Mary Landrieu

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. The letter says: Dear Mr. President: I am writing to bring a grave injustice to your personal attention. During Senate consideration of the FSC-ETI legislation, the members of the Senate added a modest provision to assist our troops. GAO studies have concluded that 41% of our Guardsmen and Reservists called to serve their country on the front line must take a pay cut to do so. Fortunately, some companies around the country have stepped up to the plate, and taken the patriotic step to make up the pay gap of these brave men and women. The provision that we added in the Senate would have provided a tax credit of 50% of these costs to companies who make up that difference. In so doing, we hoped both to acknowledge the patriotism of existing companies, and at the same time encourage more employers to take this step. Mr. President, no doubt that as you have traveled the country, you have confronted the same stories I have from spouses and military families struggling to make ends meet. We have had to ask an awful lot of our Guard and Reserves, and they ask very little from us. So trying to take this worry off the minds of our men and women on the front lines seemed to be the least we can do. So it is with deep embarrassment for our government that I must report that this very modest relief for our troops was stripped from the conference report by Congressman Thomas and the leadership of the United States House. While I am certain that representatives of your administration participated in this conference, I presume that you did not have personal knowledge of the decision to cut support for our military families. Regrettably, this decision has placed all of us in a difficult position. While I endorse many aspects of the FSC- ETI bill, but I simply cannot support a measure that places so many lesser priorities ahead of our military families. Mr. President, I respectfully request that your exert your great influence to correct this injustice. Your willingness to veto this bill, or your insistence that a free standing bill be adopted, could redress this failure. Mr. President our troops need your leadership on this matter. Let us not disappoint them. I might add, our troops need our leadership. I am sending this letter. I am sending a similar letter to Congressman Thomas. I hope in the next 3 days that we are debating we may get an answer that tells us either why they were left out or what we could do to help them, because $137 billion is a lot of money and they deserve to be in the bill. I have ended my speech. I see the Senator from Kansas on the floor and I yield the floor. Exhibit 1 National Committee for Employer Support of the Guard and Reserve Outstanding Employers 250 Central, 3M, 99th RRC, AMSA 113 (G), A.G. Edwards & Sons, Inc., A.K. Steel/A.E.I.F., Abbott Laboratories, AC Nielsen, Accenture, Accolades Awards and Trophy, Adelphia Cable, ADT Security Services, Aerojet Ordnance Tennessee, Aetna, Affiliated Computer Services, Inc/Riverside, AFLAC, Ahold Information Services, Air Products and Chemicals, Alabama Rural Water Association, Alchua County Sheriff Qffice. Alameda County Sheriffs Office, Alamo Area Council of Government, Albany, N.Y., Albertsons, Inc., ALCOA, Alion Science & Technology, Alkermes Inc., All About Music, Allianz Life Insurance Company, Allstate Insurance Company, Alpha Industries, Altair Engineering, Inc., Alticor, Inc., Amazon.com, Amber Mechanical Contractors, Inc., AMERESCO, American Electric Power Company, American Express, American Express Financial Advisors, American General Financial Group. American Heart Association, American Ink Jet Corp., American International Group, American Medical Response, American Postal Workers Union, American Recycling Systems, Inc., American Standard, American Stock Exchange, AmeriGas, Anderson County, Blue Mountain Energy, Blue Cross Blue Shield of South Carolina, Bluefield Police Department, Bluefire Partners, Blum, Shapiro & Company, P.C., BMC Software, BMW Manufacturing Corp., Boeing Aerospace, Boeing Electron Dynamic Devices, Inc., Boeing Satellite Systems. Boise Cascade, Boise Police Department, Booz-Allen & Hamilton, Bose Corporation, Bradley-Morris, Inc., BRAVO! Development Inc., Brighton School District 27J, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Britton Engineering & Land Surveying, Inc., Brooks Automation Inc., Broward County Sheriffs Office, Broward County, Florida, School Board, Brown & Williamson Tobacco Company, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad, Burnet County Sheriff's Office, CACI, Inc.--Federal, Caddo Parish Schools, La., Calamos Asset Management, Inc., Canadian National Railroad. Canon Business Solution, Cantey & Hanger, Cape May County Municipal Utilities Authority, Capitol One Financial, Capsugel/Pfizer, CAREFLITE, CASAS International, Caterpiller, Inc., Catholic Finance Corporation, CDW Computer Centers, Cendant owns [Avis & Budget rent a car agencies], Cendant Mobility, Cendant Mortgage, Cendent Corporation, Center of Applied Technology North, Centex Rooney Construction, Central Arkansas Veterans Healthcare System, Central Connecticut State College, Cerner Corporation, Cerritos College. Charles Schwab, Charter Consulting, Inc., Chautauqua and Erie Telephone, Cheaptickets, Chesapeake Biological Laboratories, Chesterfield County, Computer Sciences Corporation, Comsewogue School District Board of Education, Con-Way Central Express, Con-Way Western Express, ConAgra, Concurrent Technologies Corporation (CTC), Conectiv Power Delivery, Congentrix Energy, Congress Title, Connecticut Light & Power Company, Conoco, Conoco-Phillips, Consolidated Edison of New York, Cook County, III. Cooley Manion Jones LLP, Coors Brewing Company, Copperfield LLC., Cornerstone Retirment Community, Corriher--Lipe Middle School, Country Insurance & Financial Services, County of Santa Clara, Environmental Resource Agency, Parks & Recreation, Covance, Inc., Coweta County Sheriffs Department, Cox Communications, Cranston Print Works Company, Crowley Middle School, CSX Corp., Cummins, Inc., Curtiss-Wright Corp., CVM, Inc., D. H. Griffin Company, D. Miller & Associates, PA, Daimler Chrysler, Daphne, AL P.D. (and City of Daphne). Dassault Falcon Jet--Wilmington Corp., Data Base Accounting Solutions, Inc., Data Search Systems Incorporated, Davidson County, Tenn., Davie Police Department, DeKalb County School System, Delaware, Dell Computers, Delphi, Delta Faucet Company, Department of Environmental Protection, Department of Labor/Wage & Hour Division, Department of Military of Affairs, Designer Checks, Deutsche Bank, DeVry Inc., Digital Partners Inc., DirectEmployers Association Inc., Discover Card Services, Discover Financial Services, Discover Financial Services, District of Columbia (Washington, DC). FISI Madison Financial, Fleet Bank of Hartford, FIeetBoston Financial, Fleming Companies, Inc., Flik International, Florida Blood Services, Florida Power & Light Company, Florida State Gov., FMC Technologies, Food Lion, Ford Motor Company, Forensic Technology Inc., Forest Grove School District, Forrest Exterminating Service Inc., Fort Wayne Metals, FOX Broadcasting Company/News Corp., Fox Valley Tool & Die, Frankfort Fire Department, Franklin County Sheriff's Office, Columbus, Ohio, Freddie Mac. Freightliner Trucks, Frito Lay Corporation, Frontier Telephone of Rochester Inc., Fujitsu Network Communications, Full Association Business Service, Inc., Galileo International, Gardonville Cooperative Telephone Association, GEICO Direct, Gen-Probe Incorporated, General Dynamics, General Dynamics Land Systems, General Electric, General Motors, George's Restaurant, Georgia Power Co., Georgia Power Company, Georgia-Pacific Corporation, Giant Food Inc., Gilbane Building Company, Giles County Sheriffs Department. Glastonbury, Conn., Glaus, Pyle, Schomer, Burns & DeHaven, Inc., Glendale, Calif., Globe Motors, Inc., Goldman Sachs, Goodrich Corporation, Goodrich Corporation- Landing Gear Division, Goodwill Industries--South Eastern Wisconsin, Goodyear Tire & Rubber, Graco Minnesota Inc., Grainger, Grand Traverse County, Grapevine, Texas, GrayRobinson, Great Salt Lake Council Boy Scouts of America, Greater Baltimore Medical Center. Jackson Township, Jacksonville Sheriffs Office, James City County, Jamestown Public Schools, JCPenney Home Office, JE Dunn Construction Company, Jedi Computing, Jefferson Parish Sheriffs Office, JM Thomas Forest Products, John Peter Smith Hospital, Johnson & Johnson, Jones & Carter, Inc., Jones Day, JP Morgan Chase, JP Morgan Chase Custody Services, Inc., JSA Inc., Kaman Aerospace Inc., Kaufman & Canoles, P.C., Kell Container Corporation, Keller Police Department. Kennesaw State University, Kenton County Airport Board, Kerr-McGee, Kessler sign company, Kettering City Schools, Kettering, Ohio, Key Corporation, KeyCorp, KIC Chemicals, Inc., Kocourek Chevrolet, KORYAK Consulting, KPMG LLP, KRA Corporation, Kraft Foods-Maxwell House, Kronos, Inc., Kwik Trip Inc., L G & E Energy (KY), L-3 Communications, Labor Ready, Inc., Lake County Captains Professional Baseball. Lake County Metropolitan Enforcement Group, Landstar System, Inc., Lang Wyatt Construction, Las Vegas City, NV., Lauerman's #2 Saloon, Lawfirm of Sacks & Sacks, LD Clark Excavating, Lebanon Township Committee, Leviton Manufacturing Co. Inc. (NY), Liberty Mutual, Liberty Technology-Magnet High School, Liorente Investigations, Lisle-Woodridge Fire District, Live Oak Police Department, Lockheed Martin, Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company. Miami--Dade County, Fla., Michelin North America, Micro Vane (MI), Microsoft Corporation, Mid-States Ford Inc, Mideast Aluminum Division of Indalex, Midlands Orthopaedics, P.A., Military Resale Group, Inc., Miller Brewing Company (WI), Mind & Media, Inc., Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo PC, Mirant, Mission Critical Linux, Mississippi Board of Nursing, MK Diamond Products, Inc., Modesto City Schools, Monster Worldwide/Monster Government Solutions, Montefiore CMO, Montello School Department, Monterey Bay Aquarium. Morgan Stanley, Morgantown (WV) Utility Board, Morrison & Foerster LLP (CA), Morton Plant Mease Primary Care, Inc., Motorola, Inc., Munhall Area Prehospital Services, Munters Corporation, Mutual of Omaha, NASDAQ, Nashville, Tenn., Nassau County Police Department, Nassau County, NY, National Association of Securities Dealers, National City Bank, National City Corp, Cleveland, OH, National Information Consortium USA, National Park Service, NationsRent, Nationwide, Natural Resources Conservation Service. Navy Engineering Logistics Office, Navy Federal Credit Union, Navy Public Works Center, Nebraska Public Power, Neill Corporation, Nestle Frozen Food Division, NetJets, Inc., Nevada Highway Patrol, New Britain, Conn., New York City Housing Authority, New York City Police Department, New York Life Insurance, New York Stock Exchange, Nicor Gas, NiSource Corporation, Nissan North America, Inc. Phillip Morris, Phoenix Metals Company, Phoenix Police Department, Piedmont Natural Gas, Pilkington North America, Pinellas County Government, Pittston, Plateau Valley School District #50, PNC Bank, Police and Fire Financial Services, Portion Pac, Post, Buckley, Schuh & Jernigan, Inc., Post- Newsweek Stations, Inc. / The Washington Post Company, PPG (Pittsburgh Plate Glass), Pratt & Whitney, Praxair, Inc., Precision Castings of Tennessee, Inc., Premier Yachts, PricewaterhouseCoopers, LLP, Prince Frederick Motors. Prince George's Fire and EMS Department, Prince William County, Va., Principal Financial Group, PrivatAir Group, Produer's Cooperative Association, Progress Rail Services, Progressive Escrow and Closing, Provident Bank, Providian Financial, Prudential Financial, PS Doors, Public Service Company of New Hampshire, Public Services Group, Publishers Printing Co., Quaker Oats, Qualex, Inc., Quiet Light Securities, Quincy District Court, Qwest Communications, Rainey, Ross, Rice & Binns. Raytheon, Raytheon Systems Engineering Project AUTEC, RCI (resource communication), Regal Ware, Inc., REMEC Broadband Wireless, Rentacom, Republic Airways, Reynolds & Reynolds, Reynoldsburg Police Department, RHDonnelley, Rhodia, Inc., Rich Township, Richard B. Russell Lake and Dam, US Army Corps of Engineers, Richard Childress Racing, Richmonf Financial Group, Riverside County Sheriffs Department. Skowhegan Savings Bank, Slidell Memorial Hospital, Smurfit Stone Container Corporation, Sodexho, Solar Turbines Inc., South Brunswick Township Police Department, Southampton Sheriffs Dept., Southeast Missouri State University, Southern California Edison, Southern Connecticut State College, Southern Fabricators, Inc., Southern New England Telecommunication Corp., SouthTrust Bank, Southwest Airlines, Southwestern Bell Telephone, Space Gateway Support, Spartanburg Forest Products, Speedway Motorsports, Sprint, St. Charles County Ambulance District. St. Joseph's Medical Center, St. Onge Company, St. Vincent Healthcare, Stabilus, Stanley County Sheriff's Office, Staples, Inc., Starcom Worldwide, State Attorney, 8th Judicial Circuit, Florida, State Farm Insurance, State of California, State of Maryland (Patuxent Institution), State of New Jersey, State of New Jersey OIT, Stockton Banking Center, Student Health Services, UNCG, Subaru of Indiana, Subaru of Indiana Automotive, Inc., Supervalu, Supreme Court of Guam, Survival Incorporated. Sweetwater Police Department, Sybase, Inc., SYColeman, Synovus, Systems Research and Development, t.w.phillips Gas and Oil, Tampa Preparatory School, TAP Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Target, Target Distribution Center, Tarver Abstract Company, TASC, Inc., Technology Concepts & Design, Teledyne Brown Engineering, Tellabs Operations Inc., Tennessee Valley Authority. UBS Wealth Management, Ulbrich Stainless Steel and Special Metals, Inc., Unilever Bestfoods, Union County, North Carolina, Union Hospital of Cecil County, Union Pacific, Union Pacific Railroad, Unique Security--Silver Star Security--Champion Security, Unisys Blue Bell, United Cerebral Palsy, United Parcel Service (UPS), United Space Alliance, LLC, United States Department of Agriculture, United States Mint, United States Postal Inspection Service, United States Postal Service, United States Probation Office, Universal Forest Products, University Hospitals of Cleveland, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center. University of South Florida Foundation, UniversityCare, University of Maryland Medicine, UPS Revenue Recovery Englewood Hub, US Conec LTD, USAA, USDA Forest Service, Curlew Job Corps, USI Inc, USPS Columbus Ohio, VA Medical Center San Francisco, VAHR-EO, Vanasse Hangen Brustlin, Inc., Vanderbilt Medical Center, Ventera Corporation, Veridian, VERITAS, Verizon, Verizon Washington D.C., Inc., Veronica Connor Middle School, Victoria's Secret, Village of Wellington. VISA, Visteon Corporation, Volvo Penta of the Americas, W. W. Grainger, Wachovia Bank, Wal-Mart Stores Inc., Wal-Mart Stores, Inc--Private Fleet, Walgreen, Wallkill, NY, Washington, Washington Mutual Bank, Washington State Prison, Waste By Rail, Inc., Waste Management Inc., Wausau Imports, Inc., We Energies. Webster Cantrell Hall, Weis Markets, Wellmark Blue Cross Blue Shield of Iowa, Wells Fargo, Wesley United Methodist Church, West Virginia, WestAM, Westar Energy Inc., Westchester County, NY, Western Financial, Western Massachusetts Electric Company, Western Oklahoma State College, Westinghouse Electric Company, Westinghouse Savannah River Company. Westport Fire Dept., Westvaco, Weyerhaeuser, Wilkes-Barre City Police Department, Wisconsin State AFL-CIO LETC, Wizcom, World Financial Group, Wright Express, WWBT NBC 12, Wyeth, Xenobiotic Detection Systems, Inc., Xerox, Yankee Gas Services Company, Yearout Mechanical and Engineering, Inc., Yosemite Waters.

