Richard Lugar

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Teaching Fellows Act of 2002. This year Congress passed, and the President signed into law the No Child Left Behind Act. This new law represents the most sweeping changes to the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, ESEA, since it was enacted in 1965. The Act underscores the importance of a good education; it stresses the use of research-based teaching programs, increases funds available to public schools, broadens local flexibility, and enhances accountability. In focusing on these principles, we aim to change the way our schools do business. This is important. While some schools are doing well, many are not. It is important that our low performing schools are given the assistance they need to improve, along with the knowledge that they will be held accountable for turning themselves around and narrowing the existing achievement gaps. I have long championed the greater use of research-based programs in troubled schools, specifically Comprehensive School Reform. Good reform programs are a bargain for our schools and our children when we compare their costs to that of retention, special education and illiteracy. However, I also realize that the best research-based programs cannot be successfully implemented without a sufficient number of teachers in the classroom. Statistics vary, but it is estimated that 1 million of the Nation's 3 million teachers will retire in the next 5 years. Schools will need to hire over 2 million new teachers in the next decade. To help address this problem, my colleague Senator Bingaman and I are introducing today the Teaching Fellows Act, legislation that aims to encourage the best and brightest to enter teaching. The problem of teacher shortages is complex, and the problems States are experiencing in recruitment and retention vary. The bill we introduce today encourages states to structure their scholarship program so that it addresses the individual needs of the State, and utilizes the best resources they have to offer. Similar to the National Health Service Corps, selected students would receive at least $6,500 per year toward college expenses, and in return, would incur an obligation to serve in an under-served area. In this case, we require new teachers to teach five years in a low performing public school. The Teaching Fellows Act would set up a competitive process whereby states could apply for matching, 75-25 percent, Federal grants to establish or expand scholarship programs for prospective teachers. The proposal is based on one of the most successful teaching scholarship programs in the Nation--that of State of North Carolina. There are two main prongs to this act. The first is the teaching fellowship program, this program would distribute grants to states for teaching scholarships that students could apply for after their senior year of high school or their second year of college. The bill also authorizes a ``partnership program,'' aimed at community college students, particularly those who are currently trained or training as teaching assistants. With encouragement, the hope is that these individuals might go on to obtain four-year degrees to become licensed teachers. Grants would be available to states for partnership programs between community colleges and four-year colleges to provide for the training. Other approaches such as loan forgiveness programs and offering federal stipends are important tools in our quest to recruit teachers. However, the strength of the Teacher Fellowship Act is the focus that we place on the enrichment of these students. Qualifying States will have developed programs that have designed a strong extra-curricular program that serves as a support system for new teachers. It is estimated that up to 22 percent of new teaches leave within 3 years--this figure is as high as 55 percent in urban or rural areas. Not only must we recruit more teachers, but we must encourage a more comprehensive and supportive system of training. Our bill is not a panacea to the problems of teacher recruitment and retention. However, I believe it is a step in the right direction. I hope that we will give more states and communities the incentive to work with their institutions of higher education to more comprehensively address the education of one our Nation's most important resources--that of teachers. The successful education of our nation's children requires that we work together at the Federal, State, and local levels to ensure that no child is left behind.

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. Madam President, I am pleased to join with other Senators in honoring our distinguished colleague, Jesse Helms, who will be returning to private life at the end of the 107th Congress. For the past 26 years it has been my privilege to serve in the United States Senate with Jesse Helms. During that time, we have shared committee assignments on the Foreign Relations and Agriculture Committees. We have worked together on innumerable issues, and I have witnessed with admiration his strong character and devotion to public service. Senator Helms has played an important role in the primary U.S. foreign policy accomplishment of the second half of the 20th Century-- the collapse of Soviet Communism and transition of most of the world's Communist nations to democracy and market economics. In the Senate, Senator Helms was a steadfast supporter of policies that opposed the evils of the Soviet bloc. He looked forward with confidence to a future in which Russian foreign policy would not be predicated on empire, in which Russia would practice democracy, and in which Eastern Europe and other Soviet-dominated nations would be free. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, Senator Helms was an important advocate for embracing the new democracies of Eastern Europe. He was and continues to be a vocal supporter of NATO enlargement within the Foreign Relations Committee and the Senate as a whole. It is fitting that as we celebrate Senator Helms' career, we anticipate the entry of a new group of nations into the NATO fold that were once denied their liberty. Throughout his career in the Senate, Senator Helms' foreign policy initiatives were grounded in a fundamental faith in the power of freedom and democracy. Senator Helms' philosophy has been devoid of the cynicism that occasionally afflicts the practice of U.S. foreign policy. Our friend never forgot that the achievement of freedom must stand as the basis for American actions in the world. He remained devoted to core American values that have undergirded our Republic, including free and fair elections, freedom of religion, the rule of law, and market economic opportunities. Senator Helms has had an equally large impact on domestic policy. He will be remembered as a determined advocate for limited government. But no matter how passionately he advocated limits on government, he always understood that those limits should not reduce our human responsibilities to each other as citizens and leaders of a great nation. In my experience, few Senators have been as quick with a smile or as certain to ask about a family member as Senator Helms. In fact, few Senators ever had a greater appreciation for the strength and love of family. No remarks honoring Senator Helms would be complete without mentioning his beloved wife, Dot. A couple of years ago, I recall Senator Helms responding to a reporter's question about whether he intended to stay in the Senate. He said ``she has a vote; I have a vote; and if there is a tie, we will work it out together.'' All Senators know how important Dot has been to Jesse over the years. Even as we will miss seeing our friend every day, we know that Jesse will be blessed by the opportunity to spend more time with Dot and his family. Senator Helms leaves the Senate after 30 years, having established a legion of friendships and a memorable legacy. I am confident that he will continue to serve the public, and I join the Senate in wishing Jesse and Dot all the best as they move on to new adventures.

