Mary Landrieu

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, today I rise to commemorate the tenth anniversary of the passage of the Violence Against Women Act, VAWA. One of the most prominent woman Latin American writers, Isabel Allende, once said, ``How can one not speak about war, poverty, and inequality when people who suffer from these afflictions don't have a voice to speak?'' Ten years ago today, this body rose up and spoke for a group in our society that is frequently left voiceless. The number of women in the United States who have been murdered by an intimate partner is greater than the number of soldiers killed during the Vietnam War. In 1996 alone, over 30 percent of all female murder victims in the United States were slain by their husbands or boyfriends. These women who lost their lives in the war of domestic violence that plagues our country began to have a voice because of the passage of VAWA. Today, there are roughly 143.4 million women in the United States. Of this population, it is predicted that almost 28.7 million, or 20 percent, will be raped during their lifetime, and one-third will be physically or sexually abused. Battery is the single greatest cause of injury to women in the United States, accounting for more emergency room visits than all other injuries combined. Yet, with these sobering statistics there are three times more shelters for neglected animals than there are shelters for battered women. Jane Addams said, ``Action indeed is the sole medium of expression for ethics.'' Ten years ago on this day, the United States Congress acted to ensure that all women who are victims of violence receive the protection and support they need and deserve. However, there is still more work to be done. Domestic violence is a problem that continues to afflict our country. It is estimated that family violence costs our Nation from $5 to $10 billion annually in medical expenses, police and court costs, shelters, foster care, sick leave, absenteeism, and non-productivity. Remarkably, the VAWA domestic violence programs have helped to save money, while saving lives. The original VAWA that was authorized 10 years ago saved taxpayers at least $14.8 billion in net averted social costs. This year, as we move through the appropriations process, I ask all of my colleagues to remember the millions of innocent women in this country who have been the victims of violence and the effects that violence has had, not only on them, but also on their families and our society.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Yes, I do. I happen to have that document right here. I understand the State of Wyoming, according to this document, has received over $500 million. Yes, $503,771,000 this year, which was the State royalty for Wyoming. For the record, New Mexico received this year $318,768,000 in the same account.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that there be a period of morning business for debate up to 90 minutes, with the first 45 minutes under the control of the Democratic leader and the remaining time under the control of the majority leader or his designee.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Madam President, I rise to speak this morning about a very important issue for the country, particularly for the gulf coast region and the State of Louisiana. Madam President, as you know, although your State of Alaska is not located in the southern part of the Nation, you and other members of society are well aware of the devastation that occurred to our coastal communities, whether on the eastern coast or southeastern coast or the central gulf. As is the case this morning, Hurricane Ivan, a category 4 hurricane bearing down on the gulf coast region, according to the latest weather reports and indications based on good research that is being done here by many of our Federal agencies, we can somewhat predict the path of the hurricane. With our most sophisticated systems, radar and weather tracking, pinpointing with some accuracy, there is a projection of where this killer storm, this major storm, may hit. It seems as though it has turned north and is headed right now to the Mississippi-Alabama line, but it could move within the next 12 hours to the east or to the west. As we wrap up our business here in Washington, the entire gulf coast, and the State I represent, Louisiana being one of those Gulf Coast States, Mississippi and Alabama and the panhandle of Florida, is under a mandatory evacuation. Why? It is because this is a huge storm. It is a category 4. We hope and pray, and there are some indications, that it will change to a category 3. But it is a major storm with high winds of 165 miles per hour. It is not the first time a storm of this size or intensity has hit the gulf coast. We know by reading history. Several decades ago, some of us actually lived through extremely powerful and killer storms like Camille or Betsy in Louisiana and other States throughout the gulf coast that proved to be very dangerous, with loss of life and billions of dollars in property loss. We don't have to be reminded that Florida has just been hit in the last 3 weeks twice already. This one will be of historic devastation in Florida, having had three hurricanes hit in such