Ms. LANDRIEU. Madam President, before the Senator from Wyoming leaves, I want to make a couple of comments regarding some of the things he said. While some Members of this Senate intend to vote for this bill, I am one who will not be voting for the bill. I would like to restate why. There is only one reason, one specific reason, and I think one compelling reason, that injustice was done in this bill after it left the Senate, and that injustice was that the one provision which would give direct tax relief to the men and women on the front lines, the Guard and Reserve fighting in Afghanistan, in Iraq, or whether it is North Korea, or South Korea, was left out of the bill. We have a lot of bills, and not all of them are this fat, this full, and this expensive. This is $137 billion. In 2 years, we negotiated between the House and the Senate. I know the Senator from Wyoming is aware of this because he helped to put it in. But there was only one provision in this entire bill that would have actually directed some modest tax relief to the men and women in the Guard and Reserve. But for some reason--I am not sure if it was politics, I am not sure if it was an election, I am not sure because I have not gotten an answer yet from anyone about why it was left out. Obviously, we had $137 billion to spend, and we spent it. We allocated it, but not for the Guard and Reserve. We send the Guard and Reserve to the front lines. According to Secretary Rumsfeld, we sent 640,000 men and women, 5,000-plus from my State of Louisiana, to the front lines. We can't even send them with a full paycheck. Some of us thought, gee, if we have this tax bill going through, we have to fix this problem with the World Trade Organization, and surely in the middle of this war at this time we could spend $2 billion to give tax credit. If we didn't have the $2 billion, I certainly would not have suggested that we spend it. But we have $137 billion in this bill. I am confused. My constituents are confused. The men and women in the armed services are confused and their families are wondering and are very puzzled: How could we possibly be giving away $137 billion to businesses here and abroad and leave them out? I am going to stand here for a couple of days and talk about it. I don't have an explanation for it. I don't want to go home because I don't know what I would tell them. When the Senator from Wyoming says it is politics involved in the opposition of this bill, I think that is a good question. I am not sure of the answer. But I would like to say it this way. Is politics in any way involved in the passage of this bill? This bill, $137 billion for every corporation, or many corporations that you could think of, big ones, little ones, ones that make ceiling fans, ones that operate horse racing--just go through it. I am not going to even comment about the benefits of that. I don't want the reporters and the people following this debate to say Senator Landrieu objects to anything in this bill except that the Guard and Reserve were left out. That is what I object to. I am not going to even talk about ceiling fans and horse racing, or shipbuilding, which happens in my State. There are lots of wonderful things in this bill. My only question is, How could we possibly have the nerve to pass a bill and leave the Guard and Reserve out? According to the GAO, the men and women in the Guard and Reserve on the front lines are taking a 41-percent pay cut. You may say to me, Senator, they knew it when they signed up. Let me answer that. They knew there would be sacrifice. These men and women don't want a lot of pity or attention. They are happy to go. They want to go. They are proud to serve. I know many of them personally. I am proud of them. But I tell you what they did not know: They didn't know that we--when I say ``we'', I mean this President, the former President, and the leadership of the Armed Services Committee--would make a policy decision that would say that our Armed Forces, instead of relying mostly on Active and a little bit on our Reserve, decided because it is less expensive we are going to rely more on our Reserve and a little less on our Active. We didn't tell them that because they signed up 10 years ago and we have been making these decisions in the last couple of years. They sign up. They weigh the pros and cons. They want to serve their country. They are patriotic. They say, I will make the sacrifice. But then we changed the rules on them. It is not their job to fix that. It is our job to fix it. We had a bill coming along. It started 2 years ago. I thought: this is a perfect time to fix this situation. Here is the money. It is small businesses that are writing these checks to keep their pay whole, and surely this country would find money in this bill to do this, and then whatever else they want to do is fine with me. But, oh, no. Let me make another point about what the Senator from Wyoming said. He said something along the lines that jobs are created by tax cuts. We have to have tax cuts for businesses to grow. I think that is partially correct. I don't think just any tax cut at any time makes business grow, but I will give him that. But I will tell you what makes businesses in America grow. I will tell you what no business could operate without. I will tell you in large measure what this war is about. It is about economic freedom. It is about global trade. It is about peace in the world so people can make a profit. No business in this bill could possibly function without the men and women in the Active or Reserve units. They wouldn't exist. Yet we have this bill to help companies and businesses, and we can't help the men and women taking the bullets. I am not voting for a bill like that. I urge my colleagues, if they have decided how to vote, they might want to change their minds. I hope maybe people listening in their States, and maybe some of the families who have actually lost soldiers on the front lines might call their Senators, and say, Senator, if you do not mind, what Senator Landrieu is saying makes sense. Please don't leave me out of the bill. You put me in the war. Don't leave me out of the bill. You put me in the photograph, don't leave me out of the budget. I will say one more thing before my 10 minutes is up. I know something else about military families, and it is what I love about them the most. They never even want attention. I have had a little bit of a difficult time getting some of the families to call me. Do you know why? Because these men and women understand what sacrifice is all about. They didn't sign up to get rich. They didn't sign up to get an award. They don't really advertise their bravery every day, not like some people around here who cannot wait to show their awards off, et cetera. The men and women in uniform don't do that. So it is hard for them to ask. I want them to know it is my job as their Senator to ask for them and to fight for them. I don't blame them for not wanting to have their names used. They want to feel self-reliant. But I will be darned if I will sit here and watch this $137 billion get out of this Chamber and leave them behind. My colleagues, we are going to be here for a long weekend because I have a lot of things to say about this. My time now is up, but I am not going far. I don't live far from here. I am back and forth from Louisiana, and the house I live in when I am here is four blocks away, so I am not far away. I would stay here for many days to talk about it. Members in this Chamber feel very strongly about their Guard and Reserve. They know the sacrifices they are making and a mistake was made. Mistakes can be corrected. At 6 o'clock today I am delivering a letter to the White House. I will read it before 6 o'clock in the Senate. It is being delivered to the President. It is assumed in the letter that he didn't know about this personally, that it was just something that did not come to his attention. But he has the power as the President to fix it, and I hope that he will take that action. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I thank my distinguished colleague for yielding. I am objecting also because of an issue that is of great concern to me and to the people of Louisiana. It is in this $137 billion tax bill that we have worked on very hard for 2 years. Our leaders in the Senate have done an excellent job under very difficult circumstances. It was a House committee, without the cameras rolling and without a real record of it. The only people taking bullets for us, who are the men and women on the front line in Afghanistan and Iraq--in this case the Guard and National Reserve--the only people taking the bullets were left out of the bill completely. They were not the top of the list, they were not in the middle of the list, and they were not in the bottom of the list. So I am slowing the Senate down until I can get this message out, and talking to as many reporters and others who will talk so I can tell them the truth and what happened. I can talk to my colleagues if we are going to stay here a day or 2 days or 3 days. They have been in Iraq for over a year and a half, 2 years, and another weekend is not going to hurt me. We need to talk about a plan to work through it. But I am not leaving them on the cutting-room floor.

