letters to the attention of many, many more Americans. So that all Members may review this illustrative and telling column, I ask unanimous consent that it be printed in the Record.

Mr. LEAHY

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, this is a proud moment for our family. I commend our guest Chaplain, Father Pomerleau. For years I have called him ``pere frere,'' which is French for my father brother. Father Pomerleau is my brother-in-law. He is the brother of my wife Marcelle Pomerleau Leahy. It was in 1965 when Marcelle and I and Father Pomerleau's parents, Phil and Cecile Pomerleau, went to Rome for Father Pomerleau's ordination to the priesthood. I remember the thrill of our first trip abroad, but it was for such a special occasion. He said mass, his first mass, in the catacombs in Rome, something we will never forget. Father Pomerleau received his bachelor's degree from the University of Notre Dame. He is a Holy Cross priest. They are the ones who run Notre Dame. He received his masters there and got his masters in theology from the Gregorian in Rome and his doctorate from the University of Denver. He has been the rector of Saint George's in Santiago, Chile. He has been a professor at the University of Chile, presently a professor at the University of Portland, and is the religious superior for the order there. I can go on forever reciting the long list of his accomplishments. More the way we think of him is this Sunday on Father's Day, he joined Marcelle and myself at our home, one of our sons, our daughter, son-in- law and daughter-in-law, and three grandchildren. We were watching the little grandchildren climbing into his lap saying: Uncle Claude, Uncle Claude, will you read us a story? That was part of his pastorage, too. I am proud to have been able to introduce him. I thank the distinguished leader for letting me have this time. I yield the floor.