a short period of time. I want to speak this morning about what we can do here in Washington a little better, with a little more energy, with a little more focus to help the people in Louisiana and throughout the gulf coast area. Not only do they deserve our help, but because of the energy industry and the economic benefits they bring to the whole country, they not only need our help, they deserve our help. They deserve our attention. As I have stated, the hurricane is to make landfall sometime in early Thursday morning, sometime between 1 a.m. and 6 or 7 a.m. The people of Louisiana know the devastation this kind of storm can bring. Let me show a picture because I think a picture is worth a thousand words. While this looks terrible and horrible--and it is very frightening, as you can see a woman, standing water rising over her waist, trying to get to safety--this is not a hurricane. This is only a tropical storm. This was Tropical Storm Isidore that hit the gulf coast in 2002. This wasn't a category 1 hurricane. We are talking about severe devastation when a category 3 or category 4 or category 5 hurricane pushes that water out of the gulf, out of Lake Ponchartrain into the tremendously populated areas around the gulf coast. This is what people have been fleeing from for the last 36 hours. When I say fleeing, I mean all of the interstates going north out of Mississippi, Alabama, and Louisiana, and interstates going west, as people try to leave the east and head for safety toward Houston. They have been, at times, in bumper-to-bumper traffic for hours. People can walk faster than the rate the cars are moving. Luckily, the Governors of these States are very skilled and able, the local elected officials have been through this many times and were quick to see the danger, even though the path could not be predicted, and were quick to call for evacuations days ago. This morning, we received reports that the highways are clearing in some parts along the Gulf of Mexico. Some families spent yesterday 12, 13, 14 hours in automobiles, going less than 5 miles per hour as they tried to find safety and shelter all along the gulf coast to flee a storm of this magnitude. Again, this is not a picture of a hurricane. This is a tropical storm. That is why people are fleeing in the gulf area. I will speak for a moment about energy and about what the gulf coast contributes to the energy independence and energy security of this Nation. As millions of people have been leaving their homes to flee to higher ground, 442 rigs or platforms have been deserted by companies in the Gulf of Mexico. When I say deserted, not just, of course, left to wreak havoc, but they have been tied down, secured, supported. All nonessential emergency personnel have had to move out of the Gulf of Mexico. This evacuation represents 50 percent of the manned rigs and platforms in the gulf. Right now, oil and gas from the Gulf of Mexico and coastal Louisiana represents 60 percent of the entire Gulf of Mexico production. For the time being, that has been shut down because of Ivan. I have discussed with Members of this Senate the importance of our LOOP facility. The Louisiana Offshore Oil Port sits right out on the Continental Shelf, near Port Fourchon Louisiana, and is a superport responsible for the entrance of 1 million barrels of oil a day. We are in Iraq, in an important battle, but part of our objective there is to secure an oil supply for the region and for the Nation and to use that for the betterment of the people of Iraq, for their growth and development and the security and stability of the world, as well as to fight for other issues. We are fighting to get 1 to 3 million barrels out of Iraq, and right here in the Gulf of Mexico, today, we have a facility that has virtually been shut down because of a hurricane. Nearly a million barrels is being imported in this country, and exported, a year. Port Fourchon is a small port that sits at the very edge of Highway 1. It is unbelievable to view the picture. This is Highway 1 in Tropical Storm Isidore. That was another storm, not a hurricane. This damage occurs in a tropical storm. We cannot see the highway because it is covered with water. The highway leads down to the gulf. Port Fourchon, the LOOP facility, is right off of this shore where 18 percent of the offshore oil and gas revenues flow into this country through this little road called LA 1 that we have been fighting now for several years. With the leadership of Senator Murray and Senator Reid and others, Senator Jeffords and Members on the Republican side, as well, we have been able to get a designation as a special highway, but we are still waiting for the big bucks to help with lifting this highway and expanding it so we can have a functioning port. The hurricane is scheduled to hit Mobile or west of Mobile right now. I just spoke to the Port Fourchon Port Director and they expect this highway to be underwater by 1 p.m. today--again. This is the major route of oil and gas into the United States of America. This is Highway 1, Port Fourchon, and the LOOP facility, which is the only facility in the Nation that imports and exports oil and gas at that rate and at that level. My point is, I hope we will again use this opportunity to