Richard Lugar

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I rise to comment on World AIDS Day, which was on December 1. The global HIV/AIDS pandemic is a humanitarian crisis of horrific proportions. World AIDS Day is a day to remember the millions of lives lost to and devastated by this global pandemic and to strengthen our commitment to fight this disease. Last year, Congress passed legislation that created the Office of the Global AIDS Coordinator and pledged $15 billion over 5 years to address the HIV/AIDS crisis. The Senate Foreign Relations Committee continues to make HIV/AIDS a priority. Charged with the oversight of the President's initiative, we will continue to hold hearings and briefings on the subject of AIDS and the progress of the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief. Earlier this year, for instance, we held a hearing focused on the intersection of HIV/AIDS and hunger. At this hearing, Ambassador Randall Tobias, the Global AIDS Coordinator, and Jim Morris, Executive Director of the World Food Program, testified about the devastating effects that the HIV/AIDS crisis is having on agricultural workers and the food supply in sub-Saharan Africa. In addition, we explored the special nutritional needs of individuals who are taking antiretroviral medication. The theme of World AIDS Day this year, ``Women, Girls, and HIV and AIDS,'' is an appropriate one. This disease is having a particularly devastating effect on women and girls around the world. We are just beginning to understand how women, and young girls in particular, are especially vulnerable to HIV and AIDS, due to a combination of biological, cultural, economic, social, and legal factors. Young girls constitute 75 percent of new infections in South Africa among individuals between 14 and 25 years of age. In Malawi, the National AIDS Commission has said that HIV and AIDS is killing more women than men, and that HIV-positive girls between 15 and 24 years of age outnumber males in the same age group by a six-to-one margin. Even in the United States, the disease is having a devastating effect on women and is the leading cause of death among African American women ages 25 to 34. Not only are women and girls more vulnerable to infection, they are also shouldering much of the burden of taking care of sick and dying relatives and friends. In addition, in the vast majority of cases, they are the caretakers of the estimated 14 million children who have been orphaned by this pandemic. Grandmothers often take the responsibility of caring for grandchildren, and older female children often take care of their younger siblings. One such young girl is Fanny Madanitsa. Fanny is a 16-year-old girl living in Malawi with her two younger sisters and a brother. Life has been difficult for Fanny and her siblings since they lost their parents to AIDS. As the oldest child, Fanny must deal with the stress of taking care of her younger siblings. They live in a modest house and share one bed. Fanny dreams of being a nurse, but reaching this goal will be a challenge for her. She cannot always attend classes, as she sometimes has to look after her siblings. Because money is scarce, she has a difficult time paying for school materials and other costs of her education. But Fanny is more fortunate that many girls in similar circumstances. With the help of her Village AIDS Committee, a community-based organization that has organized to take care of the orphans in its village, Fanny and her siblings receive food, soap, school materials, and also medicines. Through the Village AIDS Committee, which receives support from Save the Children, the community assists Fanny in watching her siblings so she can attend school. This June, I introduced the Assistance for Orphans and Other Vulnerable Children in Developing Countries Act of 2004. My bill would require the United States Government to develop a comprehensive strategy for providing assistance to orphans and would authorize the President to support community-based organizations that provide basic care for orphans and vulnerable children. Furthermore, my bill aims to improve enrollment and access to primary school education for orphans and vulnerable children by supporting programs that reduce the negative impact of school fees and other expenses. It also would reaffirm our commitment to international school lunch programs. School meals provide basic nutrition to children who otherwise do not have access to reliable food. They have been a proven incentive for poor and orphaned children to enroll in school. In addition, many women and children who lose one or both parents often face difficulty in asserting their inheritance rights. Even when the inheritance rights of women and children are spelled out in law, such rights are difficult to claim and are seldom enforced. In many countries, it is difficult or impossible for a widow--even if she has small children--to claim property after the death of her husband. This often leaves the most vulnerable children impoverished and homeless. My bill seeks to support programs that protect the inheritance rights of orphans and widows with children. Although the legislation will not become law this session, I am hopeful that, with bipartisan support, it will become law early next year. The AIDS orphans crisis in sub-Saharan Africa has implications for political stability, development, and human welfare that extend far beyond the region. Turning the tide on this crisis will require a coordinated, comprehensive, and swift response. I am hopeful that, with the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, the Global Fund, and the Congress, we can make great strides in the battle against this pandemic.

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I thank my Senate colleagues for passing the resolution providing advice and consent to the Protocol amending the existing U.S. Tax Treaty with the Netherlands through the unanimous consent procedure. In spite of legislative hurdles that arose during the process, this Protocol will be enacted, and will bolster the economic relationship between the United States and a country that is already both a good friend and a critical trade and investment partner. As the United States considers how to create jobs and maintain economic growth, it is important that we try to eliminate impediments that prevent our companies from fully accessing international markets. In the case of taxes, we should work to ensure that companies pay their fair share while not being unfairly taxed twice on the same revenue. Tax treaties are intended to prevent this double taxation so that companies are not inhibited from doing business overseas. As the United States moves to keep the economy growing and to increase U.S. employment, international tax policies that promote foreign direct investment in the United States such as this Protocol, are critically important. I have received communications from several corporate employers. The foreign entities indicate that this Protocol will provide them with incentives to ``insource'' to the United States. The domestic companies indicate that this Protocol will provide overall advantages and benefits. For the benefit of my colleagues, I am attaching to my statement several of these communications. I thank my colleagues again for agreeing to pass this important measure. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the material I made reference to be printed in the Record.

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I rise today to draw attention to a growing number of premature births in the United States. The March of Dimes has declared November 16th Prematurity Awareness Day. This event is part of a five-year plan, launched in 2003, to use the combined power of awareness, education, and research to significantly decrease the number of premature births in the United States. The rise in premature births throughout the country and in my own State--despite all of our achievements in medicine--is astounding. Nationally, more than 480,000 babies were born preterm in 2002. Nearly 13 percent of Indiana's infants are born preterm and in half of the cases, doctors cannot identify the cause. Prematurity is the leading cause of infant death in the first month of life. Many of these infants will suffer lifelong health problems--such as cerebral palsy, mental retardation, chronic lung disease, and vision and hearing loss--and some will die. Reducing the number of premature births will improve the health of hundreds of thousands of infants born each year. Aside from these human costs, the financial cost of caring for preterm infants is enormous. The March of Dimes estimates that the national hospital bill for infants with a diagnosis of prematurity/low birthweight was $13.6 billion in 2001. I am pleased to be a cosponsor of S. 1726, the PREEMIE Act, legislation that seeks to expand and coordinate research on the prevention of preterm birth and the most effective care for babies when they are born preterm. Senator Lincoln and I have also introduced S. 1734, the Prevent Prematurity and Improve Child Health Act, which seeks to improve Medicaid and the State Children's Health Insurance Program to better reflect our current state of knowledge on preterm birth. For example, medical research tells us that smoking is a considerable risk factor for preterm and low birthweight infants. Our bill takes this knowledge and translates it into practice by ensuring that smoking cessation services and pharmaceuticals are available for pregnant women enrolled in Medicaid. My wife Char and I have been long-time volunteers for the March of Dimes and I am pleased that they are committing such an enormous amount of time, energy and resources into conquering the stubborn problem of preterm birth with their five-year Prematurity Campaign. Both of these bills have the potential to make a real difference in many lives and I hope that our colleagues will consider joining us in this effort. I am proud to tell you that the Indiana March of Dimes Chapter has many events planned for Prematurity Awareness Day. I commend the March of Dimes for its dedication in working toward a day when babies and their families no longer have to face the devastating consequences of premature birth. I call on my colleagues to join the fight against premature birth.