Mr. LEAHY

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I am pleased to join Senator Specter and Senator Kohl in introducing important legislation designed to protect our communities and particularly our most precious asset, our children, not only by keeping them safe and out of trouble, but also by helping to ensure they have the opportunity to become productive adult members of society. Senator Specter and Senator Kohl have been leaders in this area of the law for decades, and I am honored to work with them once again on such an important initiative. I thank Senator Kohl for sharing with me the responsibilities of chairing the Committee's hearing on this bill in December, and for working so hard to draft this legislation. The Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act, JJDPA, sets out Federal policy and standards for the administration of juvenile justice in the states. It authorizes key Federal resources for states to improve their juvenile justice systems and for communities to develop programs to prevent young people from getting into trouble. With the reauthorization of this important legislation, we recommit to these important goals but also push the law forward in key ways to better serve our communities and our children. The basic goals of the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act remain the same: keeping our communities safe by reducing juvenile crime, promoting programs and policies that keep children out of the criminal justice system, and encouraging states to implement policies designed to steer those children who do enter the juvenile justice system back onto a track to become contributing members of society. The reauthorization of the JJDPA that we introduce today augments these goals in several ways. First, this bill encourages states to move away from keeping young people in adult jails. The Center for Disease Control and Prevention concluded late last year that children who are held in adult prisons commit more crimes, and more serious crimes, when they are released, than children with similar histories who are kept in juvenile facilities. After years of pressure to try more and more young people as adults and to send them to adult prisons, it is time to seriously consider the strong evidence that this policy is not working. We must do this with ample consideration for the fiscal constraints on states, particularly in these lean budget times, and with ample deference to the traditional role of states in setting their own criminal justice policy. We have done so here. But we also must work to ensure that unless strong and considered reasons dictate otherwise, the presumption must be that children will be kept with other children, particularly before they have been convicted of any wrongdoing. As a former prosecutor, I know well the importance of holding criminals accountable for their crimes with strong sentences. But when we are talking about children, we must also think about how best to help them become responsible, contributing members of society as adults. That keeps us all safer. I am disturbed that children from minority communities continue to be overrepresented in the juvenile justice system. This bill encourages states to take new steps to identify the reasons for this serious and continuing problem and to work together with the Federal government and with local communities to find ways to start solving it. I am also concerned that too many runaway and homeless young people are locked up for so-called status offenses, like truancy, without having committed any crime. In a Judiciary Committee hearing earlier this year on the reauthorization of the Runaway and Homeless Youth Act, I was amazed by the plight of this vulnerable population, even in the wealthiest country in the world, and inspired by their ability to rise above that adversity. The Runaway and Homeless Youth Act seeks to provide necessary services to vulnerable young people. Complementing that effort, this reauthorization of the JJDPA takes strong and significant steps to move states away from detaining children from at-risk populations for status offenses. This bill requires rigorous new procedures before a state can detain a status offender, and strictly limits the time they may be detained. This provision was drafted with the limited resources of states in mind, deference to judicial discretion, and the need to keep children safe when no other appropriate placement is available, but it aims to move states decisively in the direction of ending the practice of detaining status offenders, as some states already have. As I have worked with experts on this legislation, it has become abundantly clear that mental health and drug treatment are fundamental to making real progress toward keeping juvenile offenders from recidivism. Mental disorders are two to three times more common among children in the juvenile justice system than in the general population, and fully eighty percent of young people in the juvenile justice system have been found by some studies to have a connection to substance abuse. Often these young people face coexisting mental health and drug problems. This bill takes new and important steps to prioritize and fund mental health and drug treatment. The bill tackles several other key facets of juvenile justice reform. It emphasizes effective training of personnel who work with young people in the juvenile justice system, both to encourage the use of approaches that have been proven effective and to eliminate cruel and unnecessary treatment of juveniles. It also creates incentives for the use of programs that research and testing have shown to work best. Finally, the bill refocuses attention on prevention programs intended to keep children from ever entering the criminal justice system. I was struck when Chief Richard Miranda of Tucson, Arizona, said at our December hearing on this bill that we cannot arrest our way out of the problem. I heard the same sentiment from Chief Anthony Bossi and others at the Judiciary Committee's field hearing on young people and violent crime in Rutland, Vermont, earlier this year. When seasoned police officers from Rutland, Vermont, to Tucson, Arizona, tell me that prevention programs are pivotal, I pay attention. Just as this administration and recent Republican Congresses have gutted programs that support state and local law enforcement, so they have consistently cut and narrowed effective prevention programs, creating a dangerous vacuum. We need to reverse this trend and help our communities implement programs proven to help kids turn their lives around. I have long supported a strong Federal commitment to preventing youth violence, and I have worked hard on past reauthorizations of this legislation, as have Senators Specter and Kohl and others on the Judiciary Committee. We have learned the importance of balancing strong law enforcement with effective prevention programs. This reauthorization pushes forward new ways to help children move out of the criminal justice system, return to school, and become responsible, hard-working members of our communities. I thank the many prominent Vermont representatives of law enforcement, the juvenile justice system, and prevention-oriented non- profits who have spoken to me in support of reauthorizing this important Act and who have helped inform my understanding of these issues. They include Ken Schatz of the Burlington City Attorney's Office, Vermont Juvenile Justice Specialist Theresa Lay-Sleeper, and Chief Steve McQueen of the Winooski Police Department. I know that many of my colleagues on the Committee have heard from passionate leaders on this issue in their own states. These are difficult issues. We all care deeply about the well-being of our children and our communities, but we will not always agree completely on the best way to address the problems that keep too many of our young people ensnared in the justice system. After months of research and discussions, Senator Kohl, Senator Specter, and I believe we have found a way forward toward creating a system that will work more effectively to protect our young people. I hope all Senators will support this important legislation. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. LEAHY