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I am pleased to take this opportunity to pay tribute to the remarkable life of Senator Strom Thurmond of South Carolina. On December 5, 2002, Senator Thurmond will turn 100 years old, another amazing milestone for an indefatigable public servant. Throughout his historic years of service in the Senate, he has distinguished himself through his energy, his spirited patriotism, and his dedication to excellence. Every Member of this body counts him as a friend and as an inspiration. Beginning his public service career in 1923 as a teacher and athletic coach, he became the superintendent of education in Edgefield County, SC. He was elected to the State senate at the young age of 31 and later served as a Circuit Judge of South Carolina. He left the judicial bench in 1942 to fight in World War II where he parachuted into Normandy on D-day with the 82nd Airborne Division. He served in the Civil Affairs section of the First Army headquarters where he was awarded five Battle Stars, the Legion of Merit with Oak Leaf Cluster, a Bronze Star for Valor, the Purple Heart, the Belgian Order of the Crown, and the French Croix de Guerre. Upon his return to South Carolina, he served as Governor before he was elected to the Senate in 1954. Strom Thurmond's career as a Senator has been distinguished by love of his country and all the possibilities he has envisioned for it. His longevity and strength are a result of his determination to further his ideals, his commitment to personal fitness, and his devotion to serve the people of South Carolina. Senator Thurmond's influence has been felt throughout the Senate, but it has been particularly noteworthy in his leadership on the Armed Services, Judiciary, and Veterans' Affairs Committees. In recent years, as President Pro Tempore, he set an example for us all with his thoughtful wit, his constancy, and his obvious love for the Senate and its institutions. Senator Thurmond is a statesman whose retirement from this Chamber will leave the Senate a diminished place. I am pleased to join with my Senate colleagues in acclaiming his lifetime of service to America.

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, today is National POW/MIA Recognition Day. I rise on this special day to remember and honor those brave Americans who during past armed engagements in defense of this nation or our alliances were prisoners of war and those who are still listed missing in action. As a nation, we set aside this day to further recognize the sacrifices of the restless families of these fine patriots, assuring them that we have not forgotten. In the past year, our dedicated Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen and Marines have again taken up the mantle of freedom; this time to prosecute an elusive and dangerous enemy. They have ousted an oppressive regime in Afghanistan and continue to hunt those implicated in the war on terrorism. Like generations before them, these Americans have sworn an oath to support and defend the Constitution. As a former Navy officer, I feel strongly that the United States government has a similarly strong obligation to these men and women who serve in the Armed Forces. Specifically, we must work to ensure the return of POWs and MIAs at the end of hostilities. We must not rest until all American POW/MIAs are returned and accounted for, and the many questions that have overwhelmed their families are answered. The vigorous pursuit of this commitment must continue through on-site investigations being undertaken in Indochina and through a fuller examination of records in Russia, Iraq and Southeast Asia. For in our history, we recall somberly today that while thousands died, many others endured years in starved, tortured, isolated misery before regaining their freedom. Their perseverance, integrity and heroism are shining examples of the core values on which this nation was founded and became great. A year ago, Americans were sifting through smoldering rubble at the Pentagon and at the site of the twin towers looking for their comrades in arms. Those actions have ceased, but around the world, others continue to sift through long-silent war zones to find and identify remains of the fallen and the missing. The Department of Defense Prisoner of War/Missing Personnel Office has had considerable successes in the past year, but we still have much to accomplish before our responsibility to all the POWs and MIAs is fulfilled. Just this year, we have identified the remains of 46 Americans who served in the Vietnam War. Unfortunately, there are still 1,907 unaccounted Americans who served in Vietnam. Also this year, 32 Americans have been repatriated who served in the Korean War, while over 8,100 remain unaccounted for. And, through hard work and determination in the past year, the DPMO has recovered the remains of eight Americans who served in the Second World War. 78,750 Americans who served in World War II are as yet accounted. It is important to remember that this is a cooperative effort and requires commitments from all branches of our government as well as the countries where the servicemen remain missing. Negotiations in the past six years with North Korea have yielded many successes. One search operation continues even today in North Korea and a third and final operation for the year will begin on September 28, concluding October 29. According to the Department of Defense, America has had 23 operations since 1996 to locate MIA's in North Korea. These missions are all possible because of cooperation and negotiation with North Korea. Let this cooperation be an example to all of what can be accomplished when we work together. Today, I want to pay special tribute to the dedication and service of the soldiers from my home State of Indiana who are or were POW/MIAs from the Vietnam War and the Korean War. These great Americans and their families have the gratitude of this free Nation. I urge the Senate, the administration, the Departments of Defense and State, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the National Security Agency to redouble their efforts to bring our soldiers home as quickly as possible. Let us all take heart from the POW/MIA flag, displayed in the Capitol rotunda, which proclaims: ``You Are Not Forgotten.'' I ask unanimous consent that the names of Indiana's missing and unaccounted from the Korea and Vietnam Wars be printed in the Record.

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate stand in a short recess in order that we can greet the defense committee of the Norwegian Parliament, and I ask the Senate and members of the staff to greet the delegation assembled behind my desk.

