Richard Lugar

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. My understanding is that the administration, the IAEA, and participating governments in the NSG have all stated that they would prefer that any new Indian safeguards agreement be modeled on INFCIRC/ 66 Rev. 2.

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, the unanimous consent order provides for 1 minute on each side. I will forego my minute, but I would like to yield to the distinguished leader, who is here. He wants to make a comment.

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, we relinquish all time.

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote, and I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, the Senate has taken a historic step in approving the United States-India Peaceful Atomic Energy Cooperation Act. This is critically important. Passage of the bill takes one more important step toward a vibrant and exciting relationship between our two great democracies. I thank all Senators for their cooperation in completing the Senate's consideration in such a short period of time. I thank especially Senator Biden for his strong support and cooperation. This has been truly a bipartisan effort from the beginning until final passage. We are committed to continuing this effort through the conference process. Before yielding the floor, let me publicly thank Tom Moore of the majority staff and Ed Levine of the minority staff. They have become experts on the United States-India Peaceful Atomic Energy and Cooperation Act. They have assisted the committee professionally and skillfully in helping craft the bill. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation be authorized to hold a Full Committee hearing on the Reauthorization of the Pipeline Safety Program on Thursday, November 16, 2006 at 10 a.m. in room 253 of the Russell Senate Office Building.

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, November 16, 2006 at 10 a.m. The purpose of this hearing is to consider the nomination of Kevin M. Kolevar, of Michigan, to be an Assistant Secretary of Energy (Electricity Delivery and Energy).

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that on Thursday, November 16, 2006 following the first vote Committee on Environment and Public Works be authorized to hold a Business Meeting to consider the following agenda: Alex Beehler to be Inspector General of the Environmental Protection Agency.

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Finance be authorized to meet during the session on Thursday, November 16, 2006, at 2 p.m., in 215 Dirksen Senate Office Building, to hear testimony on ``The CHIP Program From the States' Perspective.''

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions be authorized to hold a hearing during the session of the Senate on Thursday, November 16, 2006 at 10 a.m. in SD-430.

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs be authorized to hold an off-the-floor markup during the session on Thursday, November 16, 2006, to consider pending committee business (agenda attached). Agenda Legislation: S. 4046, Iraq Reconstruction Accountability Act of 2006. Nominations: The Honorable James H. Bilbray to be Governor, U.S. Postal Service; Thurgood Marshall Jr. to be Governor, U.S. Postal Service; The Honorable Dan G. Blair to be Chairman, Postal Rate Commission, Stephen T. Conboy to be U.S. Marshal, Superior Court of the District of Columbia.

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate Committee on the Judiciary be authorized to meet to conduct a hearing on ``Oversight of the Civil Rights Division'' on Thursday, November 16, 2006 at 9:30 a.m. in Dirksen Senate Office Building Room 226. The witness list is attached. Panel I: The Hon. Wan Kim, Assistant Attorney General, Civil Rights Division, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC. Panel II: Mr. Michael A. Carvin, Partner, Jones Day, Washington, DC; Mr. Ted Shaw, Director-Counsel and President, NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc. (LDF), New York, NY; Mr. Robert N. Driscoll, Partner, Alston & Bird, LLP Washington, DC; Mr. Joseph Rich, Director of Fair Housing and Community Development, Lawyer's Committee for Civil Rights Under Law Washington, DC.

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations of the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs be authorized to meet on Thursday, November 16, 2006, at 10 a.m., for a hearing entitled ``The Defense Travel System: Boon or Boondoggle (Part 2).''

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Select Committee on Intelligence be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on November 16, 2006 at 10:30 a.m., to hold a closed briefing.

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources Subcommittee on Public Lands and Forests be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, November 16 at 2:30 p.m. The purpose of the hearing is to receive testimony relating to S. 2626, a bill to establish wilderness areas, promote conservation, improve public land, and provide for high quality economic development in Washington County, Utah, and for other purposes; and S. 3772, a bill to establish wilderness areas, promote conservation, improve public land, and provide for high quality development in White Pine Nevada, and for other purposes.

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on Readiness and Management support of the Committee on Armed Services be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on November 16, 2006, at 9:30 a.m., in open session to receive testimony on Department of Defense business systems modernization efforts.

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Sharon Squassoni, a specialist with the Congressional Research Service, be granted privileges of the floor during the duration of the Senate's consideration of S. 3709.

