Mary Landrieu

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I rise today to join with my colleague Senator Brownback of Kansas as a co-sponsor of S. 2358, the Human- Animal Hybrid Prohibition Act. As stem cell research has progressed in recent years, Federal law has remained troublingly silent over its proliferation. This bill would place a ban on the creation, transfer, or transportation of a human-animal hybrid. Human-animal hybrids are defined as: a human embryo into which animal cells or genes are introduced, making its humanity uncertain; a hybrid embryo created by fertilizing a human egg with non-human sperm; a hybrid embryo created by fertilizing a non-human egg with human sperm; a hybrid embryo created by introducing a non-human nucleus into a human egg; a hybrid embryo created by introducing a non-human egg with human sperm; an embryo containing mixed sets of chromosomes from both a human and animal; an animal with human reproductive organs; an animal with a whole or predominantly human brain. In August of 2001, President Bush issued an executive order, allowing for Federal funding for stem cell research on the then-existing stem cell lines. In November of that same year, he appointed a council to monitor stem cell research, to recommend appropriate guidelines and regulations, and to consider all of the medical and ethical ramifications of biomedical innovation. To date, this council has issued numerous reports on the bioethics issues involved in stem cell research. Meanwhile, the scientific community has moved forward in its research. Just this morning, researchers from Oregon announced that they successfully used cloning to produce monkey embryos and then extract stem cells from the embryos. The National Academies of Science released guidelines for human embryonic stem cell research in 2005 and again in 2007. Everyday we, as Members of Congress, are faced with a fundamental question: How far we should go in the name of science? There is no doubt that embryonic stem cell research holds the promise of curing diseases such as Parkinson's, diabetes, Alzheimer's and cancer. Even President Bush stressed the importance of federally-funded research in approving the original stem cell lines in 2001--he explicitly stated that Federal dollars help attract the best and brightest scientists and help ensure that new discoveries are widely shared at the largest number of research facilities. Federal funding not only allows us to encourage and financially support this research, it allows us to use the power of the purse to be sure it is done in the most safe and ethical way possible. I support Federal funding for embryonic stem cell research provided that the embryos used in these studies are those that are in excess from the fertility process and are knowingly donated for this purpose. I have met with many constituents suffering from life altering and fatal diseases and they have told me the impact that this research may have on their lives. But what Senator Brownback and I come forward with today is not about stem cell research with existing embryos. This is about a practice that has far-reaching ethical implications and brings into question our notion of humanity. Scientists have begun experimenting with injecting human neural stem cells into the brain of an animal. They are looking to insert a human nucleus into the egg of an animal and vice versa. They are looking to fertilize human eggs with non-human sperm and vice versa. They are on the verge of creating human-animal hybrids that truly blur the line between species. While the stated purpose may be a noble one--to advance medical research--the outcome is deplorable. At what point is scientific research going too far? We believe we have reached that point. Creating human-animal hybrids opens the door to a host of concerns. It is a violation of basic human dignity. It also has the potential to threaten human health by introducing infections from animal populations. The human body is not a product to be mass produced and stripped for parts, even in the earliest stages of its development. Assembly lines, patents, and warehouses are appropriate terms when talking about cars or computers, but not people. If we allow the creation of human-animal hybrids for research purposes, the end result will be a system of ``hatcheries'' where such ambiguous embryos are grown in mass. We hold a certain value for the uniqueness of humans. To challenge that in the name of science will have consequences we cannot begin to predict or understand. A ban on this procedure helps to redirect science to equally promising areas. In addition, such a ban does not ban cloning and nuclear transfer techniques for the production of DNA, molecules, cells other than human embryos, tissues, organs, plants and animals. The type of ban that I support does nothing to restrict the vast majority of medical advancements that have and will continue to pave the way for potential cures for diseases such as Parkinson's, diabetes, spinal cord injuries, and cancer. But as elected officials, we must take action on matters of such grave importance. Our legislative leadership is badly needed in this area. For this reason, I ask for your support for the Human-Animal Hybrid Prohibition Act.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I rise today to join with my colleague Senator Brownback of Kansas as a co-sponsor of S. 2358, the Human- Animal Hybrid Prohibition Act. As stem cell research has progressed in recent years, Federal law has remained troublingly silent over its proliferation. This bill would place a ban on the creation, transfer, or transportation of a human-animal hybrid. Human-animal hybrids are defined as: a human embryo into which animal cells or genes are introduced, making its humanity uncertain; a hybrid embryo created by fertilizing a human egg with non-human sperm; a hybrid embryo created by fertilizing a non-human egg with human sperm; a hybrid embryo created by introducing a non-human nucleus into a human egg; a hybrid embryo created by introducing a non-human egg with human sperm; an embryo containing mixed sets of chromosomes from both a human and animal; an animal with human reproductive organs; an animal with a whole or predominantly human brain. In August of 2001, President Bush issued an executive order, allowing for Federal funding for stem cell research on the then-existing stem cell lines. In November of that same year, he appointed a council to monitor stem cell research, to recommend appropriate guidelines and regulations, and to consider all of the medical and ethical ramifications of biomedical innovation. To date, this council has issued numerous reports on the bioethics issues involved in stem cell research. Meanwhile, the scientific community has moved forward in its research. Just this morning, researchers from Oregon announced that they successfully used cloning to produce monkey embryos and then extract stem cells from the embryos. The National Academies of Science released guidelines for human embryonic stem cell research in 2005 and again in 2007. Everyday we, as Members of Congress, are faced with a fundamental question: How far we should go in the name of science? There is no doubt that embryonic stem cell research holds the promise of curing diseases such as Parkinson's, diabetes, Alzheimer's and cancer. Even President Bush stressed the importance of federally-funded research in approving the original stem cell lines in 2001--he explicitly stated that Federal dollars help attract the best and brightest scientists and help ensure that new discoveries are widely shared at the largest number of research facilities. Federal funding not only allows us to encourage and financially support this research, it allows us to use the power of the purse to be sure it is done in the most safe and ethical way possible. I support Federal funding for embryonic stem cell research provided that the embryos used in these studies are those that are in excess from the fertility process and are knowingly donated for this purpose. I have met with many constituents suffering from life altering and fatal diseases and they have told me the impact that this research may have on their lives. But what Senator Brownback and I come forward with today is not about stem cell research with existing embryos. This is about a practice that has far-reaching ethical implications and brings into question our notion of humanity. Scientists have begun experimenting with injecting human neural stem cells into the brain of an animal. They are looking to insert a human nucleus into the egg of an animal and vice versa. They are looking