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I think under the unanimous consent agreement that I am entitled to speak for the next 15 minutes.

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, the Senator from Nevada makes some interesting points. I will have more to say about that specific issue later, as will other Senators from this side. But I am glad that he brought up the point of greed because it is actually something that I am going to speak about myself but as it relates to a different aspect, a different bill, and a different issue, but basically the same ``sin,'' if you will. Unfortunately, it is not our allies who are committing this sin, it is us right here. We are debating now, over the course of the next several days, and have actually been debating for 2 years, a tax relief bill prompted by the World Trade Organization's decision that some of the things in our U.S. Tax Code were contrary to the free trade principles that most of us--not all of us but most of us--espouse. So that decision set in motion a very necessary effort to address that decision by changing some things in our Tax Code. Of course, anytime you open up the Tax Code there are many people interested in changing the words, the letters, the titles, the paragraphs, and the provisions. Sometimes a change in one word could mean a $1 billion windfall for a particular company, or millions of dollars of windfall for particular entities. There is a lot of interest every time this body opens up a tax bill. Two years ago when it came to the attention of some of us that a tax bill would be opened, and then as the 9/11 tragedy happened and as we saw men and women from our States going to the front lines to fight in Afghanistan and Iraq, and as we watched some of our health units, particularly in New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, right here in Washington, DC, and Virginia respond to some very tough casualties that this country experienced, some of us began to think: What could we do in this tax bill to honor the men and women who are on the front lines? Not being on the Finance Committee, I wasn't aware of all the specific aspects, but I knew there would be maybe hundreds or thousands of entities, corporations, big and small, groups that thought they were entitled to some sort of tax break. For the life of me, I didn't think we would have any trouble at all when a group of us got together--Senator Boxer being one, Senator Mikulski, Senator Murray, Senator Daschle, Senator Reid, Senator Bond, the Senator from South Carolina, Lindsey Graham, and many others--and thought, having been to a lot of parades and flag-waving ceremonies for our troops, maybe there would be a way we could help them in this tax bill. I know it is not the focus, but we figured--or I thought--there would be lots of other people who were trying to get in. So why don't we try to get our troops in? The good part of this story is we did in the Senate, with the help of Senator Grassley, Senator Baucus, and many members on the Senate Finance Committee who worked long hours, many weeks, many months negotiating a bill that would correct the original problem that the World Trade Organization had, and provide some tax relief, according to their views and other people who wanted tax relief; we put in a tax benefit of $2 billion for the men and women who are actually on the front lines, the guardsmen and reservists who have become a larger and larger component of our fighting force, who leave their regular jobs, leave their families, and leave their regular civilian life, put on their uniforms and go to the front lines. We know from reports which we have read and from our own experience representing our Guard and Reserve in our own States that 40 percent of these men and women take a cut in pay to go to the front lines. Not only do they take the bullet, not only do their Humvees get blown up on patrols, but they also take a cut in pay to go. Some of us had the notion that maybe in this bill, whether it was going to be $350 billion or $75 billion or $100 billion, now it is $137 billion--I would like to show you what that looks like. This is only part of it. This is what a bill looks like that has tax relief provisions of $137 billion. This is just part of it. I am going to get the rest of it because it is a lot of pages. Some of us had the foolish notion that maybe the Congress could find one page, one paragraph, one letter to include tax relief for American businesses that are doing the right thing, the patriotic thing, by filling the pay gap that these men and women are experiencing. When they leave their civilian life and they put the uniform on, and they pick up their paychecks from the Army, Air Force, or the Navy, they get a substantial cut in pay. Some of the employers are making them whole and doing the right thing, the patriotic thing. We thought surely in this tax bill we could give a tax credit to those small businesses because times are not good everywhere in some States and communities. Really, the whole economy is weaker than we had expected and these small businesses are struggling. But I don't know why Chairman Thomas from California who wrote the bill, and the House leadership of Congressman DeLay and Speaker Hastert, couldn't find one page or paragraph to include them. So they were left out. They weren't in the top of the list, they weren't in the middle of the list, and they were not at the bottom of the list. They are not on the list. We stand here and talk all weekend about our intelligence reorganization to secure ourselves. We talk about spending and the investment in our defense to secure ourselves. Let me just ask anyone who would want to come to this floor, or Chairman Thomas, if he is listening to me, what could we be thinking if we are not even keeping the paychecks of the men and women on the front lines whole? No bonus, no extra, just keep their paycheck whole, just to keep their house payments up, just to keep the car notes for their spouse who is at home so they can continue to work and transport the children, just keep the children's trust funds moving along so they don't have to make that up when they come home--what could they be thinking? They weren't thinking very well on the House side. They took it out. If we could afford $2.5 trillion in tax cuts in 2001, I think we could at least allocate one-tenth of 1 percent to our troops on the front lines who are protecting us today. I want to say another thing to the businesses that are in this bill. I have a lot of companies in Louisiana that are going to benefit from this bill. I have not a word to say about that. I am happy they are in. I am sure they have good reasons. I am sure it is going to help create jobs. But I have a word to say to the businesses in the United States of America. No business would be here, no business could operate, no business would have international trade, no business would have stockholders, no business would have a profit sheet, no businesspeople would be paying taxes on profits they made if it were not for the men and women in uniform who go to the front lines every time we have a conflict, a peacekeeping mission or a war to undertake to protect their commercial interests. I am confident that the businesspeople who are represented in this bill know that. I know they are not going to blame me for taking a few days to talk about it. I know they will say, Senator, you are right. We are grateful to the men and women in uniform. We are actually a little embarrassed because we are in the bill and they are not. It is not their fault. It is nobody's fault. But the House leadership who wrote the bill left them out. We have in this bill help for investors who want to invest in a subway system in Paris. I like NASCAR. Lots of people in my State go to NASCAR races. We have tax relief for NASCAR. We have tax relief for ceiling fan importers with Home Depot. I shop at Home Depot. I like Home Depot. But we left out the Guard and Reserve. I don't know. I am just starting to think that unless the cameras are on nobody remembers the truth. It is only the photo opportunities or the rallies or the parades that everybody goes to. We wear the pins and the flags, but when it comes to the budget and to the tax bill, we leave them out. I don't think our troops need a lobbyist. I thought we were their advocates. Mr. President, $137 billion and we could not allocate $2 billion, not $1 billion, not half a billion? I will speak about this as often as possible for the next couple of days. I tell my leadership, I don't want to make people's lives miserable. I am happy to talk with our leadership and the Republican leadership about any time agreements that make people's weekends convenient, but I could not in good conscience not spend some hours-- whether it is 2, 5, 10, or 30--talking about the 5,000 men and women who have been deployed out of Louisiana, who are on the front lines, whose employers, whom I know personally, are making their paychecks whole. We had the chance to help out small business, to help our National Guard and Reserve. Somebody, somewhere, on the other side of this Capitol made a decision that is immoral, unconscionable, and most certainly not justifiable. I will present for the record some names of families. I will present some hardship cases so the record is clear about the kind of families we have turned our backs on and the kind of employers who are doing the very best they can. While they are hiring a replacement, because they obviously need the job done, and sending the paycheck overseas, the Government of the United States, which is supposed to be on their side, decides we do not want to help them because we have higher priorities. What higher priorities could we possibly have in the Tax Code at this time? If any one of my colleagues wants to explain to me and anyone else what could be a higher priority, I would appreciate it. If there is something else in here for the Guard and Reserve, for the military, to support our troops directly, please tell me. Maybe I didn't get to read the whole report. I was on the Armed Services Committee for several years. Eventually, I hope to be on Defense Appropriations where I can do more work along this line. I know one thing, last year the Guard and Reserve, despite the fact these are the most dedicated and patriotic men and women--they will go the distance. They do not complain. They do not even like to say what is wrong because they feel sacrifice is what they do. I understand that. They came 5,000 people short of their retention goals. Could it possibly be because, although the soldiers do not mind making the sacrifice, they are getting belly sick of their spouses and their wives and children making sacrifices more than the rest of us are making? Why can't we sacrifice and help them? Why do they have to continue to make the sacrifice? When we have the opportunity, we say no. Drastic pay cuts, bankruptcies, foreclosures--these aren't exactly the kinds of challenges members of the American military reserve signed up for when they volunteered to put their life on the line for us and for a country as great as this. For all of our pompous talk about how patriotic we are in this Congress, the least we can do is keep their paycheck whole. Let me talk about three families I actually know. I will be in the Chamber talking about more. Janet Wright is from Hammond, LA. Her husband Russell is in the Marine Corps. I have the Marine Corps pin on today in honor of our men and women. He makes $60,000 a year in the civilian world. He was activated and made only $30,000. He took a 50-percent pay cut. Mrs. Wright said that after a couple of months she started to put water in her children's cereal while her husband was gone because she had to count every penny. That is what happens when we give out $137 billion: We cannot help the Wrights. We don't have enough money to help the Wrights, so they have to put water in the children's cereal bowls. Scott is a Navy reservist from California. He lost his home when he was activated and he lost nearly $1,000 a month in pay because the Navy job was different than the civilian. People say, Senator, that is impossible. There is a law that protects people from losing their home. I know that. You cannot foreclose on someone's home when they are on the front line. But the problem is, the bills add up and when they have to come home, if they have not paid those monthly notes and they cannot pay it within a certain amount of time, the foreclosure happens. I don't understand how we don't have any money to fix it. How can I go home and tell my Guard and Reserve, I'm sorry, we didn't have any money, but here is $137 billion we gave out to everybody else? I am not going to do it. I can't go home. So I would as soon stay here because I don't have a thing I can tell them, not a thing I can say. I will tell more stories about real people. They are calling my office right now and sending letters. We are getting a lot of e-mails. I will come down here until I hear from Chairman Thomas. We are sending a letter to the President at 6 o'clock today. Let me say on the record I don't think the President of the United States knows they were left out. He has a lot on his mind. I understand that. And I know this is only one of a thousand things he has to consider, literally, weekly. But I am sending him a letter to let him know. I cannot amend this bill; it is beyond my power to amend it. It is against the rules. But the bill could be vetoed and this could be included. Or the President could send a message to his House leadership that says, you must have made a mistake; we should have included this. We obviously could afford it and he could promise to fix it. I hope that is a response we will get over the next couple of days. I don't know. I know he is very busy on many other things right now. There will be a big debate tonight, but this is something I had to bring to our attention. Over 410,000 members of the National Guard and Reserve have been activated since September 11. Secretary Rumsfeld has predicted that number may go up to 640,000. That is a lot of families dependent on us to make good decisions for them. This was not a good decision made by the House leadership. I will do everything in my power to get them to change their mind, to change the bill, or to promise they will put in this $2 billion or $3 billion--whatever it will cost to close this pay gap--so the men and women who leave your State of Illinois or my State of Louisiana or the Senator's State of Ohio or the Senator's State of Massachusetts, when the soldiers leave to go overseas, they have confidence that when we have a chance to help them keep their pay whole, keep their benefits intact, give them some support in the spousal support program we have established, we are there for them. I understand the Senator from Massachusetts will speak and I understand the Senator from Iowa will yield the time to make that possible. But if my colleagues are wondering why the process has slowed down, why we are having a hard time getting a schedule for the next couple of days, this is one of the reasons. This is the reason I am voting against the bill and will be speaking about it as the days go forward. I yield the floor.