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I am pleased to join Senator Specter and Senator Kohl in introducing important legislation designed to protect our communities and particularly our most precious asset, our children, not only by keeping them safe and out of trouble, but also by helping to ensure they have the opportunity to become productive adult members of society. Senator Specter and Senator Kohl have been leaders in this area of the law for decades, and I am honored to work with them once again on such an important initiative. I thank Senator Kohl for sharing with me the responsibilities of chairing the Committee's hearing on this bill in December, and for working so hard to draft this legislation. The Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act, JJDPA, sets out Federal policy and standards for the administration of juvenile justice in the states. It authorizes key Federal resources for states to improve their juvenile justice systems and for communities to develop programs to prevent young people from getting into trouble. With the reauthorization of this important legislation, we recommit to these important goals but also push the law forward in key ways to better serve our communities and our children. The basic goals of the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act remain the same: keeping our communities safe by reducing juvenile crime, promoting programs and policies that keep children out of the criminal justice system, and encouraging states to implement policies designed to steer those children who do enter the juvenile justice system back onto a track to become contributing members of society. The reauthorization of the JJDPA that we introduce today augments these goals in several ways. First, this bill encourages states to move away from keeping young people in adult jails. The Center for Disease Control and Prevention concluded late last year that children who are held in adult prisons commit more crimes, and more serious crimes, when they are released, than children with similar histories who are kept in juvenile facilities. After years of pressure to try more and more young people as adults and to send them to adult prisons, it is time to seriously consider the strong evidence that this policy is not working. We must do this with ample consideration for the fiscal constraints on states, particularly in these lean budget times, and with ample deference to the traditional role of states in setting their own criminal justice policy. We have done so here. But we also must work to ensure that unless strong and considered reasons dictate otherwise, the presumption must be that children will be kept with other children, particularly before they have been convicted of any wrongdoing. As a former prosecutor, I know well the importance of holding criminals accountable for their crimes with strong sentences. But when we are talking about children, we must also think about how best to help them become responsible, contributing members of society as adults. That keeps us all safer. I am disturbed that children from minority communities continue to be overrepresented in the juvenile justice system. This bill encourages states to take new steps to identify the reasons for this serious and continuing problem and to work together with the Federal government and with local communities to find ways to start solving it. I am also concerned that too many runaway and homeless young people are locked up for so-called status offenses, like truancy, without having committed any crime. In a Judiciary Committee hearing earlier this year on the reauthorization of the Runaway and Homeless Youth Act, I was amazed by the plight of this vulnerable population, even in the wealthiest country in the world, and inspired by their ability to rise above that adversity. The Runaway and Homeless Youth Act seeks to provide necessary services to vulnerable young people. Complementing that effort, this reauthorization of the JJDPA takes strong and significant steps to move states away from detaining children from at-risk populations for status offenses. This bill requires rigorous new procedures before a state can detain a status offender, and strictly limits the time they may be detained. This provision was drafted with the limited resources of states in mind, deference to judicial discretion, and the need to keep children safe when no other appropriate placement is available, but it aims to move states decisively in the direction of ending the practice of detaining status offenders, as some states already have. As I have worked with experts on this legislation, it has become abundantly clear that mental health and drug treatment are fundamental to making real progress toward keeping juvenile offenders from recidivism. Mental disorders are two to three times more common among children in the juvenile justice system than in the general population, and fully eighty percent of young people in the juvenile justice system have been found by some studies to have a connection to substance abuse. Often these young people face coexisting mental health and drug problems. This bill takes new and important steps to prioritize and fund mental health and drug treatment. The bill tackles several other key facets of juvenile justice reform. It emphasizes effective training of personnel who work with young people in the juvenile justice system, both to encourage the use of approaches that have been proven effective and to eliminate cruel and unnecessary treatment of juveniles. It also creates incentives for the use of programs that research and testing have shown to work best. Finally, the bill refocuses attention on prevention programs intended to keep children from ever entering the criminal justice system. I was struck when Chief Richard Miranda of Tucson, Arizona, said at our December hearing on this bill that we cannot arrest our way out of the problem. I heard the same sentiment from Chief Anthony Bossi and others at the Judiciary Committee's field hearing on young people and violent crime in Rutland, Vermont, earlier this year. When seasoned police officers from Rutland, Vermont, to Tucson, Arizona, tell me that prevention programs are pivotal, I pay attention. Just as this administration and recent Republican Congresses have gutted programs that support state and local law enforcement, so they have consistently cut and narrowed effective prevention programs, creating a dangerous vacuum. We need to reverse this trend and help our communities implement programs proven to help kids turn their lives around. I have long supported a strong Federal commitment to preventing youth violence, and I have worked hard on past reauthorizations of this legislation, as have Senators Specter and Kohl and others on the Judiciary Committee. We have learned the importance of balancing strong law enforcement with effective prevention programs. This reauthorization pushes forward new ways to help children move out of the criminal justice system, return to school, and become responsible, hard-working members of our communities. I thank the many prominent Vermont representatives of law enforcement, the juvenile justice system, and prevention-oriented non- profits who have spoken to me in support of reauthorizing this important Act and who have helped inform my understanding of these issues. They include Ken Schatz of the Burlington City Attorney's Office, Vermont Juvenile Justice Specialist Theresa Lay-Sleeper, and Chief Steve McQueen of the Winooski Police Department. I know that many of my colleagues on the Committee have heard from passionate leaders on this issue in their own states. These are difficult issues. We all care deeply about the well-being of our children and our communities, but we will not always agree completely on the best way to address the problems that keep too many of our young people ensnared in the justice system. After months of research and discussions, Senator Kohl, Senator Specter, and I believe we have found a way forward toward creating a system that will work more effectively to protect our young people. I hope all Senators will support this important legislation. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. LEAHY