to fertilize human eggs with non-human sperm and vice versa. They are on the verge of creating human-animal hybrids that truly blur the line between species. While the stated purpose may be a noble one--to advance medical research--the outcome is deplorable. At what point is scientific research going too far? We believe we have reached that point. Creating human-animal hybrids opens the door to a host of concerns. It is a violation of basic human dignity. It also has the potential to threaten human health by introducing infections from animal populations. The human body is not a product to be mass produced and stripped for parts, even in the earliest stages of its development. Assembly lines, patents, and warehouses are appropriate terms when talking about cars or computers, but not people. If we allow the creation of human-animal hybrids for research purposes, the end result will be a system of ``hatcheries'' where such ambiguous embryos are grown in mass. We hold a certain value for the uniqueness of humans. To challenge that in the name of science will have consequences we cannot begin to predict or understand. A ban on this procedure helps to redirect science to equally promising areas. In addition, such a ban does not ban cloning and nuclear transfer techniques for the production of DNA, molecules, cells other than human embryos, tissues, organs, plants and animals. The type of ban that I support does nothing to restrict the vast majority of medical advancements that have and will continue to pave the way for potential cures for diseases such as Parkinson's, diabetes, spinal cord injuries, and cancer. But as elected officials, we must take action on matters of such grave importance. Our legislative leadership is badly needed in this area. For this reason, I ask for your support for the Human-Animal Hybrid Prohibition Act.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I appreciate the opportunity to be recognized to speak for a moment with my colleague Senator Coleman on National Adoption Day, which is this Saturday. Before I do that, let me thank the Senator from Alaska, the senior Senator, for his beautiful remarks relative to our other colleague from West Virginia, a man whom we have all come to know and love and respect for his years and quality of service to this body and to our country. Many of us will have other words to say on behalf of Senator Byrd on his birthday, which is coming up very soon. I wanted to come to the floor with my colleague from Minnesota to speak about a very important issue that we try to remember and reflect on through the whole month of November, but particularly on National Adoption Day on November 17. I also wanted to take this opportunity to remind ourselves of the importance of family and the laws we try to pass here in Congress to encourage families to be strengthened and expanded through the miracle of adoption. Many Members of Congress, including myself, are adoptive parents. We have personally experienced the joy of building our families through adoption. We are proud promoters of this practice that is not uniquely American, but is embraced by Americans in a way that it is not embraced in most countries in the world. And we are proud of that. In America, we like to believe it is not the color of our skin or even being from the same part of the world that makes a family. It is a bond, a love that can be shared between people and families and children, even if those children are of a different race or a different background. It is a very unique aspect of America that is quite open and quite extraordinary. In America, we adopt many children, thousands of children. Over the last decade, the numbers have increased every year, in good measure due to the work that has been done in the United States, right here in Congress. Let me back up a minute to say that, obviously, our ultimate hope and wish is that all children could stay with their birth families. In an ideal world, you would want all children born in every country, every day and every year, to be able to be born into families who want them, can care for them, can nurture them, and will stay whole and permanent. But we know in the reality of the world in which we live, that is not possible. War, famine, disease, addiction, violence, and gross neglect separate families, separate children from their birth parents every day. I think it is one of our primary responsibilities as responsible, functioning governments, particularly democracies, to do what we can to connect those children who are separated from that special bond with a birth parent to another nurturing, loving adult as quickly as possible. It would seem that the most natural thing in the world is to understand that a child without a parent is very vulnerable. Even children with parents who are educated and able to navigate through life still have great challenges. So, you can imagine the vulnerability of children with no parents to protect them, alone to raise themselves. Children don't do that very well. And governments don't raise children. Human beings--parents--do. So we need to do our best. We are working at it, but we have a long way to go. That is why every November, our Presidents, President Clinton, and before him President Bush, take a minute, as our current President will tomorrow at the White House, to acknowledge that November in America is National Adoption Month. We focus the attention of our country on our efforts and we congratulate ourselves on our progress, but there is still a gap. We have 514,000 children who have been removed from their birth families and placed in the care of the community, in foster care. Today, over 115,000 of these children are waiting to be adopted, and the majority of their parents already have had their parental rights terminated. These children are waiting to be placed in a permanent family through adoption, whether kinship or regular, or long-term guardianship. So I come to the floor today to recognize some of these children who are waiting today, and to say that while we are making progress, we have some beautiful children who are still waiting to be adopted. There are many misconceptions about some of the children who are in our public child welfare and foster care systems. The survey recently conducted by the Dave Thomas Foundation for Adoption indicated that the majority of Americans mistakenly believe that many of the children in foster care are ``juvenile delinquents.'' According to the survey, an unbelievable number of Americans, have thought about adopting a child from foster care, but because of their misperception that there is something wrong with these children, that they are damaged goods, they back up or they back away. The facts will show that it is not the children who are in foster care who are delinquent. It was a problem from the parental end; that the parents somehow failed to step up or were unable to step up. These children are not damaged goods. They are doing beautifully in school. Many grow up to be quite successful, but they, like all children, need parents and protection. This is a young girl, Natalyia, who is 8 years old. She has been in foster care since 2001 and is one of the children in Louisiana who is waiting to be adopted. This is two siblings. Sometimes a child is an only child and sometimes a child has brothers and sisters. I am one of nine children. I know, Mr. President, you came from a fairly large family. Sometimes the unfortunate thing is that parents walk away, or disease or violence separates them from groups of children. These are two young boys, Terron and Montrell, who are about 7 and 8 years old. They are in foster care in Louisiana, looking for parents here in the United States. This is two other brothers who have been in foster care for a while. Their names are Ronnie and Kody. They are 11 and 13 years old, also looking for a family here in the United States. We have thousands and thousands of children of all ages in the United States looking for families. We have millions of orphans around the world. As I said, there are tens of thousands of children right here in the United States who are waiting to be adopted. I am proud of the laws we have tried to pass here on the floor of the Senate, giving appropriate tax credits and providing other opportunities for children to move into loving and permanent families. I think our time is limited. I don't want to take any more time, but I ask unanimous consent to allow the Senator from Minnesota to finish up our talk here on the Senate floor, to acknowledge National Adoption Day and National Adoption Month, and then turn to the leadership, if I could.