Ms. LANDRIEU. Yes.

Ms. LANDRIEU. Will the Senator yield for a question?

Ms. LANDRIEU. Does it strike the Senator as odd and actually unjust that the same bill that would push the date back for companies to go register in the Bahamas--to give up their U.S. citizenship presumably because they think it is too hard for them to pay their taxes--in that same bill, the men and women who are protecting the right of those businesses to make a profit and to benefit from the great riches of this country were deprived of a tax credit? Does that strike the Senator as an odd way to either begin or end a session of the Congress?

Ms. LANDRIEU. Will the Senator yield for me to have an opportunity to try to answer that just briefly?

Ms. LANDRIEU. OK. I would just ask the Senator, did he know that at least my remarks were not at all directed politically to this bill? The Senator is correct. Did he know that when the provision I spoke about earlier left the Senate floor, 100 percent of the Senators, including the leadership of Senator Grassley and Senator Baucus, sent our bill over to the House saying, please put our troops at the top of the list if we are going to give out $137 billion? Did the Senator know they didn't even come back in any part of the list? They are not on the list. I just wanted to ask the Senator if he remembered that that was something we sent over.

Ms. LANDRIEU. Madam President, is there a specific order under the unanimous consent agreement?

Ms. LANDRIEU. I ask unanimous consent to speak for the next 10 minutes, if I am not interrupting anyone's time.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I rise to endorse S. Con. Res. 141 offered by Senator Domenici recognizing the essential role that nuclear power plays in our society. The U.S. Senate must recognize the important role that nuclear energy plays in our Nation's economy, our Nation's energy independence and security, and our Nation's environmental goals. And, we need to acknowledge that like nearly every other source of energy, nuclear power needs our help to continue playing its important role in our Nation's energy policy. Nuclear energy currently generates electricity for one in every five homes and businesses today. It is important not only in Louisiana, where two nuclear plants produce nearly 17 percent of my State's electricity, but also in States such as Connecticut, Illinois, New Hampshire, New Jersey, South Carolina and Vermont where nuclear generates more electricity than any other source. Nationwide, 103 reactors provide 20 percent of our electricity--the largest source of U.S. emission-free power provided 24-7. Nuclear energy is also vitally important for our environment and our Nation's clean air goals. Nuclear power is the Nation's largest clean air source of electricity, generating three-fourths of all emission- free electricity. For future generations of Americans, whose reliance on electricity will increase and who rightfully want a cleaner environment and the health benefits that cleaner air will provide nuclear energy will be an essential partner. Just this past Sunday, the Washington Post highlighted the problems that the Shenandoah National Forest now faces with pollution. Think how much worse our Nation's air pollution would be if nuclear energy did not generate one fifth of our electricity. According to the Department of Energy the demand for electricity is expected to grow by 40 percent by 2020. In order to continue producing at least one-third of our total electricity generation from emission- free sources, we must build 50,000 megawatts of new nuclear energy production. If we do that, we are just preserving our current levels of emission-free generation, not improving them. And, we need to recognize that nuclear power, by providing a stable, dependable source of electricity, is vital to our Nation's energy security and independence. Nuclear power is essentially an American invention. We generate nearly a fourth of the world's total nuclear power and we can do so with domestic energy sources. Hydrogen holds the promise of helping us lessen our dependence on imported oil and nuclear power is one of the most promising ways that we can produce hydrogen economically and efficiently. There is a nuclear power renaissance in the making. Three of the Nation's leading nuclear power operators have already applied for an early site permit to build a new nuclear plant next door to an existing nuclear plant they operate, testing the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's new licensing process for the first time. Also, just a few months ago, nine nuclear operating companies and the two major U.S. power reactor manufacturers formed the NuStart Energy consortium to apply for a construction and operating license, COL, to test the regulatory process for actually building and operating the next generation of nuclear power plants. These are positive signs that the U.S. nuclear power industry is alive and ready to build and operate the next generation of nuclear power--still without emitting any air pollutants, increasing our energy independence, and using the safest designs ever. Today 29 new plants are being built around the world in 16 counties-- most using a design that originated here in America--but not one of them is in the U.S. That must change. I urge my colleagues to support this critical resolution which will further promote a vital source of energy while helping to pave the way towards improving our Nation's energy security.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I am very pleased to join Chairman DeWine while the Senate considers passage of the fiscal year 2005 District of Columbia appropriations conference report. The bill totals $560 million, which is an increase of $18.3 million from fiscal year 2004. The conference agreement represents a concerted effort of the House and Senate members to complete a bi-partisan bill only 6 days into the new fiscal year. This is a true win for the District of Columbia, whose budget has been delayed in Congress past December and January in recent years. During our 3-year term as chairman and ranking member of the D.C. Appropriations Subcommittee, Senator DeWine and I have met many challenges to stay in our allocation and deal appropriately with controversial issues. Above it all we have remained great friends. The conference report meets the District's current needs in security, criminal justice, education, and child welfare. The conference report funds the three criminal justice functions transferred to the Federal Government for funding and oversight in the National Capital Revitalization and Self-Government Improvement Act of 1997. These functions, the courts, offender supervision, and defender services, are funded at a level which will meet the needs of FY 2005, though it was necessary to reduce funding in order to support other priorities of the Mayor and Council of the District. The conferees recommend $190.8 million for the D.C. Courts, of which $56 million is for capital improvements which we believe will be sufficient to continue restoration of the historic Old Courthouse and planning for the new Family Court facility. I was pleased to attend the ribbon cutting just a few weeks ago for the renovated interim space of the Family Court, which we funded last year. The courts have done a tremendous job of improving how the court operates, as well as improving the points where residents interact with the court--the training of their staff and the aesthetic of space. It is so important, especially for children visiting the court, to have a space that welcomes them and enables confidence in the justice system. The courts are to be commended for doing so much with small increases and we have confidence they will be able to continue this year. In addition, $180 million is included for the Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency which is responsible for all adult offenders reentering the community from prison. This agency has a critical role in public safety in the District and we have worked to ensure they have the tools needed to do their job. Chairman DeWine championed an initiative to lower the caseload ratios for special population offenders and expand use of technology to ensure offenders are meeting their parole requirements. The conference also includes $38.5 million for defender services which represents indigent defendants in the District. It is our intention this level will enable the courts to increase the pay of lawyers from $50 to $60 per hour, an increase which was started 3 years ago. Outside of the Congress' responsibility for the main criminal justice functions in the District, the bill also funds several key initiatives which the House and Senate have launched to contribute to improving education and the welfare of children in the District. I want to recognize Senator DeWine's commitment to abused and neglected children in this city, including $5 million for early intervention services, mental health services, and to support foster parents. Through Senator DeWine's commitment the status of children in the child welfare system has improved greatly, and with his sure hand I am confident it will continue to improve. There is much work to be done. In addition, $6 million was included in the conference report on behalf of the House Chairman Rodney Frelinghuysen to renovate school libraries in the District of Columbia public schools which will enable many more of the 65,000 student in the system to enjoy books and technology. Great communities need great schools. This bill includes $26 million for public education in support of the committee's goal to improve education in the District, evenly divided between traditional public schools and public charter schools. A new superintendent has been hired for the D.C. Public School system, Dr. Clifford Janey, and we are excited about his energy to reform and improve and want to support his efforts as strongly as possible. This bill includes certain tools to contribute to Dr. Janey's work. In our public schools we must recognize and reward excellence. We must acknowledge and eliminate failure. This bill directs a total of $4 million for a new incentive grant program for public education improvement in both traditional public schools and public charter schools. These grants will be awarded to the principal of high- performing or significantly improved public schools to reward their good work. A reward is a powerful incentive to build on success and meet some of the areas which can make their school thrive. I want to take this opportunity to recognize the House chairman and ranking member for their support of this new program which will contribute to reinvigorating our public schools. The second prong of the School Improvement Fund, $13 million for public charter schools, is a contribution to strengthen the chartering system. With 42 charters granted to date, the highest number of charter schools per capita, is a leader in the effort to use charter schools to spur system-wide improvement from within our system of public education. Senator DeWine and I maintain our commitment to serve as a full and equal partner in this endeavor. Strengthening charter schools, which were created in the District by Congress in the 1995 School Reform Act, is a primary tenet of our work to improve education. Pursuant to Section 120 of P.L. 106-522, the FY 01 DC Appropriations Act, the local government is prohibited from amending the School Reform Act. Therefore, Congress has continued our oversight responsibility of the charter school law this year. The bill fortifies the environment where strong, accountable, academically excellent charter schools flourish. Finally, the conference report begins a new investment in the administration of justice in the District by contributing $8 million to the construction of a new forensics lab, a top priority for the Mayor and council. This laboratory will alleviate contract pressure D.C. imposes on other Federal agencies, such as the FBI, to complete local forensic work and ensure timely processing of lab work, such as DNA tests. The bill also contributes to security and emergency preparedness in the Nation's capital with $21 million to bolster the police and first responders. This includes the annual payment of $15 million for security of Federal installations in the city and to enable the police presence now required. The conferees also provide $6 million to complete the Unified Communications Center which will coordinate all first-responders in the capital region. In addition to all of the important investments in the District, there is $7.8 million for cleaning up the Anacostia River and providing recreation for the entire region and $2.5 million for transportation improvements. I would like to close by thanking the Mayor of the District of Columbia, Anthony Williams, the entire Council, particularly the Chair Linda Cropp, and the D.C. Delegate to Congress Eleanor Holmes Norton for their many contributions and advice in developing this bill. The D.C. Appropriations Subcommittee has a unique role to fund certain aspects of the city government and we could not do that well without the guidance of the elected representative of the city's residents. They are great partners for Chairman DeWine and I to ensure the bill meets the needs of the District. I am especially pleased this year that we are passing the final budget so early in the fiscal year, because the city's local budget, nearly $8 billion, of locally-generated tax dollars, must be approved as part of this bill. I appreciate the chairman's consideration and our ability to work together so well. And finally, no bill could be completed without the diligent work of our staff, Mary Dietrich for Senator DeWine and Kate Eltrich and Kathleen Strottman on my staff. This year has been blessed by a comity not often observed in the Congress in regards to our Capital City, and I thank all my colleagues for their commitment to a positive year and a first-rate bill for the District.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I know the issue the Senator from California raised is very important and will be considered as we go forward in our debates, as our session wraps up. The Senator from Connecticut and the Senator from Maine have done an outstanding job in managing the underlying bill and helping us come to grips with some of the new fundamental changes necessary to reorganize our intelligence communities to face the challenges confronting our Nation. I do not want to take too much time away from that very important debate. But I did feel compelled to come to the floor and raise an issue regarding our military families, especially the families of our National Guardsmen and Reservists. They, too, are so critical to meeting and defeating enemies on the home-front and in Iraq and Afghanistan. Because we call on thousands of Active men and women in our armed forces, as well as reservists in our Guard and Reserve, to be in the forefront of the battles in Iraq and Afghanistan, I thought it was important to come to the floor to share some information that will disappoint people in Louisiana and across the United States. Right now, somewhere in this Capitol, there is a conference meeting trying to finalize a tax relief package that we refer to around here as FSC/ETI. It is a necessary change in our Tax Code because of some trade decisions that were made relative to the way Europe and America conduct trade and impose taxes and fees on imports and exports. For several months, members of the Senate Finance Committee and Members of the House Ways and Means Committee have been working to reach a final agreement. Different amendments have been added and subtracted as a means to bring the bill closer to final passage. One of the amendments that I thought was one of the most important amendments in that bill--one that my colleagues in the Senate, Republicans and Democrats, agreed to unanimously called for tax credits to be made available to employers who continued to pay the salaries of their employees if those employees had been activated for duty in the National Guard and Reserves. The Senate agreed that if we were going to give tax relief and a trade fix for corporations and for businesses, then we should also find space in that bill to provide tax relief in some way to the patriotic employers who are trying to help their employees in the Guard and Reserve make ends meet. We should do that so the men and women who put the uniform on every morning and run those patrols ferreting out insurgents and terrorists in Iraq would not have to take a pay cut to do their job to defend America. We want those troops focused on the war-front, not whether bills have been paid on the home-front. Americans might be shocked, because I am shocked, and I am disappointed, that our Government has not yet found a way to make sure that when we call up the men and women basically out of their regular life--as doctors or lawyers or truck drivers or nurses or teachers or government workers or firefighters or police officers--and ask them to leave their families, leave their jobs, leave their businesses and go fight on the front line for us, that we have not found a way to make sure they can do that without taking a pay cut. The GAO has documented that 41 percent of the Guardsmen and Reservists fighting for us--being called away from their