Mr. LUGAR. I ask unanimous consent that Henry Abeyta, a fellow with the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, be granted the privileges of the floor for the duration of the debate on S. 3709, the United States-India Peaceful Atomic Energy bill.

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, today I congratulate a remarkable young Hoosier and fellow Eagle Scout, Stephen Crayner. Since becoming an Eagle Scout on April 22, 2004, an extraordinary achievement in itself, Stephen has continued to work diligently to improve himself and his community, eventually earning all 121 merit badges offered by the Boy Scouts. This dedication has earned him the distinguished rank of Eagle Scout with Three Silver Palms. During my time in the Scouting program, I learned many important lessons about leadership, organization, and community spirit. For the troop to be a successful unit, each member must learn to take initiative and offer ideas and energy. He must also develop the ability to work in a team environment, and therefore accept the challenge of compromise and negotiation. Finally, the activities and the efforts of the Scouting program reflect a commitment to community involvement. Stephen's mastery of these lessons will serve him well in the years ahead. I also appreciate this opportunity to congratulate the members of Stephen's family who have played such a large role in his many accomplishments. Stephen's father David served as Scoutmaster, and his mother Libby has volunteered extensively to support the troop. It is telling that Stephen's two older brothers, William and Benjamin, have also earned their Eagle. I am hopeful that each of you will join me in congratulating Stephen for all of his remarkable accomplishments and in wishing him continuing success as he pursues new and exciting challenges.

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, on July 24 the Majority Leader placed in the Record a list of the Senators that had sought to be cosponsors of S. 3709, the United States-India Peaceful Atomic Energy Cooperation Act. Mr. President, I ask that an updated list of those who wish to be listed as cosponsors be printed in the Record The names follow. Lugar, Biden, Hagel, Chafee, Allen, Coleman, Voinovich, Alexander, Sununu, Murkowski, Martinez, Dodd, Kerry, Nelson, Obama, Cornyn, Bayh, Hutchison, DeWine, and Lott.

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I appreciate this opportunity to join my friends from across the United States, Mexico, Canada, Guatemala, and El Salvador in celebrating the 6th Annual Bi-National Health Week. Bi-National Health Week affords us an opportunity to reflect upon the many successful efforts made here in the United States in cooperation with Mexican, Canadian, Guatemalan, and Salvadorian consulates in order to promote healthy lifestyles and well-being amongst those who might otherwise lack access to important health care services. Bi-National Health Week originated as an effort by Mexico's Secretary of Health to direct health care services to the underserved migrant populations currently living and working in the United States. Since its inception in October 2001, the network of Mexican consulates throughout the country has partnered with U.S. Federal, State and local agencies, the Institute for Mexicans Abroad, the United States-Mexico Border Health Commission, the California-Mexico Health Initiative, and various Mexican and United States colleges and universities. These partnerships have resulted in celebrations throughout the world in an effort to empower local health clinics and community organizations to provide services to the Hispanic/Latino population. The agencies involved with the Bi-National Health week are working diligently to educate and encourage people to pursue healthy lifestyles. HIV, cholesterol, blood sugar, blood pressure, and oral screenings will be offered as examples of first-rate preventative care in order to avoid costly hospitalization and reduce future costs to the taxpayer. We must continue to work together at the Federal, State and local levels with our friends throughout the world in order to ensure that we seek every opportunity to pursue healthy lifestyles.

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, the organization known as Religions for Peace constitutes a global network of interreligious councils and affiliated groups, harnessed to encourage cooperation among the world's religious communities to transform conflict, build peace and advance sustainable development. Founded in 1970 as an international, nonsectarian organization, Religions for Peace is now the largest coalition of the world's religious communities. President of Religions for Peace is His Royal Highness Prince El Hassan bin Talal of Jordan. Secretary General of WCRP, as the organization is known, is Dr. William F. Vendley, of the United States. Our former colleague and my fellow Hoosier, John Brademas, who served in the House of Representatives from Indiana for 22 years and then became president of New York University, which he now serves as President Emeritus, is an International Trustee of Religions for Peace. Last month, in Kyoto, Japan, more than 800 religious leaders, from all major traditions and over 100 countries, met at the Eighth World Assembly of the World Conference of Religions for Peace. The theme of this assembly was Confronting Violence and Advancing Shared Security. At the request of our former colleague Representative Brademas, I ask unanimous consent to have the final statement issued by the Kyoto Assembly printed in the Record.