Mr. LUGAR

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

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, it is a privilege to welcome a distinguished delegation from the Norwegian Parliament. Nine members of the Committee on Defense are with us today in the Senate Chamber. They have come to the United States this week as a part of an ambitious series of events which will include meetings at the Pentagon, the State Department, the National Security Council, and Central Command in Florida. They had been scheduled to leave Washington this morning, but they have changed their itinerary deliberately because they wanted to be with us here, the U.S. Senate, in the Capitol Building on this solemn day. As fellow legislators and close NATO allies, the Norwegian Defense Committee wanted to express its solidarity with Congress and with the American people on the first anniversary of September 11. I would like to read a letter into the Record from the Defense Committee of Norway. They have written: To the Senate of the United States: The Standing Committee on Defense of the Norwegian Parliament wishes to express its deepest sympathy and solidarity with the American people on this day of remembrance--one year after the horrible terror attack on the United States that occurred September 11, 2001. Let us never forget all those individuals who lost their lives in New York, Virginia, and Pennsylvania, including firemen, police officers, and volunteers who tried to rescue people from the flames. The letter continues: September 11 changed the world and international politics. Norway is proud to participate in the broad coalition against terrorism and does so by taking part in ``Operation Enduring Freedom'' under U.S. command. The fight against terrorism is a fight for democracy, for an open and free society, and for human rights. Sincerely, The Standing Committee on Defense [of Norway]: Ms. Marit Nybakk, Chairman DC, Ms. Aase Wisloeff Nilssen, Member DC, Mr. Bjoern Hernaes, Member DC, Mr. Kjetil Bjoerklund, Member DC, Mr. Per Roar Bredvold, Member DC, Mr. Gunnar Halvorsen, Member DC, Mr. Aage Konradsen, Member DC, Mr. Leif Lund, Member DC, Mr. Per Ove Width, Member DC, Mr. Joern Olsen, Secretary DC. I know that I speak for all Members of the Senate when I say that we deeply appreciate your support today. Your presence here reminds us of the importance of allies and the enduring bond between the United States and Norway. During the long decades of the Cold War, Norway was the only NATO member to border directly on the Russian Republic. This ``front-line'' position imposed a special burden on Norway, and its value as a member of the Alliance far exceeded the size of its population. The border between Norway and Russia is now peaceful and cooperative. Yet Norway still bears burdens from its history as a front-line state. In particular, it must contend with the environmental dangers created by the nuclear-powered Soviet-era fleet that is deteriorating on the nearby Kola Peninsula. In June of this year, I had the pleasure to visit Norway following an extensive trip to Russia. There I met with many members of the Norwegian defense establishment, including members of the Defense Committee. We talked a great deal about nuclear clean-up issues on the Kola Peninsula. Norway has been an invaluable partner in addressing this nuclear threat through its support for the Nunn-Lugar program and its participation in the trilateral Arctic Military Environmental Cooperation program or AMEC. Under AMEC, our country has been working with the Russians and Norwegians to safely dispose of the nuclear material from decommissioned vessels. We have had great success so far, but the challenges of safeguarding weapons and materials of mass destruction are immense. I am hopeful that our efforts can be expanded and accelerated, and I know that Norway will work closely with us to address these dangers. So we welcome the Norwegian Defense Committee and draw encouragement from their presence here on this day of remembrance. We look forward to all that we can accomplish together, as we strive to make the world safe from terrorism and weapons of mass destruction.

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, as a lifelong supporter of cultural heritage events and friend of the Indianapolis Hispanic-Latino Community, I rise today to share with my colleagues my interest in, and strong support for, an important cultural event that will take place in Indianapolis on September 21. For the 22nd year, Fiesta will be held on the American Legion Mall in downtown Indianapolis to celebrate Hispanic culture and heritage. This is the premier Hispanic cultural event for the State of Indiana. Fiesta 2002 will highlight the music, food, and traditions of Hispanic culture and provide an educational opportunity for everyone to learn more about Hispanic traditions and understand the contributions Hispanics in Indiana have made to enrich and strengthen our community. Attendees for this public event will have the opportunity to enjoy a wide range of activities that showcase the Hispanic traditions in music, history, art, and food, among many others. Information booths, contests, and speakers will be set up to encourage attendees and their families to experience and enjoy the many educational, social, and culinary offerings that will be available. Fiesta is organized and coordinated by Fiesta Indianapolis Inc., a non-profit volunteer organization. Fiesta's mission is to promote and preserve Hispanic culture in central Indiana. Executive Director Carmen DeRusha has done outstanding work to coordinate Fiesta 2002, and I am thankful to her for her leadership in organizing the many individuals, groups, and businesses that are a part of this event. I am so pleased to join in this celebration, and I welcome the opportunity to be a part of Fiesta 2002. The success and longevity of the Fiesta event is attributable to the growth and strength of the Hispanic presence in Indiana, and to the dedication and commitment of everyone involved planning Fiesta 2002. Fiesta 2002 is important for the Hoosier State and I want to share with my colleagues in the Senate my support for this great event. The Hispanic community is strong in Indiana and growing stronger every day. Fiesta 2002 is a wonderful opportunity to learn more about Hispanic heritage and to celebrate their rich and vibrant traditions that broaden and strengthen the fabric of our community in Indiana.

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. Reserving the right to object, I shall not object, a point of parliamentary procedure: When would be the appropriate time for this amendment to be considered or this Senator to offer the amendment or for the managers to offer the amendment?

Mr. LUGAR. Very well. So it would be appropriate, if I can gain the floor, to do so following the resolution of the amendments the Senator has offered. I thank the Chair.

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, in the list that the distinguished Senator just read, was there a Lugar amendment dealing with weapons of mass destruction?

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I will not object. I simply was hopeful that the amendment might be included at this point.

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk.