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I rise to introduce two new bills to strengthen U.S. nonproliferation efforts. One of these is a new Conventional Arms Threat Reduction Act. The other is the fourth installment of the Nunn-Lugar legislation, the nonproliferation program that Sam Nunn and I sponsored in 1991. In that year, Sam Nunn and I authored the Soviet Nuclear Threat Reduction or Nunn-Lugar Act, which established the Cooperative Threat Reduction Program. That program has provided U.S. funding and expertise to help the former Soviet Union safeguard and dismantle their enormous stockpiles of nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons, means of delivery and related materials. In 1997, Senator Nunn and I were joined by Senator Domenici in introducing the Defense Against Weapons of Mass Destruction Act, which expanded Nunn-Lugar authorities in the former Soviet Union and provided WMD expertise to first responders in American cities. In 2003, Congress adopted the Nunn-Lugar Expansion Act, which authorized the Nunn-Lugar program to operate outside the former Soviet Union to address proliferation threats. The bill that I am introducing today would strengthen the Nunn-Lugar program and other nonproliferation efforts and provide them with greater flexibility to address emerging threats. To date, the Nunn-Lugar program has deactivated or destroyed: 6,462 nuclear warheads; 550 ICBMs; 469 ICBM silos; 13 ICBM mobile missile launchers; 135 bombers; 733 nuclear air-to-surface missiles; 408 submarine missile launchers; 530 submarine launched missiles; 27 nuclear submarines; and 194 nuclear test tunnels. The Nunn-Lugar program also facilitated the removal of all nuclear weapons from Ukraine, Belarus, and Kazakhstan. After the fall of the Soviet Union, these three nations emerged as the third, fourth, and eighth largest nuclear powers in the world. Today, all three are nuclear-weapons-free as a result of cooperative efforts under the Nunn- Lugar program. In addition, Nunn-Lugar is the primary tool through which the United States is working with Russian authorities to identify, safeguard, and destroy Russia's massive chemical and biological warfare capacity. These successes were never a foregone conclusion. Today, even after more than 12 years, creativity and constant vigilance are required to ensure that the Nunn-Lugar program is not encumbered by bureaucratic obstacles or undercut by political disagreements. I have devoted much time and effort to overseeing and accelerating the Nunn-Lugar program. Uncounted individuals of great dedication serving on the ground in the former Soviet Union and in our Government have made this program work. Nevertheless, from the beginning, we have encountered resistance to the Nunn-Lugar concept in both the United States and Russia. In our own country, opposition often has been motivated by false perceptions that Nunn-Lugar money is foreign assistance or by beliefs that Defense Department funds should only be spent on troops, weapons, or other war-fighting capabilities. Until recently, we also faced a general disinterest in nonproliferation that made gaining support for Nunn-Lugar funding and activities an annual struggle. The attacks of September 11 changed the political discourse on this subject. We have turned a corner--the public, the media, and political candidates are paying more attention now. In a remarkable moment in the first Presidential debate, both President Bush and Senator Kerry agree that the number one national security threat facing the United States was the prospect that weapons of mass destruction could fall into the hands of terrorists. The 9/11 Commission weighed in with another important endorsement of the Nunn-Lugar program, saying that ``Preventing the proliferation of [weapons of mass destruction] warrants a maximum effort--by strengthening counterproliferation efforts, expanding the Proliferation Security Initiative, and supporting the Cooperative Threat Reduction Program.'' the report went on to say that ``Nunn-Lugar . . . is now in need of expansion, improvement, and resources.'' The first bill that I am introducing today is ``The Nunn-Lugar Cooperative Threat Reduction Act of 2004.'' It would underscore the bipartisan consensus on Nunn-Lugar by streamlining and accelerating Nunn-Lugar implementation. It would grant more flexibility to the President and the Secretary of Defense to undertake non-proliferation projects outside the former Soviet Union. It also would eliminate Congressionally imposed conditions on Nunn-Lugar assistance that in the past have force the suspension of time-sensitive nonproliferation projects. The purpose of the bill is to reduce bureaucratic red tape and friction within our Government that hinder effective responses to nonproliferation opportunities and emergencies. For example, recently Albania appealed for help in destroying 16 tons of chemical agent left over from the cold war. In August, I visited this remote storage facility, the location of which still remains classified. Nunn-Lugar officials are working closely with Albanian leaders to destroy this dangerous stockpile. But the experience also is illustrative of the need to reduce bureaucratic delays. The package of documents to be reviewed by the President took some 11 weeks to be finalized and readied for President Bush. From beginning to end, the bureaucratic process to authorize dismantlement of chemical weapons in Albania took more than 3 months. Fortunately, the situation in Albania was not a crisis, but we may not be able to afford these timelines in future nonproliferation emergencies. The second piece of legislation that I am introducing is the ``Conventional Arms Threat Reduction Act of 2004'' or ``CATRA.'' This legislation is modeled on the original Nunn-Lugar Act. Its purpose is to provide the Department of State with a focused response to the threat posed by vulnerable stockpiles of conventional weapons around the world, including tactical missiles and man portable air defense systems, or MANPADS. Such missiles and other weapons systems could be used by terrorists to attack commercial and military targets, and U.S. facilities here at home and abroad. Reports suggest that Al Qaeda has attempted to acquire these kinds of weapons. In addition, unsecured conventional weapons stockpiles are a major obstacle to peace, reconstruction, and economic development in regions suffering from instability. My bill declares it to be the policy of the United States to seek out surplus and unguarded stocks of conventional armaments, including small arms, light weapons, MANPADS, and tactical missile systems for elimination. It authorizes the Department of State to carry out an accelerated global effort to destroy such weapons and to cooperate with allies and international organizations when possible. The Secretary of State is charged with devising a strategy for prioritizing, on a country- by-country basis, the obligation of funds in a global program of conventional arms elimination. Lastly, the Secretary is required to unify program planning, coordination, and implementation of the strategy into one office at the State Department. The bill also authorizes a budget increase commensurate with the risk posed by these weapons. The Department of State has been working to address the threats posed by conventional weapons. But in my judgment, the current funding allocation and organizational structure are not up to the task. Only about $6 million was devoted to destroying small arms and light weapons during fiscal years 2003 and 2004. We need more focus on this problem and additional funding to take advantage of opportunities to secure vulnerable stockpiles from proliferation, theft, or diversion. In August, I visited Albania, Ukraine, and Georgia. Each of these countries has large stockpiles of MANPADS and tactical missile systems and each has requested U.S. assistance to destroy them. On August 27, I stood in a remote Albanian military storage facility as the base commander unloaded a fully functioning MANPAD from its crate and readied it for use. This storage site contained 70 MANPADS that could have been used to attack an American commercial aircraft. Fortunately, the MANPADS that I saw that day were destroyed on September 2, but there are many more like them throughout the world. Too often, conventional weapons are inadequately stored and protected. This present grave risk to American military bases, embassy compounds, and even targets within the United States. We must develop a response that is commensurate with the threat. I am offering these two bills now, during the November session, so that the administration, Congress, and the public can begin an examination of their merits. I will reintroduce these bills when Congress reconvenes in January. I am hopeful for strong support that reflects the priority status of U.S. nonproliferation efforts.