Ms. LANDRIEU. Reserving the right to object.

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I would like to conclude our presentation with a few wrap-up remarks. Before my colleague leaves the floor, I wish to say that orphans everywhere have found a bold, brave, and articulate champion on their behalf. I am so pleased that Senator Coleman has joined me as a co-chair of the Adoption Caucus to help lead the 213 Members of Congress who have joined our coalition. As the Senator pointed out, it seems that around this place adoption is the only issue on which we can all agree and work so well together. I don't know if it is a tribute to us or to the children who bring us together in a very special way. I thank him. The States of Arizona, Hawaii, Iowa, Kentucky, North Carolina, Oklahoma, and Wyoming have more than quadrupled the number of public agency adoptions in their States. It takes a lot of effort, not only on what we do in Congress, but for Governors, legislators, caseworkers, social workers, and judges. I wish to call those States out today to thank them for their extraordinary work. All States are making progress, and we are happy with what the statistics will show. But those seven states are making special progress. Secondly, we want to be sensitive in our movement, if you will, to the role of birth parents and to honor the choices that birth parents make to the process of making good decisions and creating good outcomes. Sometimes we focus a lot of attention on the adopted child and the adoptive family. I am not sure we spend enough time honoring the role of the birth parents who make this very brave and generous choice. I would like our Congress to be sensitive this coming year to what we can do to honor and highlight birth parents who also are part of that great triangle of adoption. Finally, I urge our State Department to support adoption. I know they are preoccupied with many important, significant and grave issues, from international diplomacy to conducting wars, which are very important and consequential actions. However, our State Department has taken 7 years to implement the rules and changes required by the Intercountry Adoption Act of 2000 that Congress passed. Every day and every week and every month that these rules are delayed, there are literally thousands of children who die. Without these rules, we can't keep open the avenues of international adoption. I will say this to our critics-- there aren't many, but there are a few--every time there is a bad story about someone, maybe an agency, maybe a lawyer, maybe a disreputable person--and you know there are many disreputable people in the world, unfortunately--who does something wrong, does not fill out a document correctly or does not go through the proper procedures, and there is a big scandal in international adoption. The whole system is shut down under the guise of trying to get the ethics right. Nobody is more committed to ethics and adoption than the two of us. We work every day to make it transparent, make it relatively easy, reduce the challenges associated with it, and have it meet every law and cross every T. However, every time a bank is robbed in this country, we don't shut down the banking system. We go after the bank robber. We find them and put them in jail. The banking system stays open. Every day people cash checks and deposit money and take money out and make loans and keep this economy going. Every time we shut down adoptions from a country, millions of children die. That is the consequence of our action. We need to focus on the roots of the problem. We need to find solutions that address the problems and their causes, but which also meet the best needs of the children in that country. I want the State Department--and I hope they are listening--to understand that those of us in Congress understand about ethics. We understand about laws. We want things to be as appropriate and as legal as possible. When mistakes are made in a country, the answer is not to shut down the adoption of children from there. When we do this, we not only break the hearts of thousands of our constituents who are waiting to receive these children and believe they are doing God's will by taking in orphans who would die otherwise and have no one to care for them, we also hurt the children who we are trying to protect. Our State Department very callously brushes that aside. They are going to hear from us this year. They need to finalize the rules required by the law that we passed long ago. We need to continue our efforts to improve our system of international adoption. We have to get the State Department's attention. I intend to work with my colleagues to do so. I thank the Senator from Minnesota. He will be traveling to Guatemala over the holidays, which is a great testament to his leadership and dedication to helping us do the right thing by the children of Guatemala. We pledge to this Congress to give the best leadership we can on an issue that we all can come together on. It is quite refreshing. I yield the floor.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I rise today in honor of National Adoption Day and National Adoption Month. Senator Coleman and I understand that later today the Senate will consider our resolution recognizing National Adoption Day and National Adoption Month. Every child should have a loving and permanent family. The Hague Convention recognizes ``that the child, for the full and harmonious development of his or her personality, should grow up in a family environment, in an atmosphere of happiness, love and understanding.'' Unfortunately, not all children have a family of their own. However, through adoption a child can have a ``forever family.'' President Bush has recognized the importance of adoption to children and our Nation. Thus, he has declared November to be National Adoption Month. Nearly half of all Americans have been touched by adoption. In 2002, 151,332 children found ``forever families,'' a significant increase from 119,766 in 1996. 