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary be discharged from further consideration of S. Res. 584 and that the Senate then proceed to its immediate consideration.

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, this week we commemorate the 143rd anniversary of Juneteenth, the day our Nation's moral pendulum swung from slavery to freedom. On June 19, 1865, our Nation turned a significant corner. We ushered in what President Lincoln called in his Gettysburg address a ``new birth of freedom.'' We ended an oppression endured by generations of Americans and threw off the chains that shackled our common bond of freedom. We laid the roots for a constitutional revolution that, through the Civil War Amendments, transformed our founding charter from one that defended oppression, to one that embraced equal rights and human dignity. Over a century later we have made significant progress, but the struggle to secure basic rights for all remains unfulfilled. Just a few months ago, the United Nations Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination found that racial disparities continue to challenge our commitment to equality. I was not surprised to see that the U.N. report rebuked this administration's poor civil rights record. After 9/11, the Bush administration eroded many of the most precious rights and liberties held by all Americans. Just last week, the Supreme Court in the Boumediene opinion, beat back one of these most egregious attempts, restoring the Great Writ of habeas corpus to its rightful place as a mechanism to guarantee liberty from arbitrary confinement. But this administration has also played politics with critical voting laws, and failed to protect our most vulnerable citizens. The Bush administration's poor civil rights record has damaged America's prestige around the world, and undermined our tradition of progress on civil rights. Vermont is a State that holds a unique place in America's march toward equal justice. It was the first to outlaw slavery. Vermonters offered shelter to runaway slaves seeking refuge while in transit to Canada. Indeed, in just the tiny town of Brandon, 17 homes were stations on the Underground Railroad. I am proud that this month Vermont joined the States recognizing Juneteenth as a State holiday. It is important for our children and grandchildren to know our history, and to know that ordinary people can make a difference. As we reflect on the sacrifices of past generations, their example should inspire us all in our present day struggle to secure human and civil rights. We must reaffirm our faith in our cherished freedoms and restore our commitment to protect basic rights. I hope all Americans will celebrate Juneteenth by working towards building the more perfect union we want for generations to come.

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, the motions to reconsider be laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate, and that any statements related to the resolution be printed in the Record.

Mr. LEAHY

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and the motions to reconsider be laid upon the table.

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the HELP Committee be discharged from further consideration and the Senate now proceed to S. Res. 585.