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I rise to introduce the National Fuels Initiative of 2006. This act presents to this Congress a plan to bring meaningful reductions in the amount of oil we consume in the United States and reduce our dependency on oil imports. Dependence on imported oil has put the United States in a position that no great power should tolerate. Our economic health is subject to forces far beyond our control, including the decisions of hostile countries. We maintain a massive military presence overseas, partly to preserve our oil lifeline. We have lost leverage on the international stage and are daily exacerbating the problem by participating in an enormous wealth transfer to authoritarian nations that happen to possess the commodity that our economy can least do without. The hundreds of billions of dollars we spend on oil imports each year weakens our economy, enriches hostile regimes, and is used by some to support terrorism. In the absence of revolutionary changes in energy policy, we are risking multiple disasters for our country that will constrain living standards, undermine our foreign policy goals, and leave us highly vulnerable to the machinations of rogue states. There are at least six threats posed by oil dependence. First oil is vulnerable to supply disruption as a result of natural disasters, wars, and terrorist attacks. Price shocks resulting from a major supply loss can put the U.S. economy into recession. Second, global oil reserves are becoming more limited as easy supply is depleted, global demand rapidly increases, and governments exert more control over reserves. This makes oil more expensive in the short term, and creates the prospect that supplies may not be accessible in the future. Third, some oil-rich nations are using energy as an overt weapon. Adversarial regimes from Venezuela, to Iran, to Russia are using energy supplies as leverage against their neighbors. Fourth, hundreds of billions of dollars in oil export revenues flowing to authoritarian regimes increase corruption and hurt democratic reform. Some oil-rich nations are using this money to invest in terrorism, instability, or demagogic appeals to populism. Fifth, the threat of global climate change has been made worse by inefficient and unclean use of non-renewable energy like oil. This could bring about drought, famine, disease, and mass migration. And finally, dependence on oil increases instability and undermines development in much of the developing world. Rising energy costs can undermine our foreign assistance and hurt stability, development, disease eradication, and efforts to combat the root causes of terrorism. The new geo-political reality emerging from the global energy situation and United States dependence on oil imports demand that we dramatically decrease the amount of oil we consume. In March 2006, I delivered an address at the Brookings Institution in which I described ``a shifting balance of realism'' from those who believe in the immutability of oil's domination of our economy and a laissez faire approach to energy policy to those who recognize that our Nation has no choice but to seek a major reorientation in the way we get our energy. Marginally reducing our reliance on imported oil over the course of the next few decades via the slow progress of market forces will be welcome, but by the time a sustained energy crisis fully motivates market forces, we are likely to be well past the point where we can save ourselves from extensive suffering. We must respond to our energy vulnerability as a crisis. This is the very essence of a problem requiring Congressional action. The heart of America's geostrategic problem is reliance on imported oil in a market that is dominated by volatile and hostile governments. We can start to break petroleum's grip right now. The key is to replace oil used in transportation with renewable fuels and to improve the fuel efficiency of our cars and trucks. I outlined the 5 central components of this energy plan at the Richard G. Lugar--Purdue University Summit on Energy Security on August 29th, 2006. First, this bill sets a goal for the United States to expand production of renewable fuels to at least 100 billion gallons a year by 2025. Some of this added production will come from current corn-based ethanol and biodiesel, but a great majority will be from emerging cellulosic technology allowing ethanol from diverse sources of renewable biomass. Second, virtually all new cars sold in America should be flex-fuel capable. These vehicles give Americans the choice to use E-85, a blend of 85 percent ethanol and 15 percent gasoline, or regular gasoline. This bill would require that virtually all vehicles would be manufactured as flexible fuel vehicles within ten years. This provision was also part of the Biomass Security Act of 2006 which I joined Senator Harkin in introducing earlier this year. Third, roughly 25 percent of our nation's fueling stations should offer E-85 within the next ten years. This provision was also part of the Biomass Security Act of 2006. This will give consumers choice and help spur investment in renewable fuel production. Fourth, the bill would enact increased mileage standards that set a target of steadily improving