21,063 of these children were born in another country and adopted by American families. Public agency adoptions have more than doubled since 1995. The National Council for Adoption attributes the increase ``in part to the Adoption and Safe Families Act of 1997's Adoption Incentive Program, which awards financial incentives to States for placing foster children into adoptive homes.'' Seven States: Arizona, Hawaii, Iowa, Kentucky, North Carolina, Oklahoma, and Wyoming, quadrupled the annual number of public agency adoptions from 1995 to 2005. Over 7,000 children who are part of the public child welfare system are adopted every year in California, which is the highest number of all 50 States. However, only 10 percent of the 513,000 children in foster care will ever be adopted. National Adoption Day occurs on November 17 as a part of National Adoption Month. National Adoption Day is an event to raise awareness of the 114,000 children in foster care who are waiting for permanent families. Since the first National Adoption Day in 2000, nearly 17,000 children have joined ``forever families'' on this special day. This year we hope to have events in all 50 States, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico. Over l90 events in 48 States, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico are planned for this Saturday to finalize the adoption of over 3,000 foster children and youth. I want you to picture what happens on this fall day, children running, laughing, and playing with their new parent. Think about a girl or boy planning their special outfit and joyously awaiting the family celebration. Imagine the excitement welling up inside of a child as she looks into her new parent's eyes and knows she is finally part of a family. She will never dread the sound of a car coming to take her away again or wonder where she will lay her head or which school she will be moved to. Now picture the other dramatically different reality. In 2005, there were 514,000 children in foster care and 115,000 of them were waiting to be adopted. The following States have the largest number of children in their foster care system: California, Florida, Michigan, New York, Pennsylvania, and Texas. Between fiscal years 2000 and 2005, States made progress in reducing the number of children in their foster care systems, such as Illinois, 34 percent reduction, and New York, 35 percent reduction. These children have not had the luxury of their own room, a stable school environment, or a constant adult in their lives. Though the average percentage of children in foster care who are waiting to be adopted is 24 percent, some States have percentages as low as 5 percent,--California--and as high as 38 percent--New Jersey and South Carolina. Of the 52,000 foster children who were adopted, 60 percent of them were adopted by their foster parents. According to a recent survey by the Dave Thomas Foundation for Adoption, many potential adoptive parents have considered foster care adoption, but ``a majority of Americans hold misperceptions about the foster care adoption process and the children who are eligible for adoption. For example, ``two- thirds of those considering foster care adoption are unnecessarily concerned that biological parents can return to claim their children and nearly half of all Americans mistakenly believe that foster care adoption is expensive, when in reality adopting from foster care is without substantial cost.'' In Louisiana there are 4,541 children in foster care and 1,162 of them are waiting to be adopted. I would like to tell you about some of the foster children in Louisiana who are looking for their ``forever families.'' Natalyia is a cute, outgoing and loveable 8-year-old who is bright and energetic. She is in the second grade and she is an above average student. She loves to read books, ride her bike, complete crossword puzzles, and play with her dolls. Natalyia has been in foster care since November 2001. The average length of time a child spends in foster care is over 2 years. Most foster children entered into State custody because their parents were either unable or unwilling to care for them. Not only are children separated from parents, but in many cases, siblings are separated when they are placed in foster care. Terron and Montrell are two brothers in the Louisiana foster care system who would like to be adopted together. Terron is a handsome, happy 8-year-old in the third grade who is placed in the same foster home with his younger brother, Montrell. Both boys would like to be adopted together, because they share a close bond. Terron responds positively to structure, love, and consistency. He is a caring child who has enjoyed living in a two-parent family. He enjoys soccer, baseball, fishing and any outdoor activity. He wants his new family to know that he likes to eat spaghetti, macaroni, and rice- a-roni. Terron would benefit from a two-parent family that can provide structure as well as stimulation. Montrell is Terron's brother. He is a very sweet, friendly, and open young boy who responds well to structure and consistency. He is very bonded to his older brother and with time and nurturance can adjust to a new environment. Montrell is a first grader. School is a challenge for him but with patience and redirection, he responds well. Montrell's overall health is good and he is basically a happy little boy. He enjoys riding his bicycle and playing outside. Montrell and Terron would benefit from a 2-parent family that can provide structure as well as stimulation. Over half the children in foster care are 10 years of age or older and have more difficulty being adopted. These children are just waiting to flourish with the right parent's guidance. Kody and Ronnie are two brothers who are above the age of 10 years old and are waiting in the Louisiana foster care system for a ``forever family.'' Kody is a cute, very active and outgoing, blonde haired, hazel eyed, 13-year-old boy. He enjoys football, skateboarding, fourwheeling, and playing video games. He also loves horses. He is a sixth grader who enjoys science and reading. Kody would like to be an entertainer when he grows up, such as an actor, a comedian, or a rapper. He would like to be in the same home as his brother, Ronnie. Ronnie is Kody's brother. He is an 11-year-old boy who resembles his brother. Ronnie loves both playing and watching football. He likes to play video games and board games, horses, and going fishing. He is a fourth grader who likes math and science. He would like to be a policeman when he grows up, so that he could rescue people. He would also like to own a toy company, so that he could invent new video games. He wants a family who would care about him. He is very close to his brother Kody and wishes to remain in contact with him. I could stand here every day for the next month and talk about each child who needs to be adopted out of foster care. The bottom line is that each of these children, from one day old to 22 years old, needs permanency. They all need a loving, nurturing family that will help them to grow, bring out their unique personalities, and transform them into confident and happy adults. On National Adoption Day, I have faith that this can be done and we must continue to be the catalyst. The miracle of adoption cannot be explained, but the loving parents that are holding their children for the first time today are living examples of how dreams can be realized. As an adoptive mother myself, I find that words cannot adequately explain the miracle of adoption. I can only take a moment to offer my most humble thanks, gratitude, and appreciation to all those across the Nation who have given their Saturday to help find waiting children safe and loving homes. Let us continue to remember that when National Adoption Month and Day end there are still thousands of children like Natalyia, Montrell, Terron, Kody, and Ronnie who need that sense of permanency. I challenge Congress to make these children their first priority and to help them to finally realize that dream. Please support our resolution.