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, during the Memorial Day recess, it was the privilege of this Senator to travel again with my colleague and partner, Senator Sam Nunn, and with Representative John Spratt and Representative Christopher Shays to a number of sites in Russia. One of particular interest to us was the chemical weapons facility at Shchuch'ye, which is approximately 1,200 miles east of Moscow. That particular installation has been a part of the Cooperative Threat Reduction Program insofar as the United States has worked cooperatively with Russia to put extensive fencing and various other security around what amounts to 1.9 million weapon shells--that is, chemical weapon shells--filled with nerve gas, saran, and VX. I had visited the sites 18 months before, and this was a return to envision precisely these 85-millimeter shells, these small shells that you can put in a small suitcase. Indeed, I have an illustration of this, Mr. President. Here is the small suitcase, and here is the Senator from Indiana, and a Russian major took the picture. As we discuss proliferation, this intersection between terrorists and weapons of mass destruction, envision, if you will, that there are 1.9 million more of these 85-millimeter shells. The Russians on the site estimate if one shell was put into a stadium of 100,000 people, everybody would die. It has that degree of efficacy and it has this degree of portability. This is why the United States takes seriously the penning up of the chemical weapons of Russia. Russia has declared 40,000 metric tons. One-seventh of them are at Shchuch'ye, in this condition. Also at Shchuch'ye is our greatest hope in working with the Russians to destroy the chemical weapons. They are in the process of building a plant that will require U.S. money to complete. The German Bundesbank has appropriated money this year for this plant, and so has Great Britain, Canada, and Norway, in modest amounts, to join us. The Russian Duma has appropriated substantially more money for this purpose. Why? Because Russia and the United States and many other nations ratified the Chemical Weapons Convention. We did so 5 years ago. The Russians did so a short time thereafter. It is a 10-year treaty. We are almost at halftime and not the first pound of chemical weapons has, in fact, been destroyed because there was not the money, not the technical organization, until at least this present point. Mr. President, when I came back from Russia, Senator Biden, the chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, and I were asked to come to the White House to visit with the President and the Vice President, Condoleezza Rice, and Andrew Card. Six of us sat there and talked about the new treaty between the United States and Russia, on which we have had testimony at some of our committee hearings. The point made by the President, Secretary Powell, and Secretary Rumsfeld is that we have a turn of the road with Russia. We are not naive with regard to all of the problems with Russia, but the President is asking for ratification of this new treaty that would substantially reduce nuclear warheads in the next 10 years. I took the opportunity to point out to the President of the United States that it is one thing to ratify a treaty, and to negotiate one to begin with, and it is quite another to see actual results from the treaty. We are working in this country to reduce our chemical weapons, and we hope to do so in the 10 years. We have pledged to do so under the treaty. The Russians have a whole lot more of them. My point is that there has not been a reduction there. In this case, it is not a lack of good will, it is a lack of money, lack of technical support. In the midst of all of this, the dilemma for President Bush--and he raised this during our face-to-face meeting--is: What can I do about it? With the other Nunn-Lugar programs, the Cooperative Threat Reduction Programs, the President could certify that the conditions imposed by Congress on the Nunn-Lugar Act are being met. In the past 10 years, such certification has come each year. This year, it did not. Ms. Rice and the Vice President advised the President that the administration has sought authorization to waive the certification requirement so that the money could be spent. In effect, no new programs under cooperative threat reduction have occurred for 10 months of this fiscal year due to lack of certification and lack of waiver. Now, in the supplemental appropriations bill we passed the other evening, as this becomes law--at least for the last 2 months of this year--our Government can actively move to destroy weapons of mass destruction with new contracts--nuclear, chemical, and biological--for 2 months. In a conference now on the authorization of the Defense Department, there is a debate as to how long a waiver might last. The President has asked for permanent authority, and the Senate has offered that in its bill. The House has offered, as I understand it, a 3-year time for the President to waive this certification. But when we come to chemical weapons, the President apparently has no ability to waive anything, or to certify anything. An additional six requirements are posed, and they have not been met, in the judgment at least of those in the administration who were involved in these deliberations. So as a result, nothing is happening with regard to American money or the destruction of these weapons. Following my meeting with the President, I wrote a letter to Condoleezza Rice, and I stated everything that I have indicated in these remarks today. I appreciate the fact that she has responded and indicated to me that: The President has repeatedly emphasized the importance of cooperative threat reduction in his strategy to reduce and prevent the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, delivery means, and the materials and technology to develop them. Because of the program's value to the nation's security, the President has asked the Congress to grant him permanent authority to waive CTR certification requirements if he determines that is in the national interest. We strongly support the waiver provision of the Senate version of the FY2003 Defense Reauthorization bill, and have urged the conferees to adopt it. Our serious concerns about Russian chemical and biological weapons activities make it difficult for the Secretary of State to certify Russia as eligible for CTR assistance. Waiver authority will enable the Administration both to pursue essential CTR weapons reduction and nonproliferation projects, and to work with Russia to resolve our concerns about its chemical and biological weapons activities. Parenthetically, I might say that one of the concerns is the four installations, allegedly with biological weapons or preparations for them, in Russia to which none of us have had access. It is my hope in the coming recess to enter two of these and at least clear away whatever may be the dilemmas of those two situations and maybe in the fullness of time to make the other two. I have been permitted to go into a number of biological situations, in addition to the full gamut of the chemical ones, largely because there is a sense of cooperative threat reduction. The Russians themselves appreciate that if there are accidents, theft, or a breakdown of the system, Russians will be killed first and in large numbers. This is a grim and serious business which ought not be a part of parliamentary byplay and that has been the dilemma this year. Condoleezza Rice continues: Similarly, we welcome your proposal of a waiver of the legislative conditions on CTR assistance to construct a nerve agent destruction facility at Shchuch'ye. As you point out, the small, transportable munitions at Shchuch'ye pose a real proliferation risk. The President underscored the importance of assistance to Russian chemical weapons destruction in his December speech at the Citadel and most recently in the G8 Leaders announcement of Global Partnership Against the Spread of Weapons and Materials of Mass Destruction. We have been working hard with Russia to meet the legislative conditions on the Shchuch'ye project, and have made considerable progress. Nevertheless, it may be difficult to assess with confidence that the information we have from Russia on its chemical weapons stockpile is full and accurate. At a minimum, the information-gathering process will be very time-consuming, but the proliferation threat gives us no time to delay. Indeed, the Administration concluded after its thorough review of nonproliferation assistance to Russia that the destruction project at Shchuch'ye should be accelerated. Therefore, the Administration has urged the conferees to the FY2003 Defense Authorization bill to provide the President the authority to waive the conditions on CTR chemical weapons destruction assistance, if he determines that to do so is in the national interest. Given this letter, Mr. President, I have offered the amendment that is at the desk. It achieves that objective of giving the President waiver authority that he does not have with regard to these chemical weapons. In due course, the conference committee and the armed services will come to a decision as to whether the request by the President for permanent waiver authority on all Nunn-Lugar programs is to be granted to the President. In a commonsense way, I pray that will be the case. I cannot imagine that it is in the national interest for us to deliberately, having authorized money for Nunn-Lugar, having appropriated money for the Nunn-Lugar program, to have it all tied up in terms of new projects for 10 months. My point to the President has been: Mr. President, that could very well be the fate of a nuclear treaty with regard to warheads. Why do we believe that somehow that might be exempt because, clearly, American money is going to be involved if we are to make progress in seeing those warheads reduced. The Russians may want to reduce the warheads to 2,200 or 1,700 or whatever figure is in their national interest, but they clearly do not have the means to do so. Some Americans, perhaps even Members of this body, may say: Well, that is the Russian's problem; they made their bed; let them sleep in it. But it is our problem because those warheads are aimed at us. The nerve gas at Shchuch'ye will not be aimed at us if it is destroyed, and it can be destroyed during this historical window of opportunity. Therefore, I earnestly ask for support of the Senate in adopting this amendment so it is absolutely clear that the President has the authority to give the waivers so that we may move ahead on something I think is vital not only to our national interest but in the war against terrorism is imperative. My feeling always has been if the Senate had any idea of this general problem, there would be a speedy resolution. The purpose of my speech tonight is to make sure this Senate does understand and makes a commitment to destroy these weapons as rapidly as possible, given the storage and given the destruction facility. I add finally that for those who are at all wondering how they destroy the stockpile, this is the weapon in the suitcase. It would be taken down to a vacuum space. Two holes would be drilled in the bottom of the weapon. The material would be drained out and put in a chemical formulation which finally renders that toxic material without consequence. This has to happen 1.9 million times. It will take 6 years if we begin now. I hope it will begin now. My plea is for immediate action on the amendment which I hope will be favorable. I ask unanimous consent that a letter addressed to Dr. Rice dated July 12, 2002, and her response to me dated July 30, 2002, be printed in the Record.