focus on the critical infrastructure needs necessary for Louisiana and the gulf coast of Mississippi and Alabama primarily to protect itself not just from homeland security threats from terrorists but real threats of weather. People might say: Senator, why did they build the port here in the first place? I understand that. If we could do it again, knowing what we know now, perhaps that would not have been done. I will speak for a minute about that because I want people to understand the argument. Men and women are here because the oil and gas is here. If we could figure out a way to have people live in Chicago and commute every day down to the Gulf of Mexico to get the oil and gas out of the ground, then people would not have to live here, but we have not figured that out yet. So real life men and women and children and families live here. They have to live here to serve as the platform for the oil and gas that keeps the lights on all over the country. Yet we ask them time and time and time again to literally risk their lives to do so, and we cannot find a few million dollars in this budget to lift this highway so either they can get out or they can be safe. This is a heavy rain. This occurs in a tropical storm in a heavy rain. I don't know what will happen with the hurricane. That is why people are not panicked but are most certainly concerned. This picture shows the main bayou that runs inland. The only way the rigs can get out of the gulf, they can either dock along the ports--Morgan City, New Iberia, Galveston, and come into Houston for some protection, the only way they can get in is through the Mississippi, up inland, through this bayou. They cannot get in when this bridge is down. The people cannot get out unless the bridge is down. So every time there is a storm, the local officials in my State have to say: OK, kids and families, you all go over the bridge. And they hold up the rigs. Then they let some of the rigs through, and they hold up the families trying to get out. This is outrageous. We have money in the budget to build this bridge so we can move our infrastructure out of the gulf. And the Presiding Officer understands the magnitude of the barges, cranes, and sheer weight and size of the equipment I am talking about. It is not a Tonka toy. It is not Legos. It is big, heavy equipment that has to be moved at great danger to the men and women who have to move it to save insurance companies money, to save taxpayers money, to save shareholders money for these companies. Let me talk about what else is going on. Louisiana wetlands are not a beach. I have spent a lot of my life growing up in the gulf area, and I have spent a lot of time on the Florida beaches, and I have never seen anything more beautiful. We in Louisiana support those beaches. We understand the tourism. We are some of the tourists that go there. But our coast is not a beach. We do not have a beach unless you want to count Grand Isle. It is beautiful and wonderful, but does not look like Destin, Florida. It is a lovely small beach. That is about the only beach we have. The rest of our coast is not a beach. It is a wetlands. It is not the wetlands of Louisiana, it is America's wetlands. It has been washing away at an alarming rate. The difference between a major hurricane coming out of the gulf in 1940 and a major hurricane coming out of the gulf this year in 2004 is we have lost thousands and thousands of acres. The size of the State of Rhode Island has been lost in the last 50 years, so the buffer has been shrinking that protects the city of New Orleans and much of the populated portions of Mississippi. That has been lost. So the people who live on the gulf coast of Mississippi and the southern part of Mississippi and Louisiana are at greater and greater risk because those barrier islands that once existed, those acres and acres and square miles of wetlands, have been eroded. Why? For two reasons. One, we leveed the Mississippi River for commerce, not just to benefit Mississippi and Louisiana but to benefit the Midwest, the Northeast, the West, to open up trade and opportunity up and down that Mississippi River. We had no choice. If you want to go to before the trade and go to when the country started, we had to anchor the mouth of the Mississippi to literally create the Nation--unless we wanted to stop at the Kentucky border or the Shenandoah Valley, which was a choice at one time. We could have just made the United States go from the east coast to the Shenandoah Valley, and we could have had a wonderful nation right there in the East. But we decided to go West. We decided to go all the way to the Oregon Trail with Lewis and Clark. President Jefferson had a vision, but that vision could not possibly happen without anchoring the security of the mouth of the Mississippi River. So we did. We had to basically try to tame this very wild place, very wet place, very low- lying place. But we did it not just for ourselves; we did it for the whole Nation, with the Nation's help and support. We did not pay for everything, but we contributed a great deal. Today we continue to give billions of dollars out of the gulf coast in oil and gas revenues and taxes that go to this country. We continue to send our labor and our support and our money to this Nation. Yet time and time again, when Louisiana comes to ask, Could we please have just a portion of the revenue that we send?