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, almost a year ago, we passed a Homeland Security Appropriations bill. Included in that very large piece of legislation was a small provision that probably went beneath most people's notice. Section 426 of that bill allows Federal funding to provide case management services after a disaster. That has been a tragically absent component to our circumstances in Louisiana. Educated people struggle to find their way through the Byzantine morass that is FEMA individual assistance program, the Small Business Administration's loan program, the Road Home program and their own insurance company's requirements. Think of how all of this seems to working people who are encountering Federal bureaucracy for the first time. So, we need case management badly. Unfortunately, Section 426 fails the people of my State in two important ways. First, and this predates the change in Congressional leadership, it allows for case management services--but only for future disasters. The legislation that I am introducing today makes Section 426 retroactive to 2005 and will now cover Hurricanes Rita and Katrina, as well as succeeding disasters. Two years after the disaster, we only distributed half of the Road Home grants. It is obvious that we will need case management services for years to come in Louisiana. It is only common sense to direct these resources to the Gulf Coast today, where they are direly needed. However, an equally important failing of Section 426 comes from its implementation. In New Orleans and throughout the Gulf Coast, the energy for the recovery effort has truly come from America's faith community. You can see their good work in neighborhoods that are returning in my hometown. You can see them with hammers and nails in the Gulf Coast towns of Mississippi, and you can find them helping thousands of victims of Katrina and Rita to navigate the bureaucratic hurdles between them, and rebuilding their lives. As we have not had the benefit of Government supported case management, nonprofits and the faith-based community have stepped in to fill the obvious void. Unfortunately, the same community that has been such a lifeline to the people of the Gulf Coast has been barred from competing for Federal funding under Section 426. This is a shocking turnaround for an administration that has put so much emphasis on including the faith-based community in Government programming. I believe that the instinct to incorporate programs that are organic to the community, and are already working, was a good one. It is clear to me that case management services are prime examples of programs that should incorporate the faith-based community. So, as you can see, circumstances have compelled me to clarify Congressional intent. The bill I am introducing today does two things. First, it makes Section 426 retroactive to 2005, so that it may cover Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. Secondly, it strikes the phrase ``qualified private organizations'' which has been misinterpreted to exclude the faith-based community. That phrase has been replaced with ``nonprofit or faith-based organization with experience in case management services.'' It is unfortunate that we have arrived at the point where a legislative solution is needed. But nevertheless, I believe that this legislation resolves the problem, and will give comfort to the people of the Gulf Coast that Federal monies are being spent wisely, and given to those that have shown themselves capable and willing to help. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill and letters of support be printed in the Record.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, almost a year ago, we passed a Homeland Security Appropriations bill. Included in that very large piece of legislation was a small provision that probably went beneath most people's notice. Section 426 of that bill allows Federal funding to provide case management services after a disaster. That has been a tragically absent component to our circumstances in Louisiana. Educated people struggle to find their way through the Byzantine morass that is FEMA individual assistance program, the Small Business Administration's loan program, the Road Home program and their own insurance company's requirements. Think of how all of this seems to working people who are encountering Federal bureaucracy for the first time. So, we need case management badly. Unfortunately, Section 426 fails the people of my State in two important ways. First, and this predates the change in Congressional leadership, it allows for case management services--but only for future disasters. The legislation that I am introducing today makes Section 426 retroactive to 2005 and will now cover Hurricanes Rita and Katrina, as well as succeeding disasters. Two years after the disaster, we only distributed half of the Road Home grants. It is obvious that we will need case management services for years to come in Louisiana. It is only common sense to direct these resources to the Gulf Coast today, where they are direly needed. However, an equally important failing of Section 426 comes from its implementation. In New Orleans and throughout the Gulf Coast, the energy for the recovery effort has truly come from America's faith community. You can see their good work in neighborhoods that are returning in my hometown. You can see them with hammers and nails in the Gulf Coast towns of Mississippi, and you can find them helping thousands of victims of Katrina and Rita to navigate the bureaucratic hurdles between them, and rebuilding their lives. As we have not had the benefit of Government supported case management, nonprofits and the faith-based community have stepped in to fill the obvious void. Unfortunately, the same community that has been such a lifeline to the people of the Gulf Coast has been barred from competing for Federal funding under Section 426. This is a shocking turnaround for an administration that has put so much emphasis on including the faith-based community in Government programming. I believe that the instinct to incorporate programs that are organic to the community, and are already working, was a good one. It is clear to me that case management services are prime examples of programs that should incorporate the faith-based community. So, as you can see, circumstances have compelled me to clarify Congressional intent. The bill I am introducing today does two things. First, it makes Section 426 retroactive to 2005, so that it may cover Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. Secondly, it strikes the phrase ``qualified private organizations'' which has been misinterpreted to exclude the faith-based community. That phrase has been replaced with ``nonprofit or faith-based organization with experience in case management services.'' It is unfortunate that we have arrived at the point where a legislative solution is needed. But nevertheless, I believe that this legislation resolves the problem, and will give comfort to the people of the Gulf Coast that Federal monies are being spent wisely, and given to those that have shown themselves capable and willing to help. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill and letters of support be printed in the Record.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, may I take a moment to thank the chairwoman of this committee again for fulfilling the promise she made to have this bill--that was 7 years in the making--become law. And as of about 10 minutes after 12, eastern time, it did become law. People in Louisiana and throughout the gulf coast are cheering, dirt is being turned, levees are being built, and wetlands are being preserved. This Congress has kept its word to the people of Louisiana and the gulf coast, and for that this Senator is very grateful. Again, I thank the Senator from California.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I come to the floor to urge my colleagues to override the President's veto of this important bill. There are many colleagues who want to speak tonight on the subject of WRDA, because this has been a team effort. Senator Boxer, the chairman of the committee, along with Senator Inhofe, ranking member, have worked hard and diligently to put a bill together which the vast majority of us support, and many colleagues are here tonight to speak. I will be very brief. I want to speak about this bill because it is so critical to Louisiana. It is critical for us to give a green light to the people of south Louisiana and to the gulf coast who are still struggling to rebuild and put the pieces of their shattered lives back together because of the unprecedented two-punch storm--Katrina and Rita--and the breaking of the Federal levee system that should have held but didn't. We saw 285,000 homes destroyed. Because of the fires in California, as horrific as they were, screaming out of the mountains with the Santa Ana winds and scorching homes and neighborhoods, 1,600 homes were lost. Thousands of families were displaced and some businesses destroyed. But compared to Katrina and Rita, which is now 2 years in the past but is very close in the memory and hearts of the people still living there, we have to continue to remind ourselves and the Nation, it was 285,000 homes destroyed, unprecedented in the history of this Nation. This bill in place lays a foundation for us to build on. It lays a foundation for security and prosperity. Frankly, without it, our long- term recovery is in jeopardy. This bill will authorize, not fund, about $7 billion in critical water infrastructure projects, the first real piece of Louisiana coastal restoration effort, the closing of a shipping channel that was literally devastating to the parish in which it lies, St. Bernard Parish. Every home was destroyed in that parish; 67,000 people who lived there saw their lives and businesses destroyed when the levees supporting this commercial channel failed. There were levees throughout the metropolitan area that failed. This bill begins to lay a foundation for coastal restoration, to restore levees, to close the Mississippi Gulf outlet channel we refer to as Mr. Go, establishing for the first time hurricane protection along some southern parishes, Lafourche and Terrebonne, which we don't hear very much about because everybody focuses on New Orleans. We don't hear about Lafourche and Terrebonne and Iberia and Cameron. These are parishes that have hundreds of thousands of people who live there and support the commerce of this Nation disproportionate to their number. This is where the pipelines are. This is where much of the energy infrastructure is for the Nation. It is these places we want to preserve for the future. That is why Senator Inhofe and Senator Boxer and the members of their committee--Senator Vitter represents us on this authorizing committee-- have done an outstanding job in pulling together these projects. I don't know why the President chose this bill to try to reassume the mantle of fiscal responsibility, but he picked the wrong bill. As my colleagues will explain, it is fiscally responsible to pass a framework, a guideline, a limit on these projects. That is what WRDA does. For the Nation it is important we invest in critical infrastructure. I don't like to make these comparisons on everything, but it is worth noting that we are now spending $120 billion this year in Iraq. We are spending $2.3 billion a week. It is hard for me to go home to Louisiana and explain why we can't come up with $7 billion in authorizations for projects that are going to last over the next 20 or 30 years. We still have to go back and get the funding, but without authorization, we can't get started. I hope my colleagues will join me in a strong override. The House did so last night. I look forward to the Senate overriding the President's veto of this important bill. I retain the remainder of my time.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I rise to speak about a provision in this bill that I sponsored. With funding in this conference report designated in the fund for the improvement of education, the Robert H. Clampitt Foundation's Children's PressLine will establish a New Orleans bureau to teach journalism skills to at-risk youth in New Orleans. Using an oral journalism methodology created 31 years ago by its predecessor, Children's Express, New York City-based Children's PressLine, CPL, has a proven model of civic engagement and issues awareness by youth that facilitates the participation of children of all ages and literacy levels. Every year, CPL enables more than 75 children and teens to be trained quickly and easily, empowering them with real-world critical thinking, learning and writing skills outside of the constraints of a traditional classroom environment. This CPL model has a proven track record for creating an engaging program that teaches critical professional skills and media literacy in a format that invests children in the lasting journalism that they produce. This funding would provide for CPL personnel to work with local education and community leaders to establish a New Orleans bureau, implementing the CPL model for youth training and development. In the spirit of CPL's acclaimed ``In Search of Faith'' project following 9/ 11, the bureau's youth reporters would apply their skills to creating an oral history of children's experiences recovering from Hurricane Katrina. As CPL content is syndicated nationally through the Scripps Howard News Service and through online news sites including PBS OnlineNewsHour, the program would also create a national forum for children's voices to be heard. By sharing their poststorm experiences with a national audience, these children will both process their traumatic experiences in a creative way, while also developing important writing skills that will bolster their academic achievement. These types of creative programs are critical for children's development, particularly after a traumatic experience, and we are excited that CPL will now have the resources necessary to build a New Orleans bureau and work with children who will benefit greatly from the program.