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I rise to introduce two new bills to strengthen U.S. nonproliferation efforts. One of these is a new Conventional Arms Threat Reduction Act. The other is the fourth installment of the Nunn-Lugar legislation, the nonproliferation program that Sam Nunn and I sponsored in 1991. In that year, Sam Nunn and I authored the Soviet Nuclear Threat Reduction or Nunn-Lugar Act, which established the Cooperative Threat Reduction Program. That program has provided U.S. funding and expertise to help the former Soviet Union safeguard and dismantle their enormous stockpiles of nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons, means of delivery and related materials. In 1997, Senator Nunn and I were joined by Senator Domenici in introducing the Defense Against Weapons of Mass Destruction Act, which expanded Nunn-Lugar authorities in the former Soviet Union and provided WMD expertise to first responders in American cities. In 2003, Congress adopted the Nunn-Lugar Expansion Act, which authorized the Nunn-Lugar program to operate outside the former Soviet Union to address proliferation threats. The bill that I am introducing today would strengthen the Nunn-Lugar program and other nonproliferation efforts and provide them with greater flexibility to address emerging threats. To date, the Nunn-Lugar program has deactivated or destroyed: 6,462 nuclear warheads; 550 ICBMs; 469 ICBM silos; 13 ICBM mobile missile launchers; 135 bombers; 733 nuclear air-to-surface missiles; 408 submarine missile launchers; 530 submarine launched missiles; 27 nuclear submarines; and 194 nuclear test tunnels. The Nunn-Lugar program also facilitated the removal of all nuclear weapons from Ukraine, Belarus, and Kazakhstan. After the fall of the Soviet Union, these three nations emerged as the third, fourth, and eighth largest nuclear powers in the world. Today, all three are nuclear-weapons-free as a result of cooperative efforts under the Nunn- Lugar program. In addition, Nunn-Lugar is the primary tool through which the United States is working with Russian authorities to identify, safeguard, and destroy Russia's massive chemical and biological warfare capacity. These successes were never a foregone conclusion. Today, even after more than 12 years, creativity and constant vigilance are required to ensure that the Nunn-Lugar program is not encumbered by bureaucratic obstacles or undercut by political disagreements. I have devoted much time and effort to overseeing and accelerating the Nunn-Lugar program. Uncounted individuals of great dedication serving on the ground in the former Soviet Union and in our Government have made this program work. Nevertheless, from the beginning, we have encountered resistance to the Nunn-Lugar concept in both the United States and Russia. In our own country, opposition often has been motivated by false perceptions that Nunn-Lugar money is foreign assistance or by beliefs that Defense Department funds should only be spent on troops, weapons, or other war-fighting capabilities. Until recently, we also faced a general disinterest in nonproliferation that made gaining support for Nunn-Lugar funding and activities an annual struggle. The attacks of September 11 changed the political discourse on this subject. We have turned a corner--the public, the media, and political candidates are paying more attention now. In a remarkable moment in the first Presidential debate, both President Bush and Senator Kerry agree that the number one national security threat facing the United States was the prospect that weapons of mass destruction could fall into the hands of terrorists. The 9/11 Commission weighed in with another important endorsement of the Nunn-Lugar program, saying that ``Preventing the proliferation of [weapons of mass destruction] warrants a maximum effort--by strengthening counterproliferation efforts, expanding the Proliferation Security Initiative, and supporting the Cooperative Threat Reduction Program.'' the report went on to say that ``Nunn-Lugar . . . is now in need of expansion, improvement, and resources.'' The first bill that I am introducing today is ``The Nunn-Lugar Cooperative Threat Reduction Act of 2004.'' It would underscore the bipartisan consensus on Nunn-Lugar by streamlining and accelerating Nunn-Lugar implementation. It would grant more flexibility to the President and the Secretary of Defense to undertake non-proliferation projects outside the former Soviet Union. It also would eliminate Congressionally imposed conditions on Nunn-Lugar assistance that in the past have force the suspension of time-sensitive nonproliferation projects. The purpose of the bill is to reduce bureaucratic red tape and friction within our Government that hinder effective responses to nonproliferation opportunities and emergencies. For example, recently Albania appealed for help in destroying 16 tons of chemical agent left over from the cold war. In August, I visited this remote storage facility, the location of which still remains classified. Nunn-Lugar officials are working closely with Albanian leaders to destroy this dangerous stockpile. But the experience also is illustrative of the need to reduce bureaucratic delays. The package of documents to be reviewed by the President took some 11 weeks to be finalized and readied for President Bush. From beginning to end, the bureaucratic process to authorize dismantlement of chemical weapons in Albania took more than 3 months. Fortunately, the situation in Albania was not a crisis, but we may not be able to afford these timelines in future nonproliferation emergencies. The second piece of legislation that I am introducing is the ``Conventional Arms Threat Reduction Act of 2004'' or ``CATRA.'' This legislation is modeled on the original Nunn-Lugar Act. Its purpose is to provide the Department of State with a focused response to the threat posed by vulnerable stockpiles of conventional weapons around the world, including tactical missiles and man portable air defense systems, or MANPADS. Such missiles and other weapons systems could be used by terrorists to attack commercial and military targets, and U.S. facilities here at home and abroad. Reports suggest that Al Qaeda has attempted to acquire these kinds of weapons. In addition, unsecured conventional weapons stockpiles are a major obstacle to peace, reconstruction, and economic development in regions suffering from instability. My bill declares it to be the policy of the United States to seek out surplus and unguarded stocks of conventional armaments, including small arms, light weapons, MANPADS, and tactical missile systems for elimination. It authorizes the Department of State to carry out an accelerated global effort to destroy such weapons and to cooperate with allies and international organizations when possible. The Secretary of State is charged with devising a strategy for prioritizing, on a country- by-country basis, the obligation of funds in a global program of conventional arms elimination. Lastly, the Secretary is required to unify program planning, coordination, and implementation of the strategy into one office at the State Department. The bill also authorizes a budget increase commensurate with the risk posed by these weapons. The Department of State has been working to address the threats posed by conventional weapons. But in my judgment, the current funding allocation and organizational structure are not up to the task. Only about $6 million was devoted to destroying small arms and light weapons during fiscal years 2003 and 2004. We need more focus on this problem and additional funding to take advantage of opportunities to secure vulnerable stockpiles from proliferation, theft, or diversion. In August, I visited Albania, Ukraine, and Georgia. Each of these countries has large stockpiles of MANPADS and tactical missile systems and each has requested U.S. assistance to destroy them. On August 27, I stood in a remote Albanian military storage facility as the base commander unloaded a fully functioning MANPAD from its crate and readied it for use. This storage site contained 70 MANPADS that could have been used to attack an American commercial aircraft. Fortunately, the MANPADS that I saw that day were destroyed on September 2, but there are many more like them throughout the world. Too often, conventional weapons are inadequately stored and protected. This present grave risk to American military bases, embassy compounds, and even targets within the United States. We must develop a response that is commensurate with the threat. I am offering these two bills now, during the November session, so that the administration, Congress, and the public can begin an examination of their merits. I will reintroduce these bills when Congress reconvenes in January. I am hopeful for strong support that reflects the priority status of U.S. nonproliferation efforts.

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, while I support Senate passage of H.R. 4200, the Ronald W. Reagan National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005, and will not object to its passage, I am nevertheless concerned with language appearing in section 1225, ``Bilateral Exchanges and Trade in Defense Articles and Defense Services Between the United States and the United Kingdom and Australia.'' My concerns are shared by the ranking Democratic member of the Foreign Relations Committee, Senator Biden. We maintain an amicable and beneficial working relationship between the Foreign Relations and Armed Services Committees. In many years past, we opposed efforts by the Armed Services Committee to legislate on matters under our Committee's unique jurisdiction. Last June, we offered an amendment to the defense authorization bill because we understood that our own authorization bill would not proceed, and that the Senate Armed Services Committee supported all of the provisions we offered. We also sought to provide a response to certain provisions in the House defense authorization bill. The Chairman of the Armed Services Committee, Senator Warner, introduced Senate Amendment 3429 to S. 2400, the Senate version of the defense authorization bill, on June 7, 2004. This amendment was identical to language in our committee's bill that provided exceptions to the requirements in subsection (j) of section 38 of the Arms Export Control Act regarding the content of any bilateral agreement that would waive International Traffic in Arms Regulations--the ITAR, 22 CFR 120- 130--export license requirements for transfers of defense items or defense services to the United Kingdom and Australia. This legislation would have, in the case of the agreement with the Government of Australia, excepted the agreement from section 38(j)(2)(A) and, in the case of the agreement with the Government of the United Kingdom, excepted that agreement from the requirements of section 38 (j)(1)(A)(ii), (2)(A)(i), and (2)(A)(ii). The administration supported that language, and so did Senator Warner when he offered our language on his bill. The issue of the ITAR exemption agreements is a complex and important topic and, unfortunately, has become a major irritant in our special relationship with the United Kingdom. Perhaps more unfortunately, the bill the Senate will pass today will include not our language but rather language that may be prejudicial to U.S. interests on several grounds. First, the bill no longer provides the exceptions we sought. Enactment of this provision may therefore make any future efforts to obtain such statutory exceptions for these most important allies all the more difficult. The Senate will now have effectively endorsed the House position. This may well harm our bilateral relationship with the United Kingdom. Second, the language of section 1225(b) states: ``The Secretary of State shall ensure that any license application submitted for the export of defense articles or defense services to Australia or the United Kingdom is expeditiously processed by the Department of State, in consultation with the Department of Defense, without referral to any other Federal department or agency, except where the item is classified or exceptional circumstances apply.'' This language could do great harm to our government's ability to provide necessary and complete interagency review of munitions license applications. The phrase ``without referral to any other Federal department or agency'' is new law, and it far exceeds what wisdom would dictate. Under this language, the Departments of Justice and Homeland Security would not be allowed to review any case not involving classified defense items, unless it met an ``exceptional circumstances'' standard. The vast majority of defense exports to the United Kingdom and Australia that are governed under the ITAR are not classified items, and while the Foreign Relations Committee supports expeditious consideration of munitions license applications for these allies, we are concerned by provisions that could deny our government the ability to effectively staff and review license applications. This concern is heightened by the fact that the provisions of section 1225 apply to all arms exports to the United Kingdom and Australia, irrespective of end-user. The bilateral agreements negotiated with the United Kingdom and Australia take a different approach. They afford relief from export license requirements for certain unclassified exports, rather than merely expedited processing, but they also are limited in their application of a waiver to a finite group of U.S.-approved end-users. That limit is a sensible accommodation of U.S. national security concerns, and it is difficult to understand why the National Defense Authorization Act conferees decided to ignore it. I fully expect that the Foreign Relations Committee and the House International Relations Committee will revisit this issue next year in an effort to correct the failings of the measure that is now before us. Section 133