Mr. LUGAR. I will be delighted.

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I thank the distinguished Senator from Connecticut for his cosponsorship. Cosponsoring this amendment are the chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, Mr. Biden; Mr. Domenici; Mr. Hagel; Mr. Graham; Mr. Levin, chairman of the Armed Services Committee; Mr. Dodd; and I am pleased to add my colleague from Arizona, Mr. McCain.

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. Madam President, I rise today to introduce legislation authorizing President Bush and his Administration to negotiate a free trade agreement with Uruguay. I am pleased to be joined by the following co-sponsors: Senators Breaux, Chafee, Grassley, Nickles, Graham, Hagel, Specter, Hatch, and Cochran. President Bush has instructed U.S. Trade Representative, Robert Zoellick, to pursue a Free Trade Area of the Americas. I support this effort and this bill is not intended to compete with or replace that important undertaking. Instead, this legislation seeks to highlight the important relationship the U.S. enjoys with Uruguay and promote the need for extending free-trade to South America. Uruguayan economic reforms focused on the attraction of foreign trade and capital have proven successful. The economy of Uruguay grew steadily until low commodity prices and economic difficulties in export markets caused a recession in 1999. President Jorge Batlle has stated his intention to continue the promotion of economic growth, international trade, lower tariffs, and attracting foreign investment. More than one hundred U.S.-owned companies operate in Uruguay, and many more market U.S. goods and services. Uruguay is a member of the World Trade Organization and a dynamic member of the Southern Cone Common Market, MERCOSUR, with Argentina, Brazil, and Paraguay. Furthermore, it is an active participant and proponent of the Free Trade Area of the Americas process and is coordinator of the e-commerce group and sub-coordinator of the agricultural subsidies group. If the United States hopes to sustain its economic strength in the 21st Century, we must participate in an expanding global economy. We must aggressively pursue opportunities in new and emerging markets. We must maintain our technological and competitive advantage and sell our products, services and agricultural commodities in these areas. American agriculture, telecommunications, computer services, and other sectors will benefit from the opportunity to compete in Uruguay under a free trade agreement. As South America continues to recover from the Argentinian economic crisis we must look for opportunities to engage the region in free trade. A free trade agreement with Uruguay would provide American business with unfettered access to another lucrative market and Uruguayan business will have better access to American markets to successfully weather the region's economic fallout. A U.S.-Uruguayan free trade agreement is a win-win for the United States and Uruguay. I am hopeful the Senate will approve this important legislation in the near future.