fuel economy every year, as well as encourage research into new advanced technology vehicles such as hybrids and coal-based transportation fuels. I joined Senator Obama in introducing this provision earlier this year as the Fuel Economy Reform Act of 2006. Finally, the bill would establish a revolutionary variable alternative fuel tax credit to support growth of alternative fuel production. While this novel portion of the bill should be further debated and improved, its aim is to increase investment in cellulosic ethanol, coals to liquid, and other non-petroleum based fuels by reducing risks posed by oil price manipulation of foreign regimes. We must move now to address our energy vulnerability because sufficient investment cannot happen overnight, and it will take years to build supporting infrastructure and to change behavior. Americans need to know exactly what the plan is and how we will achieve it. We not only must understand how to bring alternatives to the market, we must establish what degree of change would improve our national security situation, then tailor national policy to achieve that goal. The energy plan presented in this bill is a package of proposals that would dramatically improve America's security posture. The plan would achieve the replacement of 6.5 million barrels of oil per day by volume--the rough equivalent of one third of the oil used in America and one half of our oil imports. It would provide more jobs for Americans instead of sending a deluge of money to hostile countries, support our farmers instead of foreign terrorists, and promote green fuels over fossil fuels. I ask unanimous consent that the full text of this bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the ``NATO Freedom Consolidation Act of 2006. I am pleased that the Majority Leader, Senator Frist, Senator Biden, and Senator Smith have joined me in proposing this important legislation. The goal of this bill is to reaffirm United States support for continued enlargement of NATO to democracies that are able and willing to meet the responsibilities of membership. In particular, the legislation calls for the timely admission of Albania, Croatia, Georgia, and Macedonia to NATO and authorizes security assistance for these countries in Fiscal Year 2007. Each of these countries has clearly stated its desire to join NATO and is working hard to meet the specified requirements for membership. The bill also affirms that the United States stands ready to consider, and if all applicable criteria are satisfied, to support efforts by Ukraine to join NATO, should Ukraine decide that it wishes to meet the responsibilities of membership in the Alliance. I believe that eventual NATO membership for these four countries would be a success for Europe, NATO, and the United States by continuing to extend the zone of peace and security. Albania, Croatia, and Macedonia have been making progress on reforms through their participation in the NATO Membership Action Plan since 2002. Unfortunately, Georgia has not yet been granted a Membership Action Plan but nevertheless has made remarkable progress. This legislation will provide important incentives and assistance to the countries to continue the implementation of democratic, defense, and economic reforms. Since the end of the Cold War, NATO has been evolving to meet the new security needs of the 21st century. In this era, the threats to NATO members are transnational and far from its geographic borders. There is strong support among members for NATO's operation in Afghanistan, and for its training mission in Iraq. NATO's viability as an effective defense and security alliance depends on flexible, creative leadership, as well as the willingness of members to improve capabilities and address common threats. If NATO is to continue to be the preeminent security Alliance and serve the defense interests of its membership, it must continue to evolve and that evolution must include enlargement. Potential NATO membership motivates emerging democracies to make important advances in areas such as the rule of law and civil society. A closer relationship with NATO will promote these values and contribute to our mutual security. Georgia is a young democracy that has made tremendous progress since the ``Rose Revolution.'' It is situated in a critical geostrategic location and his host to a large portion of the Baku- Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline that carries important energy resources to the West from Azerbaijan and, in the future, Kazakhstan. Georgia is resisting pressure from breakaway republics backed by Moscow. In the past, border disputes have been identified as reasons a country may not be invited to join NATO. But in this case, Russia's action, not Georgia's, is frustrating Tbilisi's NATO aspirations. Three years ago, the United States Senate unanimously voted to invite seven countries to join NATO. Today, Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia are making significant contributions to NATO and are among our closest allies in the global war on terrorism. It is time again for the United States to take the lead in urging its allies to bring in new members, and to offer timely admission of Albania, Croatia, Georgia, and Macedonia to NATO.