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I rise to introduce the Assistance for Orphans and Other Vulnerable Children in Developing Countries Act of 2004. The unprecedented AIDS orphan crisis in sub-Saharan Africa has profound implications for political stability, development, and human welfare that extend far beyond the region. Sub-Saharan African nations stand to lose generations of educated and trained professionals who can contribute meaningfully to their countries' development. Orphaned children, many of whom are homeless, are more likely to resort to prostitution and other criminal behavior to survive. Most frighteningly, these uneducated, poorly socialized, and stigmatized young adults are extremely vulnerable to being recruited into criminal gangs, rebel groups, or extremist organizations that offer shelter and food and act as ``surrogate'' families. It is imperative that the international community respond to this crisis that threatens stability within individual countries, the region, and around the world. An estimated 110 million orphans live in sub-Saharan Africa, Asia, Latin America, and the Caribbean. The HIV/AIDS pandemic is rapidly expanding the orphan population. Currently an estimated 14 million children have been orphaned by AIDS, most of whom live in sub-Saharan Africa. This number is projected to soar to more than 25 million by 2010. The pandemic is orphaning generations of African children and is compromising the overall development prospects of their countries. Most orphans in the developing world live in extremely disadvantaged circumstances. Poor communities in the developing world struggle to meet the basic food, clothing, health care, and educational needs of orphans. Experts recommend supporting community-based organizations to assist these children. Such an approach enables the children to remain connected to their communities, traditionals, rituals, and extended families. My bill seeks to improve assistance to orphans and other vulnerable children in developing countries. It would require the United States Government to develop a comprehensive strategy for providing such assistance and would authorize the President to support community-based organizations that provide basic care for orphans and vulnerable children. Orphans are less likely to be in school, and more likely to be working full time. Yet only education can help children acquire the knowledge and develop the skills they need to build a better future. Studies have shown that school food programs provide an incentive for children to stay in school. School meals provide basic nutrition to children who otherwise do not have access to reliable food. For many children, the primary barrier to an education is the expense of school fees, uniforms, supplies, and other costs. My bill aims to improve enrollment and access to primary school education by supporting programs that reduce the negative impact of school fees and other expenses. It also would affirm our commitment to international school lunch programs. Many children who lose one or both parents often face difficulty in asserting their inheritance rights. Even when the inheritance rights of women and children are spelled out in law, such rights are difficult to claim and are seldom enforced. In many countries it is difficult or impossible for a widow--even if she has small children--to claim property after the death of her husband. This often leaves the most vulnerable children impoverished and homeless. My bill seeks to support programs that protect the inheritance rights of orphans and widows with children. The AIDS orphan crisis in sub-Saharan Africa has implications for political stability, development, and human welfare that extend far beyond the region, affecting governments and people worldwide. Every 14 seconds another child is orphaned by AIDS. Turning the tide on this crisis will require a coordinated, comprehensive, and swift response. I am hopeful that Senators will join me in backing this legislation, and I ask consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I rise to introduce the Assistance for Orphans and Other Vulnerable Children in Developing Countries Act of 2004. The unprecedented AIDS orphan crisis in sub-Saharan Africa has profound implications for political stability, development, and human welfare that extend far beyond the region. Sub-Saharan African nations stand to lose generations of educated and trained professionals who can contribute meaningfully to their countries' development. Orphaned children, many of whom are homeless, are more likely to resort to prostitution and other criminal behavior to survive. Most frighteningly, these uneducated, poorly socialized, and stigmatized young adults are extremely vulnerable to being recruited into criminal gangs, rebel groups, or extremist organizations that offer shelter and food and act as ``surrogate'' families. It is imperative that the international community respond to this crisis that threatens stability within individual countries, the region, and around the world. An estimated 110 million orphans live in sub-Saharan Africa, Asia, Latin America, and the Caribbean. The HIV/AIDS pandemic is rapidly expanding the orphan population. Currently an estimated 14 million children have been orphaned by AIDS, most of whom live in sub-Saharan Africa. This number is projected to soar to more than 25 million by 2010. The pandemic is orphaning generations of African children and is compromising the overall development prospects of their countries. Most orphans in the developing world live in extremely disadvantaged circumstances. Poor communities in the developing world struggle to meet the basic food, clothing, health care, and educational needs of orphans. Experts recommend supporting community-based organizations to assist these children. Such an approach enables the children to remain connected to their communities, traditionals, rituals, and extended families. My bill seeks to improve assistance to orphans and other vulnerable children in developing countries. It would require the United States Government to develop a comprehensive strategy for providing such assistance and would authorize the President to support community-based organizations that provide basic care for orphans and vulnerable children. Orphans are less likely to be in school, and more likely to be working full time. Yet only education can help children acquire the knowledge and develop the skills they need to build a better future. Studies have shown that school food programs provide an incentive for children to stay in school. School meals provide basic nutrition to children who otherwise do not have access to reliable food. For many children, the primary barrier to an education is the expense of school fees, uniforms, supplies, and other costs. My bill aims to improve enrollment and access to primary school education by supporting programs that reduce the negative impact of school fees and other expenses. It also would affirm our commitment to international school lunch programs. Many children who lose one or both parents often face difficulty in asserting their inheritance rights. Even when the inheritance rights of women and children are spelled out in law, such rights are difficult to claim and are seldom enforced. In many countries it is difficult or impossible for a widow--even if she has small children--to claim property after the death of her husband. This often leaves the most vulnerable children impoverished and homeless. My bill seeks to support programs that protect the inheritance rights of orphans and widows with children. The AIDS orphan crisis in sub-Saharan Africa has implications for political stability, development, and human welfare that extend far beyond the region, affecting governments and people worldwide. Every 14 seconds another child is orphaned by AIDS. Turning the tide on this crisis will require a coordinated, comprehensive, and swift response. I am hopeful that Senators will join me in backing this legislation, and I ask consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I rise today to call to the attention of my colleagues a signal anniversary that has occurred in my home State of Indiana, the 150th anniversary of the YMCA of Greater Indianapolis. Since 1854, the YMCA of Greater Indianapolis has been committed not only to providing Hoosiers with an outlet for social, mental, and physical development, but also has maintained a consistent adherence to community service. As one of the first 50 YMCAs chartered in North America, this institution, whose humble beginnings originated in the basement of the Second Presbyterian Church on Monument Circle, has grown to tremendous proportions. Currently serving more than 140,000 Hoosiers, the YMCA of Greater Indianapolis has partnered with over 120 churches, schools and other community groups to reach out to both the urban community along with the surrounding counties. In 2003, 4,688 volunteers, under the direction of the YMCA of Greater Indianapolis, donated their valuable time and energy to provide nearly 98,000 hours of service. Additionally, YMCA branches in Indianapolis presented almost $4 million for scholarships, program subsidies and varied community services. I am pleased to take a moment to acknowledge the outstanding efforts the YMCA of Greater Indianapolis has afforded for the past century and a half, and I look forward to their future leadership in building stronger families and a stronger community.