homes, away from their families, and putting their lives in peril and great danger--are doing so with a pay cut. We need to provide them a helmet and a gun and a flak jacket and some protection. But I think we also should make every effort to ensure their families back-home have some stability. We should take steps so that the troop in Falujah knows his employer can take care of his family. If this Congress and the President were not already enacting trillions in tax cuts and we were adhering to a plan of fiscal responsibility, I might be able to look these families in the eye and say, ``Sorry we have a budget deficit. We are doing the best we can.'' But do you know what the shame of it is? There is a conference meeting somewhere in this Capitol giving out tax relief to people who already have a lot of money, to corporations some of which may be on the front line but many of which are not, and we have the Republican leadership on the House that says we cannot afford a tax credit to benefit patriotic employers, our Guardsmen and Reservists, and their families. We are asking our men and women in unifrom to bear 100 percent of the risk and burden of fighting the war on terror. Yet in all the tax relief in the Republican-drafted plan, the Republican- leadership plan drafted by Chairman Thomas, we can't find one penny to make sure the military families get a full paycheck. The cost of my amendment amounts to less than .1 percent of all the Bush/Republican tax cuts enacted since 2001. My amendment is even offset, but the Republican leadership simply refuses to help military families. Since 2001, the Republican leadership has passed over $2.1 trillion in tax cuts and tax breaks for the wealthiest Americans. I supported some of these tax cuts but the major beneficiaries have been wealthy individuals who had already accumulated great assets, and corporations. Direct support for military families has been less than .1 percent, or $1.37 billion, of the $2.1 trillion in tax cuts. If you remember, in 2001, we had one bill for tax cuts which we called the Military Family Relief Act. It amounted to $1.37 billion out of $2.1 trillion. So the bulk of the tax relief is going to people who are not on the front line. Only limited help is going to the people on the front line. You can see the graph here, $2.1 trillion to everybody else who is not in uniform and $1.37 billion to the military families who are fighting the battle. I don't understand how we are fighting this war. Maybe somebody can explain it to me. At least people say: Senator, you must not understand that much of these tax cuts get to the military families; it is just not directly. If they have children, they might get the child tax credit. I understand that. But 75 percent of the enlisted men and women in our armed services make less than $30,000 a year. A staff sergeant with 8 years of experience makes $30,000 a year. So if you don't write them directly into the bills--because the bills are skewed to those individuals and families making over $75,000, mostly $100,000, $200,000, $300,000--the military families don't get to take advantage of tax cuts. Time and time again, every time a tax bill passes this Congress, the military family is left on the cutting room floor. In 2001, we passed the Economic Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act, $1.6 trillion-- direct support for military families was $0. In 2002, we passed the Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act, $41 billion--military families, $0. In 2003, we passed the Jobs and Growth Reconciliation Act, $230 billion--direct support for military, $0. This year we passed the Working Families Tax Relief Act, $146 billion--direct support for military families, $0. This $146 billion had no offsets. Now we have a conference in this Capitol putting together an $81 billion tax bill. And the amendment, the one little amendment we put on to encourage employers to keep the salaries up for the Guard and Reserve when they are fighting in Iraq, was taken out because we can't afford it. When it left the Senate, we had paid for it. There are plenty of ways the House Republicans could pay for it, today, but helping military families is not in their interests. We could close a loophole that allows companies to leave the United States for the purpose of reorganizing themselves so they do not have to pay taxes. We could close that loophole and gave it to the men and women putting on the uniform to defend our country. These soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines aren't fleeing the country to avoid paying taxes, yet we don't get tough on the corporations that are leaving the country to avoid taxes. They take every benefit of what this nation has to offer, including the blood and sweat of our troops, and pay nothing in return. But, some in Congress want to put these corporations in front of our men and women in uniform. Let me also say I am ashamed for our Government that we have not yet closed our own loophole when a Federal Government worker takes off the Government suit or dress or uniform and puts on the military uniform and goes to fight on the front lines of Iraq. The US Government, as an employer, does not fill the pay gap for Federal employees. Mr. President, 41 percent of the guardsmen and reservists who are fighting in Iraq take a pay cut to fight and we keep passing appropriations bills and tax cuts to give everyone in the world a tax break, except our military families. And, our poor military families ask for help and we have the Republican leadership in the House telling them: Sorry, there is no more money. I just got back from Fort Polk a couple of weeks ago, where I have 4,000 maybe 5,000 families in Louisiana whose primary breadwinner has stopped winning bread at home and gone over to Iraq to help fight this war. I promised them that I was not going to just come on home without a fight or without raising this issue for the 5,000 families in my State and for the thousands of families around this country who do not ask for much. They ask for good training. They ask for equipment. And they are asking that they don't take a pay cut when they go to fight. They are not asking for a pay raise; they just don't want a pay cut. They'll get that pay cut if we let this last tax bill go out of here without fixing this provision or without giving some tax credit to companies, many of them small businesses, who continue to pay their activated Guard and Reserve employees. You can understand why a small business sometimes can't afford to continue to pay the guardsmen and reservists 100 percent of their salary and then have to pay 100 percent of the salary for a replacement. We are asking for a tax credit for these employers so they can voluntarily, if they want, continue to pay the salary of their Guard and Reserve, take a tax credit so we would basically share that expense among everyone and allow that guardsman and reservist to get a full paycheck. I repeat for the record, the GAO reports that 41 percent of the guardsmen and reservists called to active duty take a pay cut. We could fix that, but for some reason we do not want to, we do not think we should, or we do not have the money. Yet at the same time we are fixing a lot of things for a lot of people and passing one appropriations bill and one tax bill after another. Forty percent of those serving in Iraq and Afghanistan are Guard and Reserve; 410,000 families or individuals have been activated since September 11. We probably have a few more thousand to activate until we get it right in Iraq. We can pay for this, as I said, by closing loopholes, but the Republican leadership said, ``No.'' We cannot not pay for it. They have passed tax bills out of here and chalked it up to more debt. This would not be that much to add for people assuming 100 percent of the risk to defend this Nation, but they do not choose to do that, either. Right now, as I speak, 3 o'clock today, it is not in the bill. I hope these words are traveling through this Capitol. I hope there are people listening and phones start ringing to include the military families in this FSC/ETI bill that is moving through conference so this tax relief can be given and the pay gap can be closed. If you are on the front line, taking 100 percent of the risk, the last thing you need to take is a pay cut. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak 10 minutes as if in morning business.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, it has been said that ``ignorance, allied with power, is the most ferocious enemy justice can have.'' Sadly, this great body, in which I am so proud to serve, once allied its power with ignorance. In so doing, it condoned unspeakable injustice that diminished the role of the Senate, and heaped untold suffering on Americans sorely in need of our protection. I am referring to the Senate's role in the decades long campaign to end lynching in this country. On three separate occasions, our colleagues in the House of Representatives passed anti-lynching legislation with overwhelming majorities. On all three of those occasions members of this Chamber blocked, or filibustered the consideration of that legislation. Between 1882, when records first began to be collected, and 1968 four thousand, seven hundred and forty-two Americans lost their lives to lynch mobs. The experts believe that undocumented cases might double that figure. The vast majority of those killed--three thousand, four hundred and forty-five Americans--were African American. Sadly, a disproportionate number of those deaths occurred within my home region of the South, but 46 of the 50 States experienced these atrocities. Lynching was truly a national problem deserving the attention of the national legislative bodies. Frederick Douglas seems to have captured the real reason for this dark period of our national history. These acts of terrorism were not so much an admission of African Americans' weakness, but of their perseverance--and indomitable spirit. Douglas wrote: It is proof that the Negro is not standing still. He is not dead, but alive and active. He is not drifting with the current, but manfully resisting it . . . A ship rotting at anchor meets with no resistance, but when she sails on the sea, she has to buffet opposing billows. The enemies of the Negro see that he is making progress and they naturally wish to stop him and keep him in just what they consider his proper place. It was, in short, the ability of African Americans to overcome Jim Crow laws, to overcome share-cropping, to overcome second-class citizenship that provoked such savagery. Its an old story that repeats itself throughout human history. Whether it was the Israelites in Egypt, the colonial empires in Africa or America's own history of Apartheid, rulers that assume superiority inevitably prove themselves models of mankind's basest instincts. It should also be noted that this was not only an outrage committed against African Americans. The effort to dehumanize people on the basis of race or ethnicity did not limit itself to black Americans. In fact, the single largest incident of lynching occurred in my home state, in my home town of New Orleans. Yet, the victims were not black. They were Italians. On March 14, 1891, 11 Italian immigrants were lynched in the City of New Orleans. These immigrants too were thought to be less than human, and were simply rounded up as a group of the ``usual suspects'' following the murder of Police Superintendent David Hennessy. Already edgy from a media prompted mafia scare, a mob surrounded the prison and eventually battered down the doors. An armed group of twenty five men overtook the guards and summarily riddled the bodies of the 11 Italian prisoners with bullets. Their bodies were hung on lampposts outside the prison. Eyewitnesses described the cheering of the crowd as deafening. Of course, the attacks on that day are an example of mob justice and its irrational prejudices. However, in nearly 25 percent of all lynchings the motivations of the attackers came down to a bald attempt to maintain a caste system in this country. The NAACP cataloged the reported motivations for these forms of attack. They included: using disrespectful, insulting, slanderous, boastful, threatening or incendiary language; insubordination, impertinence, or improper demeanor, a sarcastic grin, laughing at the wrong place, a prolonged silence; refusing to take off one's hat to a white person or to give the right-of-way when encountering a white on the sidewalk; resisting assault by whites; being troublesome generally; disorderly conduct, petty theft or drunkenness; writing an improper letter to a white person; paying undue or improper attention to a white female; accusing a white man of writing love letters to a black woman; or living or keeping company with a white woman; turning or refusing to turn state's evidence; testifying or bringing suit against a white person; being related to a person accused of a crime and already lynched; political activities; union organizing; conjuring; discussing a lynching; gambling; operating a house of ill fame; a personal debt; refusing to accept an employment offer; vagrancy; refusing to give up one's farm; conspicuously displaying one's wealth or property; and trying to act like a white man. In many instances, lynchings were little more than a way to remove an economic competitor and confiscate his property. This was true in a number of cases in Mississippi involving successful African American landowners, and in one notorious Hawaiian case involving a Japanese immigrant competing with established white businessmen. Many of my colleagues might wonder why now? After all, some of these incidents are over a century old. There are two reasons. First, this aspect of American history is not well known or understood. As reconstruction concluded in the South, a very ugly struggle to reassert the social structure that preceded the Civil War took place. A great deal of it occurred with the tacit consent of the Federal Government, and the most part, the media either shared in the common prejudice, or simply ignored what was occurring. Fortunately, we have the publication of the book ``Without Sanctuary'' by James Allen, Hilton Als, Congressman John Lewis, and Leon F. Litwak to serve as a focal point for our attention to this neglected history. This is a difficult book to examine. It serves as a catalog of inhuman crime perpetrated by very ordinary citizens. Looking at anything so tragic as the victims of these crimes would be disturbing, but that is not what will leave a lasting impression. It is the festive attitude, the smiles and smirks on the crowd gathered around the victim. They clearly take a perverse pride in this act. Hannah Arendt, the famous political philosopher, subtitled her book on Adolph Eichman's war crimes trials ``A Report on the Banality of Evil.'' When you look at the expressions on the faces of the murderers in these photos, that is all you can think about. These are not crazed killers, these are rational people going about their everyday lives, and committing unspeakable acts in the process. Photos like these serve to remind us that a healthy society is not something that is built up over time, and then like a great monument, exists for centuries. Rather, a healthy society is a thin levee that must be constantly improved and maintained to hold back the worst instincts of mankind. I think the horrible pictures that came from Abu Gharib prison served as a reminder of this lesson. This book is even greater testimony that atrocities are not events that only occur in far off places. They can and have occurred here in the United States. The only way to maintain a healthy society is to acknowledge and discuss our mistakes. No one would defend the Senate's filibuster of anti-lynching legislation today. I would like to think that any Senator who did so would quickly be looking for another line of work. However, despite the change of attitude we have taken no action to remedy our wrong. That is the purpose of this resolution today. I would like to extend my deep thanks to my courageous colleague, the Junior Senator from Virginia. He seemed to instantly understand the significance of this effort, and I believed it was vitally important to proceed with this resolution in a bipartisan manner. His input and drive have made this effort much more successful than it otherwise would have been. It is our intention to submit this legislation today, and use the recess period to confer with our colleagues about it. When we reconvene next year, we will resubmit this resolution, and at that time, we hope to have the co-sponsorship of every member of this body. Then, we will endeavor to enact the resolution to commemorate Black History month. I said ignorance allied with power is justice's most ferocious enemy. Yet imagine what truth allied with power can bring. For over 50 years, African American achievement was seen as a threat to the majority of people in this nation. It is time to close the book on that tragic period and begin to celebrate the achievements of black Americans as accomplishments that have bettered us all. I believe that this resolution of apology will be an important symbolic step in this process of healing and growth.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Thank you Senator Leahy for your consideration of my requests.