-- we are not asking for charity; we are asking for something we earned; we are happy to share with the rest of the country to help invest in infrastructure--we are told: We cannot do it this year. We do not have enough money. It is not a high enough priority. Well, I do not know when it is going to get to be a high enough priority. I hate to say maybe it is going to take the loss thousands of lives on the gulf coast to make this country wake up and realize in what we are under-investing. Again, we lose a football field every 30 minutes. We have lost more than 1,900 square miles in the past 70 years, and the U.S. Geological Survey predicts we will lose another 1,000 square miles if decisive action is not taken now. Now, we have made good plans in the last several years to save the Everglades. We are well on our way to do that. We have plans underway to restore the Chesapeake Basin, which is an extremely important ecosystem to this part of the country. We have some preliminary plans underway in the Great Lakes. But no area--not the Everglades, not the Chesapeake, and not the Great Lakes--of this great Nation contributes more economically or energy-wise than the wetlands of America that lay to the south along the gulf coast. They do not compare to the energy contribution; they do not compare to the fisheries contribution; they do not compare to the commerce contribution of this Nation or the port contribution when you put it together. Yet we seem to be getting less, not more. So we have to stop the vanishing wetlands. We have plans in Congress. We are going to continue to push, with Lamar Alexander's help, on the Energy bill. We have a new bill moving through Congress called the Americans Outdoors Act that seeks to dedicate a portion of those revenues for coastal States, even States that do not produce oil and gas off of their coast. I think we should be willing to share some of these coastal revenues for coastal-related issues. Some people disagree. The people of Louisiana do not mind sharing. It is sort of our natural way. We are happy to do that. We do not even want it all. We just want our fair share. That is what this bill does. We also have a bill through the WRDA legislation, which is the traditional funding for the Corps of Engineers, the Federal agency primarily responsible to keep the waterways dredged, to keep the levees up as high as possible, to work with our local flood control folks, particularly our levee boards in Louisiana, which are some of the most important public entities we have, that literally keep people dry from heavy rains and from floods and storms of this nature. But let me also repeat, again for the record, I know every time a hurricane hits in North Carolina or South Carolina or Florida, other people who are not familiar with hurricanes say: Why do the people live along the coast? Why do we let people live along the coast? I think that is a legitimate argument that could be made for resort communities. It is not mandatory they live there. They choose to live there because, of course, the coastlines are very pleasant and beautiful places to live. In fact, Americans really agree with that because two-thirds of the entire population of the United States live within 50 miles of the coast. So that is an issue that could be debated, and we could talk about that. But Louisiana people who live in Port Fourchon, while they enjoy living there, believe me, and while they love to shrimp and they love to fish, they are there doing a great service for this Nation, working in an energy industry and trying to dig out of the gulf the resources this country needs. Where people live along these bayous, they are fishing and they are contributing to industries. They do not have a lot of fish in downtown New York. They do not have a lot of fish in Chicago. The only place you are going to catch fish is in the water. So you have to live there basically to catch the fish. They are living there for a livelihood. In addition, New Orleans itself was settled as the security as this Nation grew. Now people want to say, maybe we should--if a big storm hits--just move New Orleans. I do not know how you move a major metropolitan area. But I also say this about my great city, where I grew up and have represented, still to this day--and in many different ways throughout my life--the people, the city is 9 feet generally below sea level. But we have some of the most sophisticated pumping systems in the world. In fact, the engineers who built the pumping stations that supply New Orleans with flood control were the engineers who helped Holland and studied in Venice. We do not have halfway pumping systems. We have the best in the world. We have the best engineers, the finest pumping systems. We are an old city, and we spend a lot of our money to keep those pumping systems up to date. In fact, the Federal Government has been a major partner. I am proud to have led the effort. The Southeast Louisiana Flood Control program has invested hundreds of millions of dollars, Federal and State money, to upgrade those pumping systems. So we are not Pollyanna about this. We