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I rise today in order to express my support for the Nonprofit Athletic Organization Protection Act of 2004. Our country has invested a tremendous number of resources in providing our children with the ability to play sports. In every town in America, you will find boys and girls playing America's most popular sports: baseball, soccer, football and, of course, basketball. A recent study by the Sporting Goods Manufacturers Association showed that in 2000 at least 36 million American children played on at least one team sport. Of those 36 million, 26 million children between the ages of 6- 17, played on an organized team in an organized league. A study by Statistical Research, Inc. for the Amateur Athletic Foundation and ESPN found that 94 percent of American children play some sport during the year. The ability for children to participate in sporting events provides our society many benefits that government cannot provide. Studies have shown that these benefits include betterment to a child's health, academic performance, social development and safety. It is no wonder that the most obvious benefit of organized sports is physical fitness. The National Institute of Health Care Maintenance has identified physical activity such as sports as a key factor in the maintenance of a healthy body. Lack of physical activity, along with unhealthy eating habits, has been identified as the leading cause of obesity in children. The center notes: ``Physical activity provides numerous mental and physical benefits to health, including reduction in the risk of premature mortality, cardiovascular diseases, hypertension, diabetes, depression, and cancers.'' The Washington Times reported on May 14th of this year that a Cooper Institute for Aerobics Research study indicated, ``Low fitness outranks fatness as a risk factor for mortality.'' By encouraging our children to participate in organized sports, we increase physical fitness and fight obesity. A second benefit in the participation of organized sports is an increase in academic performance. The National Institute of Health Care Maintenance has highlighted ``a recent largescale analysis reported by the California Department of Education [has shown] that the level of physical fitness attained by students was directly related to their performance on standardized achievement measures.'' When we encourage our children to participate in organized sports, we increase the ability for them to achieve academically. A third benefit for young people who participate in organized sports is that they learn positive social development. Organized sports teach values of teamwork, fair play, and friendly competition. Success in organized sports is also a vital self-esteem builder in many children. These three benefits have been widely discussed on the floor of the Senate and we have acted to implement several programs designed to reduce obesity and increase fitness, educational standards and the social well-being of our children. The fourth benefit to participation in organized youth sports, providing a safe place to play, is a topic that has not received as much attention as the first three. Nonetheless, it is no less important. Fewer kids are simply going outside to play, due to the attraction of TV, video games, and the Internet, combined with parents' safety concerns about letting children run around outside unsupervised. As a result, organized sports teams are an increasingly important source of safe physical activity in children. The American Academy of Pediatrics has stated, ``In contrast to unstructured or free play, participation in organized sports provides a greater opportunity to develop rules specifically designed for health and safety.'' One primary reason why organized sports provide such an opportunity for safe play is that non-profit, volunteer organizations establish rules to provide a safe place to play. These organizations are made up of professional people who are in the business of providing children a fun and safe avenue for athletic exercise. Organizations like the Boys and Girls Club, the National Council of Youth Sports, the National Federation of State High School Associations and others exist largely to establish rules in order to minimize the risk of injury our children face while participating in sports. No matter how well these organizations perform their work, however, boys and girls will be injured. Over the last several years, more and more of these rule making bodies have become targets for lawsuits seeking to prove that the rule maker was negligent in making the rules of play. These lawsuits claim that had a different rule been in place, the injury would not have happened. Indeed, these suits place rule makers into a Catch-22. A child can be injured in almost any situation no matter how a rule is written. The result has been to have more and more lawsuits. As a consequence, the insurance premiums of these organizations have risen dramatically over the past several years. In his testimony before the House Judiciary Committee this past July, Robert Kanaby the Executive Director of the National Federation of State High School Associations testified that: ``Over the last three years, the annual liability insurance premiums for the National High School Federation have increased three-fold to about $1,000,000. We have been advised by experts that given our claims experience and the reluctance of insurers to offer such coverage to an organization `serving 7,000,000 potential claimants,' the premiums will likely increase significantly in years to come. Since we operate on a total budget of about $9,000,000, such an increase would be, to put it mildly, problematical.'' The costs have increased to the point where it is possible that these organizations will cease from providing age appropriate rules and the safety of youth sports will decline. Because of this problem, I am introducing today the Nonprofit Athletic Organization Protection Act of 2004. This legislation will eliminate lawsuits based on claims that a non-profit rulemaking body is liable for the physical injury when the rule was made by a properly licensed rulemaking body that has acted within the scope of its authority. Lawsuits may be maintained if the rule maker was grossly negligent or engaged in criminal or reckless misconduct. This reasonable legislation will help sports rule makers to do their job. If we do not pass this legislation, it is likely that rule makers will eventually close their doors since they will be unable to afford the insurance needed to provide a safe sporting environment. No one who has participated in the debate surrounding this problem has disagreed that the current lawsuit culture needs reform. Instead, two concerns have arisen regarding the scope of the legislative remedy: first, that the remedy was overly broad preventing law suits against rule makers on other issues; second, that this legislation would prevent lawsuits against rule makers who are negligent. To remedy these concerns, the legislation introduced today contains a provision that explicitly says that lawsuits involving ``antitrust, labor, environmental, defamation, tortuous interference of contract law or civil rights law, or any other federal, state, or local law providing protection from discrimination'' are not barred by this bill. The additional provision would also provide no legal immunity from lawsuit if the rule maker has authority to determine coach eligibility. Additionally, the PROTECT Act passed last year, we authorized a pilot program that enabled the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children to do background checks on coaches who participate in certain programs. This program has been successful, weeding out many who would potentially harm our children. So much so that last Friday, by unanimous consent, Senators Hatch and Biden shepherded through an extension of this program for an additional 18 months with an aim of eventually making this program permanent. As my colleagues know, I am a runner. I enjoy the activity and the positive effect that running and athletics have played in my life. I would hope that my nine grandchildren will be able to have an opportunity to participate in organized sports and that lawsuits against rule makers for allegedly faulty rules will not prevent these organizations from functioning properly. I encourage my colleagues to support passage of this legislation.

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I rise today in order to express my support for the Nonprofit Athletic Organization Protection Act of 2004. Our country has invested a tremendous number of resources in providing our children with the ability to play sports. In every town in America, you will find boys and girls playing America's most popular sports: baseball, soccer, football and, of course, basketball. A recent study by the Sporting Goods Manufacturers Association showed that in 2000 at least 36 million American children played on at least one team sport. Of those 36 million, 26 million children between the ages of 6- 17, played on an organized team in an organized league. A study by Statistical Research, Inc. for the Amateur Athletic Foundation and ESPN found that 94 percent of American children play some sport during the year. The ability for children to participate in sporting events provides our society many benefits that government cannot provide. Studies have shown that these benefits include betterment to a child's health, academic performance, social development and safety. It is no wonder that the most obvious benefit of organized sports is physical fitness. The National Institute of Health Care Maintenance has identified physical activity such as sports as a key factor in the maintenance of a healthy body. Lack of physical activity, along with unhealthy eating habits, has been identified as the leading cause of obesity in children. The center notes: ``Physical activity provides numerous mental and physical benefits to health, including reduction in the risk of premature mortality, cardiovascular diseases, hypertension, diabetes, depression, and cancers.'' The Washington Times reported on May 14th of this year that a Cooper Institute for Aerobics Research study indicated, ``Low fitness outranks fatness as a risk factor for mortality.'' By encouraging our children to participate in organized sports, we increase physical fitness and fight obesity. A second benefit in the participation of organized sports is an increase in academic performance. The National Institute of Health Care Maintenance has highlighted ``a recent largescale analysis reported by the California Department of Education [has shown] that the level of physical fitness attained by students was directly related to their performance on standardized achievement measures.'' When we encourage our children to participate in organized sports, we increase the ability for them to achieve academically. A third benefit for young people who participate in organized sports is that they learn positive social development. Organized sports teach values of teamwork, fair play, and friendly competition. Success in organized sports is also a vital self-esteem builder in many children. These three benefits have been widely discussed on the floor of the Senate and we have acted to implement several programs designed to reduce obesity and increase fitness, educational standards and the social well-being of our children. The fourth benefit to participation in organized youth sports, providing a safe place to play, is a topic that has not received as much attention as the first three. Nonetheless, it is no less important. Fewer kids are simply going outside to play, due to the attraction of TV, video games, and the Internet, combined with parents' safety concerns about letting children run around outside unsupervised. As a result, organized sports teams are an increasingly important source of safe physical activity in children. The American Academy of Pediatrics has stated, ``In contrast to unstructured or free play, participation in organized sports provides a greater opportunity to develop rules specifically designed for health and safety.'' One primary reason why organized sports provide such an opportunity for safe play is that non-profit, volunteer organizations establish rules to provide a safe place to play. These organizations are made up of professional people who are in the business of providing children a fun and safe avenue for athletic exercise. Organizations like the Boys and Girls Club, the National Council of Youth Sports, the National Federation of State High School Associations and others exist largely to establish rules in order to minimize the risk of injury our children face while participating in sports. No matter how well these organizations perform their work, however, boys and girls will be injured. Over the last several years, more and more of these rule making bodies have become targets for lawsuits seeking to prove that the rule maker was negligent in making the rules of play. These lawsuits claim that had a different rule been in place, the injury would not have happened. Indeed, these suits place rule makers into a Catch-22. A child can be injured in almost any situation no matter how a rule is written. The result has been to have more and more lawsuits. As a consequence, the insurance premiums of these organizations have risen dramatically over the past several years. In his testimony before the House Judiciary Committee this past July, Robert Kanaby the Executive Director of the National Federation of State High School Associations testified that: ``Over the last three years, the annual liability insurance premiums for the National High School Federation have increased three-fold to about $1,000,000. We have been advised by experts that given our claims experience and the reluctance of insurers to offer such coverage to an organization `serving 7,000,000 potential claimants,' the premiums will likely increase significantly in years to come. Since we operate on a total budget of about $9,000,000, such an increase would be, to put it mildly, problematical.'' The costs have increased to the point where it is possible that these organizations will cease from providing age appropriate rules and the safety of youth sports will decline. Because of this problem, I am introducing today the Nonprofit Athletic Organization Protection Act of 2004. This legislation will eliminate lawsuits based on claims that a non-profit rulemaking body is liable for the physical injury when the rule was made by a properly licensed rulemaking body that has acted within the scope of its authority. Lawsuits may be maintained if the rule maker was grossly negligent or engaged in criminal or reckless misconduct. This reasonable legislation will help sports rule makers to do their job. If we do not pass this legislation, it is likely that rule makers will eventually close their doors since they will be unable to afford the insurance needed to provide a safe sporting environment. No one who has participated in the debate surrounding this problem has disagreed that the current lawsuit culture needs reform. Instead, two concerns have arisen regarding the scope of the legislative remedy: first, that the remedy was overly broad preventing law suits against rule makers on other issues; second, that this legislation would prevent lawsuits against rule makers who are negligent. To remedy these concerns, the legislation introduced today contains a provision that explicitly says that lawsuits involving ``antitrust, labor, environmental, defamation, tortuous interference of contract law or civil rights law, or any other federal, state, or local law providing protection from discrimination'' are not barred by this bill. The additional provision would also provide no legal immunity from lawsuit if the rule maker has authority to determine coach eligibility. Additionally, the PROTECT Act passed last year, we authorized a pilot program that enabled the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children to do background checks on coaches who participate in certain programs. This program has been successful, weeding out many who would potentially harm our children. So much so that last Friday, by unanimous consent, Senators Hatch and Biden shepherded through an extension of this program for an additional 18 months with an aim of eventually making this program permanent. As my colleagues know, I am a runner. I enjoy the activity and the positive effect that running and athletics have played in my life. I would hope that my nine grandchildren will be able to have an opportunity to participate in organized sports and that lawsuits against rule makers for allegedly faulty rules will not prevent these organizations from functioning properly. I encourage my colleagues to support passage of this legislation.