Ms. LANDRIEU. Madam President, I would like to commend Chairman McConnell and ranking member Leahy for drafting a Foreign Operations Appropriations bill that provides a generous amount of foreign assistance to help vulnerable people around the world. Their bi- partisan efforts have resulted in a strong bill that addresses many of the needs that exist across our globe. I would like to take this opportunity to present two items that I respectfully request our committee address in conference negotiations of this bill with the House. These items refer to allocations for the United Nations Development Fund for Women UNIFEM. UNIFEM works in more than 100 countries to invest in women to reduce poverty, end violence against women, combat HIV/AIDS, and support women's roles in conflict prevention and reconstruction. This investment in women contributes to a more stable world for all countries. Despite our contributions for UNIFEM's work and mission, the United States has yet to step forward and provide adequate core support to UNIFEM. Our current contribution is $1 million annually, less than countries like Belgium, whose size and population are less than some of our states. In fact, our total support for UNIFEM is 6 percent of their budget, a considerable distance from the average of 22 percent that the United States contributes to other UN agencies. Additionally, the UNIFEM Trust Fund in Support of Actions to Eliminate Violence Against Women--a key support mechanism for local groups fighting violence--has never received a US government contribution. As you know, the House has passed a Foreign Operations Appropriations bill that includes greater funding for UNIFEM than is included in the proposed Senate bill. Specifically, the House report says, ``The Committee supports a total of $3,000,000 for the United Nations Development Fund for Women (UNIFEM) including a $2,000,000 contribution to the Fund and a $1,000,000 first time contribution to the Trust Fund in Support of Actions to Eliminate Violence Against Women. This level is $2,000,000 above the request and $2,006,000 above the level provided in the 2004 act.'' I respectfully request that the Senate work to adopt the House recommended support levels for the United Nations Development Fund for Women--UNIFEM--and the UNIFEM Trust Fund in Support of Actions to Eliminate Violence Against Women. Specifically, in conference, I hope the Senate will favorably consider the addition of $500,000 to the $1.5 million that is presently allocated to UNIFEM, for a total of $2.0 million. Second, I respectfully ask that the Senate conferees consider the addition of $1 million as a first time contribution to the UNIFEM Trust Fund in Support of Actions to Eliminate Violence Against Women. Again, these additions would reflect the sums allocated in the House Foreign Operations Appropriations bill and provide critical assistance to women throughout the developing world. I hope that Senator Leahy will work in conference to take actions that are necessary to ensure that the House recommendations are adopted in the final passage of this law.