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. Madam President, I rise today to introduce legislation authorizing President Bush and his Administration to negotiate a free trade agreement with Uruguay. I am pleased to be joined by the following co-sponsors: Senators Breaux, Chafee, Grassley, Nickles, Graham, Hagel, Specter, Hatch, and Cochran. President Bush has instructed U.S. Trade Representative, Robert Zoellick, to pursue a Free Trade Area of the Americas. I support this effort and this bill is not intended to compete with or replace that important undertaking. Instead, this legislation seeks to highlight the important relationship the U.S. enjoys with Uruguay and promote the need for extending free-trade to South America. Uruguayan economic reforms focused on the attraction of foreign trade and capital have proven successful. The economy of Uruguay grew steadily until low commodity prices and economic difficulties in export markets caused a recession in 1999. President Jorge Batlle has stated his intention to continue the promotion of economic growth, international trade, lower tariffs, and attracting foreign investment. More than one hundred U.S.-owned companies operate in Uruguay, and many more market U.S. goods and services. Uruguay is a member of the World Trade Organization and a dynamic member of the Southern Cone Common Market, MERCOSUR, with Argentina, Brazil, and Paraguay. Furthermore, it is an active participant and proponent of the Free Trade Area of the Americas process and is coordinator of the e-commerce group and sub-coordinator of the agricultural subsidies group. If the United States hopes to sustain its economic strength in the 21st Century, we must participate in an expanding global economy. We must aggressively pursue opportunities in new and emerging markets. We must maintain our technological and competitive advantage and sell our products, services and agricultural commodities in these areas. American agriculture, telecommunications, computer services, and other sectors will benefit from the opportunity to compete in Uruguay under a free trade agreement. As South America continues to recover from the Argentinian economic crisis we must look for opportunities to engage the region in free trade. A free trade agreement with Uruguay would provide American business with unfettered access to another lucrative market and Uruguayan business will have better access to American markets to successfully weather the region's economic fallout. A U.S.-Uruguayan free trade agreement is a win-win for the United States and Uruguay. I am hopeful the Senate will approve this important legislation in the near future.

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I rise today to submit a resolution encouraging the ongoing peace process in Sri Lanka. It was recently announced that Norway has agreed to mediate a new round of peace talks. The peace process brings hope that a continued commitment to democracy and human rights might be realized through lasting peace. The roots of the current crisis began in the early 1800's when Sri Lanka fell subject to British colonial rule. Indian Tamil laborers were brought to Sri Lanka to develop and maintain numerous plantations. This practice doubled the number of Tamils in Sri Lanka and further diversified the population. In 1948, Sri Lanka gained its independence from Britain and rose above bitter communal and religious issues and established a democratize government. Regrettably, issues of language and alleged government bias propelled this once peaceful nation into brutal civil war. The Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam became the leading rebel group in the struggle against the government. Over the last two decades, an estimated sixty-five thousand people have been killed and one million have been displaced by the fighting. The nation once referred to as the ``pearl upon the brow of India'' has become known as the ``fallen tear.'' The situation is not without hope. The people of Sri Lanka demand peace and with the assistance of Norway, the sides have once again returned to the negotiating table. Past failures shed some light on the difficult path that lies ahead and the tremendous work that lies before Norwegian mediators. Norway's offer to mediate talks was accepted in 1999. By keeping the negotiations secret, Norway has gained the cautious trust and respect of both sides. The fighting has ceased, and negotiations are planned to begin in Thailand in the near future. One of my constituents, the Reverend Paul Jahn, and the Indiana- Kentucky Conference have placed a critical role in bringing peace to Sri Land. Reverend Jahn and the conference have dedicated a significant amount of time and effort to this important effort. They have raised significant amounts of funding for various relief efforts in Sri Lanka and continue to make valuable contributions to the peace process. I want to thank Reverend Jahn, a minister at St. Peter and Trinity United Church of Christ in Lamar, IN, and the Conference for suggesting the important role this resolution could play in expressing American support for the peace process. I urge the Congress, through this resolution, to express its support for these efforts and to encourage both sides to resolve their differences as expeditiously as possible. The United States finds itself at a time when our international responsibilities are great, and yet it remains essential that we continue to support the realization of peace and democracy wherever it exists. To do this, I urge my colleagues to adopt this resolution, and show our support for Norwegian mediators as they endeavor to make it possible for Sri Lanka to enjoy the virtues that have made our nation, and so many nations around the world, just and free.

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I rise today to engage in a colloquy with the chairman of the Armed Services Committee, Senator Levin, and the chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, Senator Biden, to discuss the legislative intent of the Nunn-Lugar Expansion Act. I appreciate Chairman Levin's strong support for my bill. Under his leadership the Armed Services Committee adopted the bill and included it as section 1203 of the fiscal year 2003 Authorization bill. Furthermore, Chairman Biden is a cosponsor of the bill and his support is critical to the successful implementation of the nonproliferation authorities provided to the Secretary of Defense. Section 1203 seeks to capitalize on the unique nonproliferation asset the Nunn-Lugar Program has created at the Department of Defense. An impressive cadre of talented scientists, technicians, negotiators, and managers has been assembled by the Defense Department to implement non- proliferation programs and to respond to proliferation emergencies. Equally impressive credentials are held by other agencies such as the Department of Energy, State Department, and Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Section 1203 acknowledges the unique skills held by various agencies and seeks to broaden the President's menu of response options. Our legislation rejects a ``one size fits all'' response and provides another department with the authorization to respond to a proliferation threat. As the United States and our allies have sought to address the threats posed by terrorism and weapons of mass destruction in the aftermath of September 11, we have come to the realization that, in many cases, we lack an appropriate assortment of tools to address these threats. Beyond Russia and other states of the former Soviet Union, Nunn-Lugar-style cooperative threat reduction programs aimed at weapons dismantlement and counter-proliferation do not exist. The ability to apply the Nunn-Lugar model to states outside the former Soviet Union would provide our President with another tool to confront the threats associated with weapons of mass destruction. If the President determines that we must move more quickly than traditional consultation procedures allow, the legislation provides that authority to launch emergency operations. We must not allow a proliferation or WMD threat to ``go critical'' because we lacked the foresight to empower the President to respond with a variety of options. In the former Soviet Union the value of being able to respond to proliferation emergencies has been clearly demonstrated. Under Nunn- Lugar the U.S. has undertaken time-sensitive missions like Project Sapphire in Kazabstan and Operation Auburn Endeavor in Georgia that have kept highly vulnerable weapons and materials of mass destruction from being proliferated. But these endeavors have also illustrated the inherent problems of the inter-agency process in addressing time sensitive threats. We have seen on more than one occasion that teams of lawyers haggling over agency prerogatives and turf have delayed responses to critical threats. We must not allow this to continue. We cannot permit the intersection of terrorism and weapons of mass destruction. This type of scenario does not mean Congress will abandon its oversight responsibilities or the Administration should be continue and coordinate its actions to ensure the most seamless and effective response. Section 1203 requires extensive reporting requirements if action is taken under emergency circumstances. Furthermore, this legislation is not a blank check. We expect this legislation to be implemented with close consultation between relevant agencies. But at the same time, the legislative authority provided therein enables the President to avoid inter-agency logjams that would retard urgent American action.