are not Johnny-come-lately. We have great engineers. We are smart. If fact, we have taught the world how to drain floodwaters because we have been doing it the longest, for over 300 years. But the city can do just so much, when it has a population that is challenged. We are not the wealthiest State. We are not the richest State. We need our Federal Government to understand that we are happy to share our resources and riches with the world, but we do deserve a greater portion of these revenues to keep our people safe, to keep our infrastructure intact, and, most certainly, to be respectful of what the people of Louisiana and the entire gulf coast contribute to our national well-being and security. I want to put up another picture. This is another picture of LA 1. This is on a day when you see the traffic backed up. Obviously, there was something wrong with the Leeville Bridge. But this is what the traffic looks like trying to get out before a hurricane: the trucks, the cars, the schoolbuses, trying to leave a place where they were working on behalf of not only themselves but on behalf of this Nation. The least we can do is send a little money to fix this highway and to keep people safe and high and dry in these storms. Let's pray, Madam President, that Hurricane Ivan does not hit the city of New Orleans directly. I am going to submit a front-page article from the Washington Post for the Record. It is an article about what that might be like. One of our emergency personnel who has been working on an emergency plan has stored several thousand body bags in the event of a major flood in the city of New Orleans. Let's hope that never happens. But I have to say, as a Senator representing the State of Louisiana, the chances of it happening sometime are pretty good. If we do not improve our transportation evacuation routes, invest in protecting this infrastructure, and focusing on reinvesting some of the tremendous wealth that has been taken from this area, and reinvesting it back, we will only have ourselves to blame. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the article entitled ``Awaiting Ivan in the Big Uneasy'' be printed in the Record.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be dispensed with.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, today I rise to honor the Historically Black Colleges and Universities around the country that serve over 215,000 of our finest African-American students. Since the first HBCU was founded in 1837, HBCUs have played an important role in our higher education system. They have educated some of our most prominent African-American leaders, such as the Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., former U.S. Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall, educator Booker T. Washington, former U.S. Surgeon General David Satcher, Nobel Laureate Toni Morrison, and Louisiana native and former United Nations Ambassador Andrew Young, Jr., to just name a few. Today, 65 percent of all African-American physicians, 50 percent of African-American engineers, and 35 percent of African-American lawyers are graduates of an HBCU. It is clear that HBCUs have and continue to play a vital role in our higher education system, and for that, I honor them today. I would specifically like to praise the six HBCUs in my home state of Louisiana that produce exceptionally fine graduates: Dillard University in New Orleans, Grambling State University in Grambling, Southern University and Agricultural and Mechanical College in Baton Rouge, Southern University in New Orleans, Southern University in Shreveport, and Xavier University in New Orleans. These schools serve roughly 30,000 Louisiana higher education students and prepare them to be tomorrow's leaders. For that, I say thank you. Recognizing the importance of HBCUs, I am proud to lend my support to S. Res. 422, designating this week as ``National Historically Black Colleges and Universities Week.'' And, I am proud to support the College Quality, Affordability, and Diversity Improvement Act, S. 1793, which extends and increases the Title V, Part B programs under the Higher Education Act that strengthen HBCUs. As we enter the final weeks of the 108th Congress, I look forward to discussing, debating, and passing this important piece of legislation, and as we move through the appropriations process, I urge my colleagues to ensure that adequate funding is given to HBCUs. Historically Black Colleges and Universities have given a great amount to our higher education system through the years, and today I give them my thanks and praise.