Ms. LANDRIEU. Madam President, I would like to commend Chairman McConnell and ranking member Leahy for drafting a Foreign Operations Appropriations bill that provides a generous amount of foreign assistance to help vulnerable people around the world. Their bi- partisan efforts have resulted in a strong bill that addresses many of the needs that exist across our globe. I would like to discuss a crisis that is growing in West Africa and that is the crop destruction occurring from a rampant outbreak of desert locusts during harvest season. When we talk of improving living conditions in Africa, we must first look at whether Africa has enough food to sustain its needs. Regrettably, civil wars, poor agricultural practices, poor weather conditions, or pests and vermin leave Africa on the brink of hunger all too often. Today, the United Nation's Food and Agriculture Organization reports the Sahel in West Africa is under invasion from desert locusts. Locust swarms have infested nearly four million hectares. Wide-spread crop damage has been reported, and the FAO fears West Africa's food supplies and food security may be in jeopardy. If action is not taken, millions of people could face famine and starvation. The international community is only now beginning to realize the gravity of this crisis. Donor nations have pledged $37 million to the FAO's efforts to eradicate the desert locust in West Africa. The United States has committed $4 million in Fiscal Year 2004 pledges, and I am grateful for this contribution. However, the FAO says these pledges fall short of the $100 million necessary to stem this locust infestation. So much more needs to be done. As we move the FY 2005 Foreign Operations bill to conference, I would hope that Congress and the Executive branch would take a further look at the gravity of the situation is in West Africa. Senator Leahy, I know how committed you are to the economic development of Africa. I hope you would join me in calling on the State Department and the U.S. Agency for International Development to make an even greater contribution to the FAO or direct contributions to nations suffering from locust infestations. Moreover, can we agree to work together in conference to identify FY 2005 funds to ameliorate the crisis in West Africa? Without significant action by the U.S. and the world community, the locusts will only continue wreak havoc in West Africa. After all, FAO predicts locusts hatches will continue through the Fall and spike, once again, in the Spring.