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation to amend the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act that will streamline, nationwide, management of the Summer Food Service Program. The proposed administrative changes are expected to increase the number of local organizations stepping forward to sponsor a summer feeding program in their communities and, thus, serve many more children in poor neighborhoods. Children in low-income communities are eligible to receive free or reduced price meals during the school year through the National School Lunch and Breakfast Programs. During the 2000-2001 school year, 15.3 million children received such assistance. But, unless children attend school during the summer, access to meals through these programs ends. The Summer Food Service Program, which is administered at the federal level by USDA, helps to fill the resulting hunger gap and helps children get the nutrition they need to learn, play and grow throughout the summer months. This is an entitlement program which funds the meal and snack service provided by the sponsors of diverse, summer activity programs. Although the Summer Food Service Program is the largest Federal resource used to feed children during the summer months, we know that there is substantial unmet need. Among the more than 15 million children getting free and reduced-price meals during the school year, only about 20 percent of these three million children received free meals during the summer months. State administering agencies report that a major obstacle to serving more low-income children is the relatively small and static number of local organizations serving as program sponsors or meal providers. During the last several years, the total number of Summer Food Service Program sponsors across the country ranged between 28,000 and a little over 31,000. Two important factors contribute to this situation. Many schools and summer recreation programs remain unaware that federal funding is available to provide free meals and snacks to needy children. Others find the requirements for budget and cost reporting, which are different from those used in the School Lunch and Breakfast Programs, to be unusually complex and burdensome. The administrative obstacles are both familiar to the Congress and one we have taken an initial step to address. In early fiscal year 2001, I authored a provision of the Consolidated Appropriations Act that authorizes a pilot to try out simpler accounting and reimbursement procedures. The pilot replaces a sponsor's usual obligation to provide detailed and separate documentation of actual administrative and operating costs up to specified limits. In practice, this documentation has little effect, since a large majority of sponsors qualify for the maximum reimbursement. In the pilot states, sponsors report the number of meals and are reimbursed at a flat rate of $2.50 per meal. This allows sponsors in the 13 pilot States to combine both cost categories and follow procedure used in the school meals programs for reimbursement. Although the pilot test is not over, the initial results are positive. The Food Research Acton Center released findings today in their annual summer nutrition status report, Hunger Does Not Take a Vacation. The number of sponsors increased by eight percent in the pilot areas compared to one percent across all other states. Most important, children's participation in the Summer Food Service Program increase by 8.9 percent across the pilot States. This contrasts with a 3.3 percent decline for the rest of the nation. USDA's Secretary Veneman and Under Secretary Bost used their authority to facilitate sponsorship and announced, last March, that all states may seek waivers to adopt more streamlined administrative procedures. I think it is now time for Congress to step up and take action to further improve the capacity of the Summer Food Service Program. I am introducing a new bill, along with Senator Harkin, the Chairman of the Agriculture Committee. Our proposed legislation makes the procedural simplifications in the pilot a part of the Program's regular operating rules. This eliminates the need for waiver requests and waiver approval. If we are truly committed to the principle that no child will be left behind, this is a small step that can make a large difference in encouraging local organizations to sponsor a summer feeding program and in meeting the nutrition needs of low-income children. 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 legislation to amend the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act that will streamline, nationwide, management of the Summer Food Service Program. The proposed administrative changes are expected to increase the number of local organizations stepping forward to sponsor a summer feeding program in their communities and, thus, serve many more children in poor neighborhoods. Children in low-income communities are eligible to receive free or reduced price meals during the school year through the National School Lunch and Breakfast Programs. During the 2000-2001 school year, 15.3 million children received such assistance. But, unless children attend school during the summer, access to meals through these programs ends. The Summer Food Service Program, which is administered at the federal level by USDA, helps to fill the resulting hunger gap and helps children get the nutrition they need to learn, play and grow throughout the summer months. This is an entitlement program which funds the meal and snack service provided by the sponsors of diverse, summer activity programs. Although the Summer Food Service Program is the largest Federal resource used to feed children during the summer months, we know that there is substantial unmet need. Among the more than 15 million children getting free and reduced-price meals during the school year, only about 20 percent of these three million children received free meals during the summer months. State administering agencies report that a major obstacle to serving more low-income children is the relatively small and static number of local organizations serving as program sponsors or meal providers. During the last several years, the total number of Summer Food Service Program sponsors across the country ranged between 28,000 and a little over 31,000. Two important factors contribute to this situation. Many schools and summer recreation programs remain unaware that federal funding is available to provide free meals and snacks to needy children. Others find the requirements for budget and cost reporting, which are different from those used in the School Lunch and Breakfast Programs, to be unusually complex and burdensome. The administrative obstacles are both familiar to the Congress and one we have taken an initial step to address. In early fiscal year 2001, I authored a provision of the Consolidated Appropriations Act that authorizes a pilot to try out simpler accounting and reimbursement procedures. The pilot replaces a sponsor's usual obligation to provide detailed and separate documentation of actual administrative and operating costs up to specified limits. In practice, this documentation has little effect, since a large majority of sponsors qualify for the maximum reimbursement. In the pilot states, sponsors report the number of meals and are reimbursed at a flat rate of $2.50 per meal. This allows sponsors in the 13 pilot States to combine both cost categories and follow procedure used in the school meals programs for reimbursement. Although the pilot test is not over, the initial results are positive. The Food Research Acton Center released findings today in their annual summer nutrition status report, Hunger Does Not Take a Vacation. The number of sponsors increased by eight percent in the pilot areas compared to one percent across all other states. Most important, children's participation in the Summer Food Service Program increase by 8.9 percent across the pilot States. This contrasts with a 3.3 percent decline for the rest of the nation. USDA's Secretary Veneman and Under Secretary Bost used their authority to facilitate sponsorship and announced, last March, that all states may seek waivers to adopt more streamlined administrative procedures. I think it is now time for Congress to step up and take action to further improve the capacity of the Summer Food Service Program. I am introducing a new bill, along with Senator Harkin, the Chairman of the Agriculture Committee. Our proposed legislation makes the procedural simplifications in the pilot a part of the Program's regular operating rules. This eliminates the need for waiver requests and waiver approval. If we are truly committed to the principle that no child will be left behind, this is a small step that can make a large difference in encouraging local organizations to sponsor a summer feeding program and in meeting the nutrition needs of low-income children. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. Madam President, I am pleased to rise today to recognize the signal accomplishments of students from Castle High School, of Newburgh, IN, who were the Central States Regional Award winners in the 2002 ``We the People: The Citizen and the Constitution'' national competition. The ``We the People: The Citizen and the Constitution'' program, administered by the Center for Civic Education, promotes an understanding of the rights and responsibilities of United States citizens. Students in the elementary, middle, and high school levels learn about the values and principles embodied in the Bill of Rights and the United States Constitution. The Castle High School team competed against fifty classes from throughout the country and testified before a mock Congressional hearing as experts on Constitutional law. This kind of practical application of constitutional principles helps students in addressing modern public policy concerns. These award-winning students demonstrated an extensive understanding of the ideology of our governmental framework. Their commitment to excellence and thorough preparation is reflected in their achievement. They have truly brought pride to the State of Indiana. The names of these young Hoosiers are: Carrie Baum, Michael Carter, Marc Chapman, Allison Craney, Robert Dagit, Kelly Daniels, Karen De Neve, Phillip Exline, George Ferguson, Jr., Bryan Hart, Kimberly Hedge, Melanie Hiatt, Rachel Hopper, Brett Howard, Eric Jenkins, Andy Jobe, Yvonne Laaper, Christine Lowe, Maureen Martin, Steven Melfi, Amanda Merold, Peter Murphy, Allan Patterson, Lynn Perry, Mina Pirkle, Sarah Relyea, Rachel Roper, Michael Schmidt, Kellen Scott, Jeffrey Seibert, Kelly Smith, Matthew Suter, Prashant Tatineni, Stephanie Wurmnest. I would also like to commend their teacher, Stan Harris, who did a remarkable job preparing the team for this achievement. He is a talented educator who has provided tremendous leadership for students in the Newburgh area. Again, congratulations to Castle High School on a remarkable performance in the ``We the People: The Citizen and the Constitution'' national competition.