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, today I submit an amendment in the form of a substitute to S. 2781. I want to thank the majority leader for his support of our efforts to authorize assistance for the Darfur crisis and a final peace in Sudan. I also want to take this opportunity to express my appreciation to Senator Biden for his cooperation in introducing the bill, as well as in refining its language. Our Committee recently held a historic hearing on Sudan. In that hearing Secretary Powell declared Sudan and the Janjaweed responsible for genocide. This important event reinforced congressional concern for African affairs and pursuing peace in Sudan. Senator Biden and I have improved S. 2781 in the pending amendment by clarifying several elements. These improvements include an update to language that directly reflects the comments of Secretary Powell in his declaration of genocide in the Sudan. Further, the amendment clarifies that neither of the regions administered by the Government of Sudan nor the SPLM will be authorized to receive assistance unless the President certifies that they are complying with specific requirements. Finally, upon receipt of the testimony and reports from Secretary Powell and the State Department, as well as the recent eyewitness account of the USAID Administrator Natsios, we want to redouble our commitment to support the African Union Mission in Sudan. The value of the reports from the small African Union Observer Force now in Darfur is evident and the international community must recognize its own responsibility in enabling the African Union to continue in this assertive and positive role. In my view the bill states that the United States should provide, to the extent practicable, all assistance necessary to ensure the African Union Mission in Sudan is capable of carrying out its mandate. I urge my colleagues to support this important legislative initiative.

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Health Promotion FIRST (Funding Integrated Research, Synthesis and Training) Act, legislation to provide the foundation for solid planning and a scientific base for health promotion. Between one half and two-thirds of premature deaths in the United States and much of our health care costs are caused by just three risk factors: poor diet, physical inactivity, and tobacco. Recent news reports have highlighted the alarming increase in obesity across the Nation. In the last 10 years, obesity rates have increased by more than 60 percent among adults--with approximately 59 million adults considered obese today. We also know that medical costs are directly related to lifestyle risk factors. The September 2000 issue of the American Journal of Health Promotion reported that approximately 25 percent of all employer medical costs are caused by lifestyle factors. Emerging research is showing the value may be closer to 50 percent today. Medical care costs are reaching crisis levels. Some major employers are actively exploring discontinuing medical insurance coverage if costs are not controlled. The Federal Government has the same cost problems with its own employees, and the cost to Medicare of lifestyle- related diseases will only increase as Baby Boomers retire, and more and more beneficiaries are diagnosed with lifestyle-related illnesses. An obvious first step to addressing our health and medical cost problems is to help people stay healthy. The good news is that both the public and private sectors are starting to do more in the area of health prevention and health promotion. For instance, the Medicare Modernization Act of 2003 included several new prevention initiatives for Medicare beneficiaries. Also in recent years Congress and the Administration have worked together to pass numerous pieces of legislation to establish grants to provide health services for improved nutrition, increased physical activity, and obesity prevention. However, despite the success of many health promotion programs, there is a quality gap between the best programs and typical programs. This occurs because most professionals are not aware of the best practice methods. Furthermore, even the best programs reach a small percentage of the population and do poorly in creating lasting change. The Health Promotion FIRST Act will build the foundation for a stable coordinated strategy to develop the basic and applied science of health promotion, synthesize research results and disseminate findings to researchers, practitioners and policy makers. The bill directs the Department of Health and Human Services to develop strategic plans focusing on the following: how to develop the basic and applied science of health promotion; how to best utilize the authority and resources of the Department of Health and Human Services and other federal agencies to integrate health promotion concepts into health care and other elements of society; how to synthesize health promotion research into practical guidelines that can be easily disseminated and; how to foster a strong health workforce for health promotion activities. Additional funding is also provided for the Centers for Disease Control and the National Institutes of Health to augment current activities related to health promotion research and dissemination. We have made a good start, at the Federal level, in addressing the needs of health promotion. However, we need to go further. I believe this legislation will serve as a good basis for Congress and the administration to take the next step in developing health promotion programs for the next decade.

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Health Promotion FIRST (Funding Integrated Research, Synthesis and Training) Act, legislation to provide the foundation for solid planning and a scientific base for health promotion. Between one half and two-thirds of premature deaths in the United States and much of our health care costs are caused by just three risk factors: poor diet, physical inactivity, and tobacco. Recent news reports have highlighted the alarming increase in obesity across the Nation. In the last 10 years, obesity rates have increased by more than 60 percent among adults--with approximately 59 million adults considered obese today. We also know that medical costs are directly related to lifestyle risk factors. The September 2000 issue of the American Journal of Health Promotion reported that approximately 25 percent of all employer medical costs are caused by lifestyle factors. Emerging research is showing the value may be closer to 50 percent today. Medical care costs are reaching crisis levels. Some major employers are actively exploring discontinuing medical insurance coverage if costs are not controlled. The Federal Government has the same cost problems with its own employees, and the cost to Medicare of lifestyle- related diseases will only increase as Baby Boomers retire, and more and more beneficiaries are diagnosed with lifestyle-related illnesses. An obvious first step to addressing our health and medical cost problems is to help people stay healthy. The good news is that both the public and private sectors are starting to do more in the area of health prevention and health promotion. For instance, the Medicare Modernization Act of 2003 included several new prevention initiatives for Medicare beneficiaries. Also in recent years Congress and the Administration have worked together to pass numerous pieces of legislation to establish grants to provide health services for improved nutrition, increased physical activity, and obesity prevention. However, despite the success of many health promotion programs, there is a quality gap between the best programs and typical programs. This occurs because most professionals are not aware of the best practice methods. Furthermore, even the best programs reach a small percentage of the population and do poorly in creating lasting change. The Health Promotion FIRST Act will build the foundation for a stable coordinated strategy to develop the basic and applied science of health promotion, synthesize research results and disseminate findings to researchers, practitioners and policy makers. The bill directs the Department of Health and Human Services to develop strategic plans focusing on the following: how to develop the basic and applied science of health promotion; how to best utilize the authority and resources of the Department of Health and Human Services and other federal agencies to integrate health promotion concepts into health care and other elements of society; how to synthesize health promotion research into practical guidelines that can be easily disseminated and; how to foster a strong health workforce for health promotion activities. Additional funding is also provided for the Centers for Disease Control and the National Institutes of Health to augment current activities related to health promotion research and dissemination. We have made a good start, at the Federal level, in addressing the needs of health promotion. However, we need to go further. I believe this legislation will serve as a good basis for Congress and the administration to take the next step in developing health promotion programs for the next decade.