Ms. LANDRIEU. Thank you to the chairman and ranking member for their efforts.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I would like to take a moment to pay tribute to a group of 84 World War II veterans from the Acadiana region of Louisiana that is making its way to Washington this weekend. Here the veterans will visit the World War II, Korea, Vietnam and Iwo Jima memorials as well as Arlington National Cemetery to lay a wreath at the Tomb of the Unknowns. The trip to the Nation's Capital this Saturday is being sponsored by a group in Lafayette, LA, called Louisiana HonorAir. The organization is honoring each surviving World War II Louisiana veteran by giving them a chance to see the memorials dedicated to their service. So far this year, there have been four trips to these Washington landmarks, and this weekend's trip will be the final one this year. World War II was one of the greatest achievements in American history, and was also the deadliest conflict. More than 60 million people worldwide were killed, including 40 million civilians, and more than 400,000 American servicemembers were slain during the long war. The ultimate victory over enemies in the Pacific and in Europe is a testament to the valor of American soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines. The years 1941-1945 also witnessed an unprecedented mobilization of domestic industry, which supplied our military on two distant fronts. In Louisiana, there remain today about 44,000 living WWII veterans, and every one of them has their own heroic tale of their experience in achieving the noble victory of freedom over tyranny. Veterans in this group began their service in 1940 before the bombing of Pearl Harbor, and served as late as 1957, between the Korean and Vietnam wars. They served in every branch of the military--35 members in the Army; including a Buffalo soldier based in Italy; 27 in the Navy; 16 in the Army Air Corps, now the Air Force; five in the Marines; and one in the Coast Guard. The spent their service in the European and Pacific theaters as well as stateside and participated in many famous battles, including the attack on Pearl Harbor, the Battle of Normandy and the Battle of the Bulge. I ask the Senate to join me in honoring these 83 men and one woman, all Louisiana heroes, that we welcome to Washington this weekend and Louisiana HonorAir for making these trips a reality.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I would like to take a moment to pay tribute to a group of 94 World War II veterans from Louisiana that is making its way to Washington this weekend. Here the veterans will visit the World War II, Korea, Vietnam and Iwo Jima memorials as well as Arlington National Cemetery to lay a wreath at the Tomb of the Unknowns. The trip to the Nation's Capital this Saturday is being sponsored by a group in Lafayette, LA, called Louisiana HonorAir. The organization is honoring each surviving World War II Louisiana veteran by giving them a chance to see the memorials dedicated to their service. So far this year, there have been three trips to these Washington memorials and two more are planned, including this one. World War II was the deadliest conflict in our history. More than 60 million people worldwide were killed, including 40 million civilians, and more than 400,000 American service members were slain during the long war. In Louisiana, there remain today about 44,000 living World War II veterans, and every one of them has their own heroic tale of their experience in achieving the noble victory of freedom over tyranny. One of our veterans traveling for his first time to Washington is Frank Menard from Lafayette. Originally from Youngsville, he was drafted into the Army in 1942 at 21 years old and trained at Camp Claiborne in Rapides Parish. In 1943, he was sent to England as part of the Army's 101st Airborne Division, serving as a driver and a mechanic. He participated in many battles with the Nazis during his 3 years in Europe, including the Battle of Normandy, where an enemy artillery shell struck his truck, and the Battle of the Bulge, which severely crippled German forces. His French and German language skills helped him gather intelligence about enemy plans. During the Battle of the Bulge, he took a pregnant Belgian woman whose toes had been shot off by the Germans to an American hospital, saving her life. When he returned to Louisiana after the war, Frank used his mechanics skills to become a union electrician in Lake Charles and Lafayette, where he settled. I ask the Senate to join me in honoring Frank Menard, the other 93 Louisiana heroes we welcome to Washington this weekend and Louisiana HonorAir for making these trips a reality.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, Walgreens, a leading national drug store chain, is today hosting a celebration for the opening of its 6,000th store, which is located in New Orleans, LA. I am thrilled that for this milestone the company has chosen my hometown, which is enduring a long recovery from Hurricane Katrina. The greater New Orleans area is one of Walgreens' oldest and most distinct markets. The first store in the region opened in 1938, and the new store in the historic Carrollton neighborhood is the city's 48th. The company currently employs nearly 1,400 people in the area who serve thousands of patients and customers every day. Walgreens will become a wellness resource for Carrollton residents, some of whom have underserved health care needs. In honor of the grand opening, Walgreens is today offering free blood glucose screenings in every New Orleans store to drive greater awareness of the diabetes epidemic and get more people on the path to prevention or early detection and treatment. The Walgreens wellness tour bus will also travel to locations throughout the area today to provide a variety of tests, including cholesterol, blood pressure, bone density, and body mass index for individuals who otherwise may not have access to basic health screenings. Immediately following Katrina, 74 Walgreens stores had to close because of physical damage and loss of power. It was the most significant operational challenge in the company's 106-year history. More than 700 Walgreens employee volunteers traveled from across the country to help with recovery efforts, filling hundreds of thousands of emergency prescriptions and providing vital supplies to evacuees. Walgreens was one of the first retailers to reopen, proving New Orleans was on the road to recovery. I am grateful for their great help to our region during the extremely challenging days following the storm and the flood that followed. Through its investment, Walgreens is demonstrating its continued commitment to our great city and region. By next summer, Walgreens will have more stores in the New Orleans area than it did prior to the hurricane. I ask the Senate to join me in congratulating Walgreens and New Orleans for this longstanding and growing relationship.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk--I want to clarify it has actually been filed--amendment No. 3446.

Ms. LANDRIEU. I wish to call it up for consideration.

Ms. LANDRIEU. I ask unanimous consent to dispense with the reading of the amendment.