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. I join with my colleague from Indiana to express my concern about the flooding situation in Indiana. A number of Indiana communities are working to recover from damages caused by recent flooding. Should the Conference Committee include a listing of specific states in the final Conference report under this program, I hope Indiana will be included.

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I wish to take a moment to discuss a security problem that exists in the Andean Trade Preference Act extension contained in H.R. 3009, as amended and passed by the Senate, and which must be addressed. The problem is that, in an understandable effort to support Andean economies by providing tuna export preferences, this bill unfairly harms the economies of Thailand, Indonesia, and the Philippines. Providing trade preferences to one ally, or regional bloc, at the expense of others is patently unfair. The problem this bill creates for the Philippines, and for American interests in the Philippines, is particularly troublesome. The entire tuna industry in the Philippines is located in the southern region of Mindanao. It is in Mindanao that Muslim terrorist cells, with reported ties to al-Quaeda, are operating. In order to combat the terrorist threat in the southern Philippines, American troops have recently been deployed to Mindanao and are training Philippine forces to track down terrorists. Damaging the Philippines' tuna export market by tipping the scale in favor of other countries will damage the single largest employer and increase instability in the exact area where U.S. troops are deployed to help create stability. If that were not enough, Mindanao's tuna industry was largely created by U.S. and other donor nations' assistance as a means to increase opportunities and provide jobs for former guerrillas. This effort succeeded and the majority of Muslim separatists in Mindanao have laid down their arms. Disrupting Mindanao's tuna industry will not only create economic instability in a strategically sensitive region, it will waste past investments of U.S. taxpayer money and could return some former Muslim fighters to their violent ways. I see my colleague from Alaska, the ranking member of the Appropriations Committee on the floor. He may wish to say a word about this matter since he was responsible for bringing this issue to the attention of many Senators.