Mr. LEAHY

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, tomorrow, we expect to be in a position to turn to consideration of the House message to accompany H.R. 3221, the Housing and Economic Recovery Act. We will continue working with colleagues on a way to move forward on this important legislation. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. LEAHY

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, if there is no further business to come before the Senate, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate stand adjourned under the previous order.

Mr. LEAHY

Mr. LEAHY. Will the Senator yield for a question?

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I ask through the Chair, did the majority leader not hear the distinguished Republican leader say they don't want to give consent to these hearings that the majority may want? I was wondering if the distinguished majority leader was aware of this discussion on May 15 of this year about this judgeship act. First, I quote Senator Sessions, a noted Republican: My comments on the judges' bill, as a member and Ranking on the Courts Subcommittee, we did have hearings several years ago but not recently. Then we heard from Senator Kyl, the distinguished deputy minority leader: So what I would like to do, Mr. Chairman, is just recommend that you take our colleagues up on the suggestion that we have a hearing to validate the requirements. At which point Senator Coburn, another Republican, said: If we're going to fix it, let's fix it right. Let's have a great hearing. Let's bring the GAO in, let's bring the Conference in, and let's find out [how] to do it right. And then Senator Grassley, another noted Republican said: That is the purpose of a hearing, and that's why it is very important that we give this adequate study. I ask the distinguished leader, was he aware of the fact that this hearing was being held after four senior members of the Republican caucus asked me to have the hearing?

Mr. LEAHY

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. LEAHY

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I congratulate the Vermont State Housing Authority, VSHA, on 40 years of excellence. This organization, which came into existence with a creative spark as the first statewide housing authority in the country, continues to find new and innovative ways to use Federal housing programs to find affordable homes for Vermonters. Reaching this milestone should bring great pride to the visionaries that created the system in 1968, including Governor Phil Hoff, and to the 40 years of staff, board members and leaders that have ensured that the statewide mission of VSHA has been carried out on a daily basis. The VSHA executive director, Richard Williams, has been at the helm of the VSHA for more than half its lifespan, working since 1984 to expand the reach of the organization, develop and maintain properties and move people out of the cold and into their own homes. It takes a man of great conviction to accomplish what he has done, and it takes a great team to deliver on the mission he and the board created. Richard was recently quoted saying, ``We are proud of what we've been able to accomplish for Vermonters over the past 40 years, but the challenges have never been greater. We're inspired and motivated by the knowledge that our services are needed more than ever.'' One of VSHA's primary responsibilities is administering the Department of Housing and Urban Development's, HUD, Section 8 Voucher Program in Vermont. During the past 40 years, the VSHA has worked to increase the number of vouchers available to Vermonters in all corners of the State. This has been increasingly important as the Federal resources for the programs many of our Nation's most vulnerable populations depend upon have been shrinking and poorly prioritized. The number of low- to moderate-income Vermonters seeking affordable housing, including those with disabilities, the elderly and returning veterans, continues to climb. Fortunately for Vermonters, the VSHA is constantly recognized by HUD as one of the Nation's most well run and effective housing authorities--giving hope to those that might have lost hope in virtually every other government system. Not only has the VSHA worked to assist people in finding affordable apartments, but they have also helped many Vermonters pursue their dreams of homeownership. It gives me great pride to say that VSHA's Homeownership program has given more than 80 low-income Vermont families the opportunity to become homeowners. This dynamic program works to improve self-sufficiency by converting Section 8 vouchers into Homeownership Vouchers. I am happy to say that the VSHA Homeownership program has enabled low-income Vermonters to build equity and wealth while increasing their civic involvement. While providing housing for Vermonters, the VSHA has simultaneously preserved and revitalized town centers, historical buildings and a general sense of community across the State. They have done this with commendable collaboration with nonprofit organizations, the private sector and various government agencies. I have seen their work, and most importantly, I have seen the tremendous impact their programs have had on my home State and the people who call the Green Mountains their home. I congratulate the VSHA on their outstanding achievements over the past 40 years. On behalf of the people of Vermont, I applaud everyone who has worked to make the Vermont State Housing Authority a great success.