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I rise today to honor an exemplary soldier, a loyal American, a loving father, and a devoted husband. Our friend and neighbor, Colonel Jon Jones passed away on June 6 after a courageous battle with brain cancer that he waged on his own terms. Until the week of his death, Jon lived life to the fullest and did not allow cancer to define him or to diminish his dream. Rather, he chose to be a husband, father and soldier until the end. His death has been a profound loss to his colleagues in the Army, his neighbors, his friends, and especially to his family. I say to his wife Cynthia, to his two children Nick and Lena, who are here with us today, our Nation is grateful for your family's service and sacrifice. Jon was born and raised in California. His mother was a teacher, and the influence she had on him was apparent throughout his life. He attended high school outside of Sacremento, and graduated from Cal State at Sacramento. He went the extra mile to participate in the ROTC program at UC-Davis, because his own school had abolished ROTC during the Vietnam war. He graduated in 1980 as a distinguished military graduate and was commissioned as a regular Army military intelligence officer. He met Cynthia while he was in officers' basic course in Arizona, and they married in 1981. His career in the Army took Cynthia, Nick, and Lena to Turkey, Germany, and South Korea; and his last deployment was to Kuwait and to Iraq. Jon died two weeks shy of serving 24 years in the U.S. Army and only 12 days from his change of command. For almost 2 years he successfully led the Army's only deployable echelons-above-corps contingency force protection military intelligence brigade. The men and women who served under him, as well as his colleagues and senior officers, testified to his leadership in a time of war. One soldier called it a privilege to be under Colonel Jones' command, and described his strength and leadership as going well beyond what this soldier had seen in any other military officer. Throughout the war, in addition to his mission, Jon's focus was on the health, welfare, and safety of every soldier and civilian who served with him. When his brigade was deployed for 9 months to support Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom, he succeeded in that mission and brought every one of his soldiers home. A month after bringing his brigade home, Jon was diagnosed with an aggressive brain tumor. He was entitled to retirement, but he chose instead to stay in the Army. As he told a colleague: ``Quitting was not an option.'' Another person might have headed for the shore and waited for his time in comfortable surroundings, but this was not the path for Jon Jones. At the time of his diagnosis, he had a battalion preparing to redeploy to Iraq, and the thought of leaving them went against everything he stood for. In fact, in the months preceding his death, in between his own treatments and surgeries, Jon went to Kuwait and Iraq several times to support and bolster his troops. Before he passed away, Jon was nominated for the Distinguished Service Medal, for unparalleled dedication to duty. This citation states that his accomplishments will have a lasting effect on national security formulation at the highest levels. Later today, in a room near this distinguished Chamber, Jon's widow Cynthia will accept this medal on her husband's behalf. Jon's commanding generals, some of whom are also with us today, accepted his decision to stay in the Army and continue in command throughout his treatments. Perhaps they would have encouraged a lesser officer to retire, but Jon was too valuable a soldier to lose. Unfortunately, the Army, and especially the military intelligence community, realizes every day how valuable COL Jake Jones was. Perhaps the words of one of his fellow officers said it best when he stated: Jake Jones did more than command a Brigade in war. He commanded the respect and confidence of his peers, his superiors, and his soldiers. He had a special aura about him--a calming presence that bespoke competence and reason. All of the virtues that made Jon a good soldier also made him a devoted husband and father. In a career that takes you away from your family for extended periods of time, he made it home for his children's birthdays and other special events. The only birthday of Nick's he ever missed was last year when duty to country called him to stay in Iraq. He made it home in time for Lena's birthday last year, and only God's call home kept him from making that commitment this year. He was driven to be a good example to his children and to make them proud. This drive contributed to his desire to continue in command even as he fought his own personal battle with a fierce enemy. Although his time with Nick and Lena was inexplicably cut short, I know the love he gave them and the lessons he taught them will shore them up, inspire them, and comfort them throughout their lifetime. Mentor, hero, charismatic leader, humble individual, inspiring commander, confident, patient, steadfast, stalwart, a rock--these are a few of the descriptions used to communicate the man he was. Jon had the determination and perseverance to accomplish any task with which he was presented. The role in life he cherished the most, after the role of father, was that of a mentor, whether to his soldiers or to his children. He simply loved to teach. Having been raised by a mother who was a teacher, he paid her the greatest compliment a child can give a parent: He followed in her footsteps. He taught those of us who knew him how much fun it was to live, and that quitting was not an option. Jon Jones was a friend of our family, a neighbor, and an inspiration to all who knew him. His death is our Nation's loss. Rarely does a soldier so capable and so completely committed step forward to answer the call to service. And rarely has a family been so blessed to have such a father and husband. May it be recorded this day that the people of the United States are grateful to COL Jon Jones for his years of service in the U.S. Army. His memory will live on in the hearts and minds of the many who knew him, admired him, followed him, and loved him. Thank you, Mr. President.