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, first let me say I wish to be added as a cosponsor to Senator Cardin's amendment. I was very taken by his presentation about the responsibility that we do have, and it has been on my mind, actually, for several weeks about our allies and support staff in Afghanistan and Iraq, so I want the clerk to note that I wish to be a cosponsor to the Cardin amendment. But I rise to speak about an amendment I am offering, and I have had some very good advice and counsel on this amendment from several members of the committee, and I will speak about the amendment as if it is modified, because Senator Kennedy suggested I might make some changes to it. As you may remember, last week the Senate was very helpful in reinstating one mental health program that had been cut, I think very inappropriately, and it couldn't have been at a worse time for us in the gulf coast. It was an outstanding model program. Last week the Senate adopted my amendment to reinstate a child's health program that LSU had been running for 4 years, because after Katrina and Rita hit, it was literally the only child counseling program in the metropolitan area. That has already been done. Tonight I come to the floor to try to help again in the same area of mental health. We have crafted this amendment so that it has no impact on the underlying bill because what it does, basically, is set a competitive preference. This is not a set-aside but a competitive preference for programs within the already existing and already funded school-based mental health program. That has been well established and well run for many years. My amendment, with the Kennedy modification, simply says that the Department should look out in the country, and if there are areas where a disaster has been declared, they would give a competitive preference to those areas and to those schools in giving out these grants for counseling. I cannot even begin to express the heroic efforts of our schools-- public schools, private schools, and parochial schools--and the things some principals, teachers, faith-based organizations, and foundations have done to help rebuild hundreds of schools that were destroyed. We found, in our disaster--and of course we are learning a lot from the lessons learned in the disasters of Katrina and Rita, but one thing I know for sure, and I don't need a survey or anybody else to tell me about it because, as you know, I have been following it pretty closely, is that the first thing parents and a community want back, basically, is their schools. After a whole neighborhood is destroyed, or large parts of a city, no matter how large or how small, in order to get back to normal, parents first have to get their children safe and into a school. So we noticed right after Katrina-Rita, with 300,000 children looking for a place to go to school on Monday morning, there was a great struggle underway for parents to start to stabilize their family situation by getting their children back in school. Even if the family had no home, even if the father or mother had no job, even if they couldn't locate the grandparents, they were first thinking about where can our children go to school on that Monday morning. Imagine the children coming into schools--and I could tell you so many stories, extraordinary stories of teachers and schools and principals who opened their arms to children who came in and who had been traumatized from not only, of course, losing their own home, but some of the children swam out of water, some children, unfortunately, saw many people die in the disaster, and some had losses in their own immediate families. So I don't think I have to explain the need and the importance of mental health counseling. That is what this bill does. Senator Harkin has been a phenomenal supporter of this program. I think he actually helped to create it. Again, I am not asking for any new money to be added. I am not even asking for a set-aside for any of the programs in the gulf coast. I am simply saying as we look to the future to fund these programs that we give a competitive preference, if you will, for schools that find themselves in disaster areas. Senator Boxer spoke for 10 minutes on the crisis underway in Southern California. Imagine the trauma some of these children are going to be dealing with over the next months and years trying to rebuild in those communities, or if their home was completely destroyed by fire. These disasters, by their very nature, cluster in certain communities. So you might have a group of schools where 90 percent of the children lost their homes, or a large proportion of children might have lost someone in their family in a disaster. So it makes common sense for us to be a little more sensitive to these mega disasters, and that is what my amendment does. So I offer it now. I don't know if it can be accepted by voice vote. I am happy for it to be voted on at any time. If everything else is in order, I will leave the rest to the managers. While I am waiting on some documents in another matter, let me say a few more things about this. The funds would be divided between four grantees to leverage funds for mental health services, as I said, to the schools. The schools play a central role after a communitywide traumatic event. Schools are a very important site for delivering mental health services. Schools are often best situated to recognize immediate mental disorders. School-based mental health services lead to increased academic achievement, decreased attention problems and disciplinary issues, and reduce special education referrals. The national average, unfortunately, as we know--and I think we need more resources in this area--is 476 students for every 1 counselor. The recommended ratio in our schools is 250 to 1. So imagine in the devastated areas along the gulf coast and in other places, such as in Kansas, where Senator Pat Roberts experienced a great tornado disaster in a much smaller community, but it was pretty much a complete destruction of a town in Kansas; or as Senator Boxer is experiencing right now in Southern California, this amendment would look forward. Again, it would not add anything to the budget, but I think it would give us an opportunity to give some appropriate competitive preference to these children. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I appreciate all of Chairman Harkin's efforts in bringing this bill forward and thank him for his continued support of the Nation's public schools, including charter schools, which increase the academic achievement of our Nation's most low-income students. Unfortunately, the committee did not provide enough funding for public charter schools. Charter schools are public schools created by teachers, parents, and other community stakeholders to educate students of all backgrounds and educational abilities. In exchange for greater accountability for student achievement, these schools are free from many local and State regulations. This flexibility and accountability has allowed individuals with nontraditional backgrounds to create cultures that have made charter schools top academic performers often in some of the Nation's largest urban centers. Because of this unique approach to education, demand for these schools has been remarkable over the last decade. In New Orleans, charters schools have been an engine of our school systems rebirth. For the 2006-2007 school year almost 60 percent of New Orleans' public schools students were enrolled in charter schools, the largest market share of any city in the country. Charter schools are not a panacea, but they are a tremendously valuable piece of education reform, and we should be cautiously optimistic about their potential to help close the achievement gap. In my State, charter schools have come in and filled the intense need we faced following the hurricanes of 2006. As the chairman knows, I have filed an amendment to restore funds to the Credit Enhancement Program. I understand the chairman is not in a position to be able to support that amendment at this time. Before I withdraw my amendment, I hope that the chairman will commit to support as much funding as possible for Public Charter Schools.

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I thank the chairman.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Yes, Mr. President, there is objection. On behalf of Senator Carper, I object.

Ms. LANDRIEU. Now, Mr. President, I understand the previous amendment has been cleared. I ask for its adoption.

Ms. LANDRIEU. I move to reconsider the vote, and I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Ms. LANDRIEU. I suggest the absence of a quorum.