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I join with Senator Biden today to introduce legislation reauthorizing the Tropical Forest Conservation Act of 1998 (TFCA) through fiscal year 2007. Since its creation, the TFCA has helped conserve 40 million acres of tropical forests in the world. The current TFCA authorization, P.L. 107-26, expires at the end of fiscal year 2004. The House of Representatives has already voted in favor of H.R. 4654, which is identical to the legislation we introduce today. We hope the Senate will be able to take speedy action on this important program. Senator Biden and I proposed TFCA in 1998 based on the 1991 Enterprise for Americas Initiative (EAI) that allows the President to restructure debt in exchange for conservation efforts in Latin America. The TFCA expanded on the EAI and allows protection of threatened tropical forests worldwide through ``debt-for-nature'' mechanisms. With TFCA, the State Department has reached agreements generating $70.4 million in long-term commitments for tropical forest conservation. In addition, private donors, including the Nature Conservancy, the World Wildlife Fund, the Wildlife Conservation Society and Conservation International, have contributed more than $5 million to TFCA swaps, leveraging U.S. Government funds. Seven TFCA agreements have been concluded to date in Bangladesh, El Salvador, Belize, Peru, the Philippines, Panama and Colombia. With the reauthorization of TFCA, the State Department will be able to complete negotiations with Jamaica and Sri Lanka, and pursue agreement with Guatemala, Ecuador, Paraguay, St. Vincent, Botswana, Costa Rica, the Dominican Republic, India, Indonesia, Brazil and Kenya. This legislation authorizes appropriations for debt reduction for eligible countries through fiscal year 2007 at $20,000,000 in fiscal year 2005 (as the President requested); $25,000,000 in fiscal year 2006; and $30,000,000 in fiscal year 2007. A new section authorizes that funds can be used for audits and evaluations of the program. In addition, an amendment allows for TFCA debt reduction agreements to redirect reduced principal payments for forest conservation activities. Current law allows only the redirection of reduced interest payments into forest conservation funds. The debt-for-nature mechanisms in the TFCA have proven to be an effective, market-oriented tool to leverage scarce funds available to international conservation. The host country places an amount in its tropical forest fund that typically exceeds the cost to the U.S. Government of the debt reduction agreement. In addition to forest conservation and debt relief, TFCA strengthens civil society in participating countries by creating local foundations to support small grants to nongovernmental organizations and local communities. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I join with Senator Biden today to introduce legislation reauthorizing the Tropical Forest Conservation Act of 1998 (TFCA) through fiscal year 2007. Since its creation, the TFCA has helped conserve 40 million acres of tropical forests in the world. The current TFCA authorization, P.L. 107-26, expires at the end of fiscal year 2004. The House of Representatives has already voted in favor of H.R. 4654, which is identical to the legislation we introduce today. We hope the Senate will be able to take speedy action on this important program. Senator Biden and I proposed TFCA in 1998 based on the 1991 Enterprise for Americas Initiative (EAI) that allows the President to restructure debt in exchange for conservation efforts in Latin America. The TFCA expanded on the EAI and allows protection of threatened tropical forests worldwide through ``debt-for-nature'' mechanisms. With TFCA, the State Department has reached agreements generating $70.4 million in long-term commitments for tropical forest conservation. In addition, private donors, including the Nature Conservancy, the World Wildlife Fund, the Wildlife Conservation Society and Conservation International, have contributed more than $5 million to TFCA swaps, leveraging U.S. Government funds. Seven TFCA agreements have been concluded to date in Bangladesh, El Salvador, Belize, Peru, the Philippines, Panama and Colombia. With the reauthorization of TFCA, the State Department will be able to complete negotiations with Jamaica and Sri Lanka, and pursue agreement with Guatemala, Ecuador, Paraguay, St. Vincent, Botswana, Costa Rica, the Dominican Republic, India, Indonesia, Brazil and Kenya. This legislation authorizes appropriations for debt reduction for eligible countries through fiscal year 2007 at $20,000,000 in fiscal year 2005 (as the President requested); $25,000,000 in fiscal year 2006; and $30,000,000 in fiscal year 2007. A new section authorizes that funds can be used for audits and evaluations of the program. In addition, an amendment allows for TFCA debt reduction agreements to redirect reduced principal payments for forest conservation activities. Current law allows only the redirection of reduced interest payments into forest conservation funds. The debt-for-nature mechanisms in the TFCA have proven to be an effective, market-oriented tool to leverage scarce funds available to international conservation. The host country places an amount in its tropical forest fund that typically exceeds the cost to the U.S. Government of the debt reduction agreement. In addition to forest conservation and debt relief, TFCA strengthens civil society in participating countries by creating local foundations to support small grants to nongovernmental organizations and local communities. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Comprehensive Peace in Sudan Act. This bill is intended to address both the immediate crisis in the Darfur region of Sudan and to support a comprehensive peace in all of that country. It would authorize $300 million to respond to the unfolding catastrophe in Darfur for the next fiscal year and to provide additional funds to begin reconstruction in Sudan upon the conclusion of a viable, comprehensive peace. Events in Darfur constitute a moral and humanitarian tragedy of incredible proportions. The people of the Darfur region of Sudan are experiencing the full force of an ethnic cleansing campaign by the Government of Sudan. Numerous credible reports by U.S. and U.N. officials indicate that the Sudanese Government has armed and employed a militia of Arab Sudanese, called Janjaweed, to join it in a coordinated effort to kill and rape Darfur inhabitants and systematically destroy homes, villages, and all means of subsistence. This campaign has killed tens of thousands of people and displaced 1.2 million African Sudanese of which 200,000 are now refugees in Chad. A second phase of this campaign may prove to have the most devastating effect through the onset of famine and disease--unless, the international community responds quickly. The United Nations is meeting significant obstacles to providing life-saving food, medicine, and shelter to the displaced Sudanese. The Sudanese Government has established bureaucratic and administrative obstacles to the provision of assistance. In addition, the international community has not provided adequate resources given the magnitude of the human suffering in Darfur. The United States has been pressing for a more vigorous response to this humanitarian crisis. This bill would support diplomatic efforts already underway and ensure a significant flow of funding. I am hopeful that Senators will join me in passing this bill quickly. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Comprehensive Peace in Sudan Act. This bill is intended to address both the immediate crisis in the Darfur region of Sudan and to support a comprehensive peace in all of that country. It would authorize $300 million to respond to the unfolding catastrophe in Darfur for the next fiscal year and to provide additional funds to begin reconstruction in Sudan upon the conclusion of a viable, comprehensive peace. Events in Darfur constitute a moral and humanitarian tragedy of incredible proportions. The people of the Darfur region of Sudan are experiencing the full force of an ethnic cleansing campaign by the Government of Sudan. Numerous credible reports by U.S. and U.N. officials indicate that the Sudanese Government has armed and employed a militia of Arab Sudanese, called Janjaweed, to join it in a coordinated effort to kill and rape Darfur inhabitants and systematically destroy homes, villages, and all means of subsistence. This campaign has killed tens of thousands of people and displaced 1.2 million African Sudanese of which 200,000 are now refugees in Chad. A second phase of this campaign may prove to have the most devastating effect through the onset of famine and disease--unless, the international community responds quickly. The United Nations is meeting significant obstacles to providing life-saving food, medicine, and shelter to the displaced Sudanese. The Sudanese Government has established bureaucratic and administrative obstacles to the provision of assistance. In addition, the international community has not provided adequate resources given the magnitude of the human suffering in Darfur. The United States has been pressing for a more vigorous response to this humanitarian crisis. This bill would support diplomatic efforts already underway and ensure a significant flow of funding. I am hopeful that Senators will join me in passing this bill quickly. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I pay heartfelt tribute to the Reverend Charles Williams, a visionary Hoosier friend who passed away yesterday at the age of 56. I have looked forward to visiting with Charles Williams for many years. His dynamic leadership was best exemplified through his work leading the Indiana Black Expo, Inc., a not-for-profit community service organization comprised of ten chapters throughout the State of Indiana. Since 1983, he has been an effective advocate of an expanding number of Indiana Black Expo programs. His accomplishments included founding the Circle City Classic football game, an annual event that raises funds for minority college scholarships. Most recently, Reverend Williams has worked diligently to inform men, especially African-American men, on the importance of prostate cancer screening. Afflicted with this terrible disease, he shared his personal testimony on struggles with prostate cancer in an effort to encourage other men to consider personal healthcare more seriously. The Indiana Black Expo was founded in 1970, while I served as Mayor of Indianapolis. Each year, the Indiana Black Expo hosts the Summer Celebration. Currently underway, this event is the longest-running cultural showcase of its kind nationwide. I look forward to visiting, once again, with thousands of attendees in Indianapolis this weekend. I am honored to have this opportunity to pay tribute to the life of Reverend Charles Williams. At this difficult time, my thoughts and prayers go out to his family and friends.