Mr. LEAHY

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to a period for the transaction of morning business, with Senators permitted to speak for up to 10 minutes each.

Mr. LEAHY

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I ask the Chair to lay before the Senate a message from the House of Representatives on S. 2146. The PRESIDING OFFICER laid before the Senate the following message from the House of Representatives:

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate concur in the House amendment, and the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate.

Mr. LEAHY

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it stand adjourned until 10 a.m. tomorrow, Wednesday, June 18; that following the prayer and the pledge, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, the morning hour be deemed to have expired, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, and the Senate then resume consideration of the motion to proceed to H.R. 6049, the Renewable Energy and Job Creation Act, with Senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each. I further ask that at 2:30 p.m., there be 2 hours for morning business, with Senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each, with the time equally divided and controlled between the two leaders, or their designees, with the majority controlling the first hour and the Republicans controlling the next hour.

Mr. LEAHY

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, while I was chairing a Judiciary Committee meeting today, I received notice of the Supreme Court's ruling this morning in Boumediene v. Bush. I normally do not come to the floor to talk about Supreme Court rulings, whether I agree or disagree with them, but this one is of fundamental importance to all Americans, and I wish to take just a moment. We Americans know there is nothing more fundamental than the right of habeas corpus--the right to challenge your detention by the Executive as unlawful. It was part of our reason for fighting a revolution. It is enshrined in our Constitution. We have preserved it through two world wars. We cherish it as something that has set us apart from so many other countries around the world. This administration has tried repeatedly to push the limits of Executive power, including its effort to extinguish the Great Writ for certain detainees. In three separate decisions, a conservative U.S. Supreme Court in recent years has rejected this administration's erosion of fundamental rights. I applaud the Supreme Court for doing that because these protections set the United States apart from those who wish to harm us. Today's decision repudiating the administration's efforts to curb judicial review of detainees echoes earlier court decisions that have solidified our constitutional system of checks and balances. The administration has rolled back essential rights that have long guided our Nation's conscience. The administration has acted as though the President--and the President alone--can decide the rights of Americans. But the Great Writ has kept us strong as a nation from the time we fought a Revolution. We fought that Revolution to say that we will protect our own rights and we will set up three branches of Government to do so, including an independent Federal judiciary. Today's Supreme Court decision in Boumediene v. Bush is a stinging rebuke of the Bush administration's flawed detention policies. It is also a vindication for those who have argued from the beginning that it was unwise as well as unconstitutional for Congress, at the administration's request, to try to override a core constitutional protection. A majority of the Court has ruled that the constitutional right to habeas corpus extends to territories, including Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, where the United States exercises de facto control. The Court further held that the administration's detention procedures used at Guantanamo Bay are a constitutionally inadequate substitute for habeas corpus rights. Therefore, the provisions of the Military Commissions Act that stripped away the habeas rights of detainees held at Guantanamo Bay are unconstitutional. As a result, those detainees who have been determined to be ``unlawful enemy combatants'' are entitled to seek habeas relief in Federal courts, just as they had been doing before Congress' ill- advised decision to endorse the administration's detention policies through passage of the Military Commission Act in 2006. No detainee is set free as a result of this decision. Rather, detainees will simply be able to challenge their detention before a neutral, life-tenured judge. The Court's 5-to-4 decision sustains the long held and bipartisan belief that I and others have always maintained: Congress made a grave error when it voted to strip habeas corpus rights in the run-up to the 2006 mid-term elections, and leave in place hopelessly flawed procedures to determine whether detainees could be held indefinitely with no meaningful court review, merely by the President's decree. I have said many times on the floor of this Senate that we are the conscience of the Nation. Certainly, part of our job is to uphold our Constitution. It is easy to uphold our Constitution when we see no threats on the horizon. It is more difficult but even more important to uphold it when we do see threats on the horizon. So Congress, as I said, made a grave error in trying to diminish habeas corpus, and I am gratified that today's Supreme Court decision takes a significant step in reversing that action. Mr. President, the Great Writ--the Great Writ of habeas corpus-- protects you and protects me. It protects all 300 million Americans. It protects people who look to the United States to be a beacon of freedom. I am grateful that the Supreme Court believes, as I do, that this fundamental right must be preserved. Mr. President, I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. LEAHY