Ms. LANDRIEU. I thank Senator Leahy for his consideration of my requests.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I am pleased to join Chairman DeWine in presenting the bipartisan fiscal year 2005 District of Columbia appropriations bill to the Senate. The bill totals $560 million, which is an increase of $18.3 million from fiscal year 2004. The chairman and I moved this bill through the full Appropriations Committee on Tuesday, September 21 by a near-unanimous vote with no controversial amendments. During our 3-year chairman and ranking membership of the D.C. subcommittee, we have met many policy and partisan challenges and remained great friends. This year is truly an achievement of the chairman's bipartisan lead of this bill. We continue to marry our interests in strengthening education and child welfare in the District. Great communities need great schools. This bill includes $26 million for public education in support of the committee's goal to improve education in the District. Fifty years after the landmark Brown v. the Board of Education decision of the Supreme Court, 3 years after enactment of the significant No Child Left Behind Act, we are still working to shape the two-sided face of public education, excellence and failure, into a more equal experience for children. The District's schools have been mired in years of changing superintendents, management and oversight challenges. A new superintendent has been hired, Dr. Clifford Janey, we are excited about his energy to reform and improve and want to support his efforts as strongly as possible. This bill includes certain tools to, hopefully, contribute to Dr. Janey's work. In our public schools we must recognize and reward excellence. We must acknowledge and eliminate failure. This bill directs a total of $7 million for a new incentive grant program for public education improvement in both traditional public schools and public charter schools. These grants will be awarded to the principal of high performing or significantly improved public schools to reward their good work. A reward is a powerful incentive to build on success and meet some of the areas which can make their school thrive. These grants could be for a specialized librarian, new books, and bonuses for excellent teachers, or even to support sports and recreation with a new basketball court. It is entirely up to the principal to decide. In addition, the bill includes $5 million to support the very successful D.C. program to reconstitute the schools designated as in need of improvement by the standards of the No Child Left Behind Act. The Transformation School Initiative has successfully breathed new life into 15 of the lowest performing public schools in the District with innovative ways to reinvigorate teachers, reinvest parents, and get kids exciting about going to school and excited about learning. We are very pleased to support these programs with $13 million for public schools as part of the $40 million School Improvement Fund created last year. The second prong of the School Improvement Fund, $13 million for public charter school, is supported by robust support to strengthen the chartering system. With 41 charters granted to date, the District has achieved the distinction of having the highest number of charter schools per capita. As such, the District is in a position to serve as leader in the effort to use charter schools to spur system-wide improvement from within our system of public education. Senator DeWine and I maintain our commitment to serve as a full and equal partner in this endeavor. It is important to note that while the primary reason for the rapid growth in the number of charter schools was the unmet desire of education reformers to find a way to ``step out of the box'' that had become our public school system, charter schools are by definition independent public schools. With their relative autonomy, charter schools are a way to provide greater educational choice and innovation while not abandoning the public school system. Recent studies show that the existence of a charter school in a district not only increases the quality of education available to the students served directly by the charter school but in all surrounding public schools. In addition, charter schools provide a healthy dose of competition into the public school system and have the effect of accelerating reforms and improvements in traditional public schools. Despite the increased challenge of educating students with the greatest need, objective surveys and reports show that the academic progress among charter schools students outpacing that of their cohorts in traditional public schools. Those successes included gains in reading and math performances; test scores higher than district, state and neighborhood schools; increased parental involvement; and higher attendance and fewer disciplinary problems. Strengthening charter schools, which were created in the D.C. by Congress in the 1995 School Reform Act, is a primary tenant of our work to improve education. Pursuant to Section 120 of P.L. 106-522, the Fiscal Year 2001 DC Appropriations Act, the local government is prohibited from amending the School Reform Act. Therefore, Congress has continued our oversight responsibility of the charter school law this year. The bill fortifies the environment where strong, accountable, academically excellent charter schools flourish. This bill includes language which will encourage public schools to convert to charter schools. The 1996 School Reform Act allows for traditional public schools to petition to convert to a public charter school, if the teachers and parents in the community want a more responsive and engaging school. However, to date, only one school, Paul Junior High, has exercised that option. We are not trying to say that every public school should be a charter school, but we support if the community of a particular school sees a benefit in becoming a charter school and can gain a majority consensus of that community, a conversion is possible. In addition, we toughen oversight of chartering boards to better screen applications and strengthen oversight of existing schools. We think this will make a stronger public charter school community, and should not create any additional bureaucracy which would tamp down reform. Finally, we included language which will improve access to facilities for charter schools, which can be their greatest challenge. The buildings in which children learn are just as critical as the other tools available to make these kids a success. Under the kind leadership of Chairman DeWine, we have also invested in the welfare of the most vulnerable children in the District, those in the custody of the abuse and neglect welfare system. Just in the last week, the District has suffered the loss of another child, Angel Fleming, who was put in the custody of the Child and Family Services Agency. The bill supports our priority of reforming child welfare by providing the tools necessary to the foster care system with $5 million. We are funding for early intervention services to try to keep kids with relatives, rather than send them to temporary foster care homes. The bill also continues to ensure that all kids in foster care get mental health assessments and services. Finally, Senator DeWine has ensured that an area often forgotten, foster parents, receive the respite services necessary and promote grassroots foster parent recruiting and training efforts. This bill meets our Federal responsibility to the criminal justice system and infrastructure investments requested by the mayor and council. The new family court, which embraces the ideal of one family- one judge, is fully funded and we continue to provide for their new building. In addition, the bill initiates a new investment in the administration of justice in the District by contributing $8 million to the construction of a new forensics lab. This laboratory will alleviate contract pressure D.C. imposes on other Federal agencies, such as the FBI, to complete local forensic work. The bill also contributes to security and emergency preparedness in the Nation's capital with $22 million to bolster the police and first responders. In addition to all of the important initiatives in the District this bill invests in, there is $13 million for cleaning up the Anacostia River and providing recreation for the entire region and $5 million for transportation improvements. I want to thank the mayor of the District, Anthony Williams, the entire council, particularly the Chair Linda Cropp, and the D.C. Delegate to Congress Eleanor Holmes Norton for their many contributions and advice in developing this bill. They are great partners for Chairman DeWine and I to ensure the bill meet the needs of the District. I appreciate the chairman's consideration and our ability to work together on this bill. The amendment was ordered to be engrossed and the bill to be read a third time. The bill (H.R. 4850), as amended, was read the third time and passed, as follows: (The bill will be printed in a future edition of the Record.) The Chair appointed Mr. DeWine, Mrs. Hutchison, Mr. Brownback, Mr. Stevens, Ms. Landrieu, Mr. Durbin, and Mr. Inouye conferees on the part of the Senate.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. We ask the same, that the same process that is in the law for onshore oil and gas drilling be in the law for off-shore oil and gas drilling. The onshore revenue provision has been in place since the early 1920s. The record is clear. This, basically, is the essence of what our bill does to mark the 40th anniversary of the creation of the Land and Water Conservation Fund. Let's actually find a way to fund it. That is what our bill will do.

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I see my colleague from Tennessee is again on the Senate floor, and it is my pleasure this afternoon to spend a few minutes with him marking the 40th anniversary of the creation of the Land and Water Conservation Fund, a fund that has been extraordinarily helpful and useful to Governors, mayors, local elected officials, and advocates for conservation and for preservation for these 40 years. When it was passed and signed into law by President Lyndon Johnson, it was a very farsighted and bold legislation that acknowledged that one of the great characteristics that separates America from the rest of the world, particularly the old world represented by the European countries. The essence of America, having such great expanses and great outdoors, separates it from an old world that was relatively small geographically and somewhat cramped. The United States of America has many special characteristics about it, but the one that really stands out that people of all political persuasions and from all geographic areas really appreciate and grasp is the value of the vastness of our land and the great open spaces. Our mighty rivers, our deep canyons, our extraordinary lush forests and green spaces, our breathtakingly beautiful deserts are all the things that make this country what it is. Although the country was created this way and a great gift to all of us from the Creator, it is not going to stay this way unless we take some affirmative actions to preserve what we can, to give our people and our population places to grow, expand, earn livings, and create jobs. We have an obligation, as stewards, as the Senator said earlier, not just to our constituents but actually we have a moral obligation to the Creator who created this beauty to be good stewards of the land and the gift that has been given. Looking at the 40th anniversary of the Land and Water Conservation Fund, while we have done a good job, while we have made a fine effort, while we can point to many success stories of the Land and Water Conservation Fund, I stand today on the 40th anniversary with the Senator from Tennessee to say that we must do better. There are terrible gaps in funding that are leaving beautiful States such as Tennessee and magnificent States such as Louisiana and other States throughout our Nation desperate for Federal help to finish the good work that was started late in the last century. President Roosevelt, who is even credited today with being such a great visionary conservationist, was an advocate of the preservation of special places in America. That is what we come today to talk about, how important it is to recommit ourselves, on this 40th anniversary, to setting aside the proper amount of money, not more than we need but an adequate amount of money to help our Governors and our mayors and support a new effort for wildlife preservation and support our coastal areas in light of the original vision of the Land and Water Conservation Fund. So the Senator from Tennessee and I have introduced the Americans Outdoors Act of 2004. I commend the chairman, Pete Domenici from New Mexico, who, in this very challenging year, has already allowed us a hearing on this bill. We look forward to working with the members of the Energy Committee, which has jurisdiction, of course, and the Department of Interior as we move this great legislation through seeking a more reliable source of funding. We propose in our legislation to basically establish the same conservation royalty that the Federal Government now gives for onshore production of oil and natural gas. This bill will create a conservation royalty for offshore production of oil and natural gas and have it distributed in a way that complements and fulfills the promise of the Land and Water Conservation Fund. It is like saying the great wealth of this resource, of oil and natural gas, should be invested, as the Senator said, in the Federal Treasury to help economic development and building highways and the space program and should support our military. A large percentage of these tax dollars should go for general uses, but a small percentage, 25 percent of these billions of dollars that are generated, should really go to a conservation royalty to acknowledge the creation that we have inherited, to acknowledge the great land and water that we have inherited, and to say on this day we believe it is wrong to take and never to give back. We believe it is our political and moral responsibility to be good stewards of the wealth that is generated and to turn back a portion of that money for conservation. It is our responsibility to give to our grandchildren and great grandchildren the great gift and the great land that was given to us by our forefathers and our Presidents, both Republican and Democrat, who have argued and established this great fund. So it is my hope, with the Senator from Tennessee, that we will be joined by other Senate leaders as we pursue this effort to find a reliable stream of revenue to create a conservation royalty that will fully fund the State side of the Land and Water Conservation Fund, a robust coastal program for the States in our Nation, and a wildlife restoration fund, as well as the urban parks component of the State side of the bill. I think we should explore and try to look for opportunities to find a reliable stream of money for the Federal side as we continue to build and expand on public lands in the United States. Let me say there is no one in this Senate who understands the great value of private property more than do I and the Senator from Tennessee. I go all over the world doing a lot of work on economic development and lifting people out of poverty. I have been probably to more orphanages and homes for poor children than most. Many Senators do that great work. I am well aware that, in order for countries to create wealth, owning private property and building equity in a home or getting a mortgage for a farm is essential. That is the founding essence of America. This bill we intend to reinvigorate today is not a threat to private property. It complements the great commitment we have to private property, by saying that some lands, a small portion of lands, should be in public hands. The majority should be in private hands. It is an extraordinary partnership that gives value to both. The Land and Water Conservation Fund envisions that strong partnership making all of our land more valuable, cleaner, more user friendly, open and beautiful for us to give to future generations. I see the Senator from Tennessee, who may want to add a few additional words. But I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record the distribution of money to the Land and Water Conservation Fund. It is not blown up, but I think the cameras at least can zoom in to see how volatile the funding has been, up and down, up and down, since 1965. Our bill attempts to equal this out by creating a conservation royalty so we can rely on these dollars and we can make good plans, spend taxpayer money well and wisely, creating beautiful bike paths and trails, helping to make more robust our park systems and our public lands for the benefit of our grandchildren in a way that complements the private sector, private property, and the economic development efforts that will continue to be underway for generations to come in this great Nation. I also ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record a news release that was issued by the Department of Interior, saying how proud they are to have distributed some money, royalties, for conservation to interior States.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak for up to 10 minutes.