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I rise to submit a resolution expressing the Sense of the Senate on promoting initiatives to develop an HIV vaccine. The HIV/AIDS pandemic is unlike any disease in history and has profound implications for political stability, development, and human welfare. The sheer magnitude of the crisis is overwhelming. An estimated 40,000,000 people around the world live with HIV or AIDS, and nearly 8,500 people die every day from AIDS. Last year alone, more than 3,000,000 people died from AIDS. Every 14 seconds, a child loses a parent to AIDS. An estimated 14,000,000 children have lost one or both parents to AIDS, and this number is expected in increase to 25,000,000 by 2010. According to recent projections from the World Health Organization and the Joint United Nations Program on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS), if the pandemic spreads at this current rate, there will be 45,000,000 new infections by 2010 and nearly 70 million deaths by 2020. Sub- Saharan Africa has been hardest hit by the disease, with more than 75 percent of the people infected with HIV living in the region. The U.S. is leading global efforts to combat the pandemic through its $15 billion dollar Emergency Plan for AIDS relief and its commitment to the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria. But the human and economic toll of the HIV pandemic demands that these activities be complemented by accelerated efforts to develop an HIV vaccine. An HIV vaccine would prevent new HIV and AIDS cases, which could save millions of lives and dramatically reduce the negative social and economic consequences of the disease. Yet, HIV vaccine development is still not prominent on national or international public health agendas. Developing an HIV vaccine is particularly challenging because HIV is one of the most complicated viruses ever identified. In addition, many private sector biotechnology companies have not invested money and expertise in the search for an HIV vaccine. Developing an HIV vaccine, therefore, is unlikely to occur without a well-coordinated and focused global research effort. Recently, under President Bush's leadership, the Members of the Group of Eight Industrialized Nations (G-8), during their meeting at Sea Island, endorsed the establishment of a Global HIV Vaccine Enterprise. The Enterprise, an international alliance working to develop an HIV vaccine, would be modeled after the Human Gnome Project which brought together public and private sector researchers to map the human genetic code. Similarly, the HIV Vaccine Enterprise is intended to accelerate progress by promoting international public-private collaboration. It would coordinate the research efforts of scientists from around the globe to improve the chances of developing an HIV vaccine. President Bush also announced plans to establish a second HIV Vaccine Research and Development Center, in addition to the one at the U.S. National Institutes of Health. The new center will become a key component of the Global HIV Vaccine Enterprise. The International AIDS Vaccine Initiative (IAVI) has been instrumental in laying the groundwork for such an enterprise. The IAVI is an international organization that collaborates with developing countries, governments, and international agencies dedicated to accelerating the development of a vaccine to halt the AIDS epidemic. The IAVI, however, cannot accomplish this task alone. Here in the United States, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the Rockefeller Foundation have joined forces to help address the financial problems faced by small biotechnology companies. They founded BIO Ventures for Global Health to help small biotechnology companies address the problems they confront in developing new medical products for poor countries. The wider application of this model would greatly improve the development of vaccines and other medicines aimed at improving health in the developing world. I commend the President's leadership on this critically important issue. The G-8's endorsement of a Global HIV Vaccine Enterprise is a big step forward in the development of an HIV vaccine. My resolution acknowledges the President's and the G-8's actions towards this goal and urges them to continue to cooperate with other countries, particularly those hit hardest by the HIV/AIDS pandemic, to achieve this important objective.

Mr. LUGAR

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

Mr. LUGAR. Madam President, I yield myself as much time as I may require for this statement from the time allocated to our side. Madam President, today the Senate will have the opportunity to consider many nominations for diplomatic posts of some very talented Americans who have made themselves available for public service--some as a career, and others for temporary periods--and who have come before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in formal hearings, and whom the committee has sent to the floor for action by the Senate. It is my hope these nominations will be acted upon favorably today. It is important to our country that these ambassadors and representatives to various other international organizations be in place as rapidly as possible. In an often-changing and sometimes dangerous world, we need that leadership. Our committee has tried to act in an expeditious manner to provide a fair degree of certainty to Senators, and a confidence level that these are good nominees who will represent our country well. Prominent among those whom we recommend today is our former colleague, Senator John Danforth of Missouri. It is a great pleasure for me to address the nomination of Senator Danforth before the Senate now in this specific debate on his nomination. As a result of his three distinguished terms as a Senator from Missouri, he is well known to many Members of the Senate and to the Committee on Foreign Relations. It turns out that eight of us served with Senator Danforth in this body. We were able to identify ourselves during the hearing. I had the privilege of coming into the Senate with Senator Danforth after the election of 1976, sworn in early in January, and had the pleasure of serving with him throughout the 18 years of his tenure. After entering with Senator Danforth, as did Senator Paul Sarbanes of Maryland and Senator Orrin Hatch of Utah, in what was a large class of Senators--eight Democrats and eight Republicans coming in as new Senators from the election of 1976--those of us who had the privilege of serving with him can certainly attest to his integrity, his intellect, his sound judgment, and his good humor. President Bush has made a very wise choice, in my judgment, for an extremely important position. The Committee on Foreign Relations signaled its agreement by voting him out of committee unanimously last Tuesday. I will mention parenthetically that in a meeting at the White House this morning, President Bush asked specifically for consideration for the leadership on the part of those of us on both sides of the aisle to make certain we are represented at the United Nations as our now- Ambassador to the United Nations, Ambassador Negroponte, goes on to these very important responsibilities in setting up the new embassy in Iraq. The job before Senator Danforth is a daunting one that will require all of his talents and his experience. As the Security Council vote 2 weeks ago on Iraq demonstrated, critical decisions are being made at the United Nations that have a huge impact on the outcome in Iraq, on the welfare of our troops there, and on peace in the world. Success in Iraq is unlikely to be achieved without the active cooperation of many other nations, reinforced by the international legitimacy that can be secured and underlined at the United Nations. Beyond Iraq, that same week, the United Nations Security Council met to discuss sanctions on Liberia, the peacekeeping mission in Cypress, and weapons of mass destruction generally. Other United Nations bodies addressed in that same week issues as divergent as women's rights, the need for greater access to potable water in this world, efforts to expand freedom of expression, and the role that primary education plays in childhood development. The United Nations remains the focal point of our multilateral diplomacy on so many fronts. Being U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations requires one not only to deal with policies and politics in New York, it requires one to manage these same issues back here in Washington where many in Congress are sometimes skeptical of the United Nations procedures. Our U.N. Ambassador must be able to explain to Congress why it is important to pay our dues and to pay them on time, and why peacekeeping operations can benefit the United States. Every U.N. peacekeeper in the Congo, Haiti, and East Timor allows U.S. troops to focus on our missions in Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere. At the same time, our Ambassador must be a forceful spokesperson for greater efficiency and transparency at the United Nations and an intolerance of corruption at the United Nations. The recent revelations regarding the Oil-for-Food Program remind us that close oversight must be part of our role at the U.N. Senator Danforth's years of experience in Washington ensure that he will keep Congress informed about U.S. policies at the U.N. His talents as a bridgebuilder and a communicator will serve him well as he seeks to articulate both to the world and to the Congress the nuances of his work in New York. Since leaving the Senate, Senator John Danforth has continued his commitment to public service. From 1999 to 2001, he headed the independent inquiry into the Branch Davidian standoff at Waco, TX. Since September of 2001, he has served as President Bush's special envoy for peace in troubled Sudan where he has devoted his time and his talents to reducing the suffering in that troubled nation. In this capacity, he has made seven trips to Sudan and other nations in the region. This experience will be particularly useful when the United Nations Security Council begins debate on whether to send peacekeepers to try to maintain the fragile peace framework signed in Nairobi on June 5. We wish him success in this endeavor and pray this framework evolves into a formal peace agreement that finally ends the civil war that has resulted in more than 2 million deaths and over 4 million displaced persons. The United States and the United Nations must work together in Sudan, Iraq, Haiti, Afghanistan, and many other trouble spots throughout the world. American credibility in the world, progress in the war on terrorism, and our relationships with our allies will be greatly affected by what can be accomplished at the United Nations in the coming months and years. Senator Danforth is eminently qualified to meet these and other challenges. We recognize the deep personal commitment necessary to undertake this difficult assignment. We are grateful that a leader of his stature is willing to step forward. I recommend Senator John Danforth to the full Senate and ask my colleagues to send him on his way to New York with a unanimous vote. I thank the Chair, and I yield the floor.

Mr. LUGAR. Madam President, I would like to yield time to the distinguished Senator from Missouri, Senator Talent. I yield as much time as he might require.