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I rise to introduce the National Fuels Initiative of 2006. This act presents to this Congress a plan to bring meaningful reductions in the amount of oil we consume in the United States and reduce our dependency on oil imports. Dependence on imported oil has put the United States in a position that no great power should tolerate. Our economic health is subject to forces far beyond our control, including the decisions of hostile countries. We maintain a massive military presence overseas, partly to preserve our oil lifeline. We have lost leverage on the international stage and are daily exacerbating the problem by participating in an enormous wealth transfer to authoritarian nations that happen to possess the commodity that our economy can least do without. The hundreds of billions of dollars we spend on oil imports each year weakens our economy, enriches hostile regimes, and is used by some to support terrorism. In the absence of revolutionary changes in energy policy, we are risking multiple disasters for our country that will constrain living standards, undermine our foreign policy goals, and leave us highly vulnerable to the machinations of rogue states. There are at least six threats posed by oil dependence. First oil is vulnerable to supply disruption as a result of natural disasters, wars, and terrorist attacks. Price shocks resulting from a major supply loss can put the U.S. economy into recession. Second, global oil reserves are becoming more limited as easy supply is depleted, global demand rapidly increases, and governments exert more control over reserves. This makes oil more expensive in the short term, and creates the prospect that supplies may not be accessible in the future. Third, some oil-rich nations are using energy as an overt weapon. Adversarial regimes from Venezuela, to Iran, to Russia are using energy supplies as leverage against their neighbors. Fourth, hundreds of billions of dollars in oil export revenues flowing to authoritarian regimes increase corruption and hurt democratic reform. Some oil-rich nations are using this money to invest in terrorism, instability, or demagogic appeals to populism. Fifth, the threat of global climate change has been made worse by inefficient and unclean use of non-renewable energy like oil. This could bring about drought, famine, disease, and mass migration. And finally, dependence on oil increases instability and undermines development in much of the developing world. Rising energy costs can undermine our foreign assistance and hurt stability, development, disease eradication, and efforts to combat the root causes of terrorism. The new geo-political reality emerging from the global energy situation and United States dependence on oil imports demand that we dramatically decrease the amount of oil we consume. In March 2006, I delivered an address at the Brookings Institution in which I described ``a shifting balance of realism'' from those who believe in the immutability of oil's domination of our economy and a laissez faire approach to energy policy to those who recognize that our Nation has no choice but to seek a major reorientation in the way we get our energy. Marginally reducing our reliance on imported oil over the course of the next few decades via the slow progress of market forces will be welcome, but by the time a sustained energy crisis fully motivates market forces, we are likely to be well past the point where we can save ourselves from extensive suffering. We must respond to our energy vulnerability as a crisis. This is the very essence of a problem requiring Congressional action. The heart of America's geostrategic problem is reliance on imported oil in a market that is dominated by volatile and hostile governments. We can start to break petroleum's grip right now. The key is to replace oil used in transportation with renewable fuels and to improve the fuel efficiency of our cars and trucks. I outlined the 5 central components of this energy plan at the Richard G. Lugar--Purdue University Summit on Energy Security on August 29th, 2006. First, this bill sets a goal for the United States to expand production of renewable fuels to at least 100 billion gallons a year by 2025. Some of this added production will come from current corn-based ethanol and biodiesel, but a great majority will be from emerging cellulosic technology allowing ethanol from diverse sources of renewable biomass. Second, virtually all new cars sold in America should be flex-fuel capable. These vehicles give Americans the choice to use E-85, a blend of 85 percent ethanol and 15 percent gasoline, or regular gasoline. This bill would require that virtually all vehicles would be manufactured as flexible fuel vehicles within ten years. This provision was also part of the Biomass Security Act of 2006 which I joined Senator Harkin in introducing earlier this year. Third, roughly 25 percent of our nation's fueling stations should offer E-85 within the next ten years. This provision was also part of the Biomass Security Act of 2006. This will give consumers choice and help spur investment in renewable fuel production. Fourth, the bill would enact increased mileage standards that set a target of steadily improving fuel economy every year, as well as encourage research into new advanced technology vehicles such as hybrids and coal-based transportation fuels. I joined Senator Obama in introducing this provision earlier this year as the Fuel Economy Reform Act of 2006. Finally, the bill would establish a revolutionary variable alternative fuel tax credit to support growth of alternative fuel production. While this novel portion of the bill should be further debated and improved, its aim is to increase investment in cellulosic ethanol, coals to liquid, and other non-petroleum based fuels by reducing risks posed by oil price manipulation of foreign regimes. We must move now to address our energy vulnerability because sufficient investment cannot happen overnight, and it will take years to build supporting infrastructure and to change behavior. Americans need to know exactly what the plan is and how we will achieve it. We not only must understand how to bring alternatives to the market, we must establish what degree of change would improve our national security situation, then tailor national policy to achieve that goal. The energy plan presented in this bill is a package of proposals that would dramatically improve America's security posture. The plan would achieve the replacement of 6.5 million barrels of oil per day by volume--the rough equivalent of one third of the oil used in America and one half of our oil imports. It would provide more jobs for Americans instead of sending a deluge of money to hostile countries, support our farmers instead of foreign terrorists, and promote green fuels over fossil fuels. I ask unanimous consent that the full text of this bill be printed in the Record.