Mr. LEAHY. Madam President, I am disappointed that those across the aisle would not join with us to move to consider and debate the Consumer-First Energy Act of 2008. This legislation is designed to protect consumers from artificially high fuel prices, to curtail the massive giveaway of taxpayer resources through the continuing tax breaks to oil companies, and to recapture a portion of the windfall profits they are making at the expense of hard- working Americans. While the presumptive Republican Presidential nominee today recognized that gas prices can be expected to continue to climb, I continue to wonder why so many Republican Senators voted along party lines to ignore one of the biggest problems facing families across the country. Did they not want to debate why oil and gas companies should not continue to benefit from tax breaks while raking in record profits? Did they not want to debate why members of the OPEC cartel, such as Iran and Saudi Arabia, when acting anticompetitively and fixing output so as to artificially raise oil prices, should be held accountable through laws intended to protect competition, market forces, and consumers? The NOPEC provisions of the bill are drawn from the bill I cosponsored and the Judiciary Committee has reported repeatedly over the last several years, including in May 2007. Or did Republicans not want to debate why the administration has failed to crack down on excessive speculation and manipulation of the oil commodities markets? I guess none of us should be surprised that so many Senate Republicans voted to prevent debate over these concerns and this legislation. The Bush-Cheney administration opposes it and has already threatened a veto. Senate Republicans are simply doing what they have been doing for the last 7 years--falling in line. We need a President who will stand with the American people, not with the oil companies and market speculators. I know that both President Bush and Vice President Cheney have longstanding ties to the oil industry, but over the last 7\1/2\ years, American consumers have suffered enough. This administration has stood by and watched as the price of a gallon of gasoline has gone from $1.45 to over $4.00. I would have thought that an oil man who claims to be from West Texas would recognize that when top executives of the oil industry come before the Senate Judiciary Committee and testify under oath that they would make profits if oil were sold anywhere from $55 to $65 a barrel but that it is, in fact, selling for over $130 a barrel, action needs to be taken. I would have hoped that the President who promised the American people when he ran for office that his family's close ties with the Saudi ruling family would help him successfully persuade them to increase oil production and cooperation would recognize that his two recent, unsuccessful trips to the Middle East to beg the Saudis to increase oil production should lead to effective government action by the United States, not a threat to veto legislation. Most of all, I would have hoped that Senators would join together to debate this matter and take action to help the American people. President Bush's ballyhooed statement in his State of the Union a couple of years ago that we must end the oil addiction was nothing more than empty words. They rank with his space travel initiative that went nowhere and more tragically with his hollow promise to rebuild New Orleans. Their votes against debating the Consumer-First Energy Act ranks with their votes against debating the bill to correct the Supreme Court's Ledbetter decision that locked American workers out of the courts, their votes against debating the restoration of habeas corpus, their votes against debating comprehensive bipartisan legislation to begin to confront global climate change, their vote against debating congressional voting rights for the District of Columbia, and their votes on so many matters that Republican Senators have acted to block. I hope that when the majority leader moves for reconsideration of the vote on the Consumer-First Energy Act, Senators will search their consciences and do the right thing by voting to allow Senate consideration of that legislation in the best interest of the American people.

Mr. LEAHY

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I reserve the remainder of my time.