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Madam President, I speak today to honor the service of CPT Chris Christopher, who is currently the Deputy Director for Future Operations, Communications and Business Initiatives at NMCI. Captain Christopher comes to this position after nearly 20 years of distinguished service to the Navy in the fields of aviation, public affairs and intelligence. Captain Christopher has spent most of his life in New Orleans, and he has made a wonderful home there with his wife Patti and their two daughters. He received undergraduate and graduate degrees from the University of New Orleans, and his work with NMCI still brings him back to the UNO campus. Though he is now stationed in Virginia, his heart and family remain in New Orleans. As a Louisiana Senator, I like that! Captain Christopher's work at NMCI has been truly outstanding. The Navy Marine Corps Intranet is a progressive project whose ultimate goal is to transform the Department of the Navy's computer networks. NMCI will revolutionize command and control efficiencies within the Navy, and between the services, to ensure that our forces are operating in unison. This will save American lives, increase combat readiness and effectiveness, and, ultimately, make us stronger. Under Captain Christopher's leadership, many of these goals have been brought closer to reality. From June 20-23, Captain Christopher organized the 2004 Navy Marine Corps Intranet Symposium in New Orleans. This event was an opportunity for all parties involved in NMCI to continue their dialogue on reshaping information technology in the Navy and Marine Corps. Captain Christopher made this event happen and I have been informed that it was a complete success. I once again want to thank my friend, CPT Chris Christopher, for his efforts on America's behalf. Future generations of sailors and Marines will no doubt reap the benefits of his labor and America will be safer as a result. I am proud of Chris's ``Louisiana-bred'' success, and I wish him well in his future endeavors.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I am pleased to join my colleague Senator Alexander as we introduce this very significant conservation legislation. The junior Senator from Tennessee has been a long-time effective advocate for the environment and for conservation, not only in his own State of Tennessee but for our Nation. The legislation we introduce today is a new, enhanced version of a piece of legislation that was introduced several years ago. We believe it is a very promising approach to launch one of the most significant conservation efforts ever considered by Congress. The American Outdoors Act is a landmark multiyear commitment to conservation programs directly benefiting all 50 States and hundreds of local communities. It creates a conservation royalty derived from the production of oil and gas on the Outer Continental Shelf and directs it toward the restoration of coastal wetlands, preservation of wildlife habitat, and it helps build and maintain local and State parks for our children, our children's children, for generations to come. By enacting this legislation, we will make the most significant commitment of Federal resources to conservation ever and ensure a positive legacy of protecting and enhancing critical wildlife habitat, estuaries, marshlands, mountain ranges, open green spaces, and expanded recreational opportunity for Americans today and generations to come. The legislation builds on a great and notable effort made during the 106th Congress that was supported by Governors, mayors, and a coalition of over 5,000 organizations throughout the country. Unfortunately, despite our bipartisan and very deep and widespread support, our efforts were cut short before a final bill could be signed into law. Instead, a commitment was made by those who opposed the legislation last time to guarantee funding for these programs. And unfortunately, we all know the story and the outcome of those promises. As we have painfully witnessed since then, these programs have not only been reduced, some of them have been eliminated completely, and are terribly underfunded in terms of the critical needs that are presented to us today. What has happened is exactly what those of us who initiated the effort always anticipated. Each of these significant programs has been shortchanged and a number of them have been left out altogether or forced to compete with each other for Federal resources. The legislation we are introducing today provides reliable, significant, and steady funding for the urgent and worthy conservation and outdoor recreation needs of our states and rapidly growing urban areas. What makes more sense than to take a portion of revenues from a depleting capital asset of the Nation--offshore Federal oil and gas resources--and reinvest them into sustaining the natural resources of our Nation: wetlands; parks and recreation areas and wildlife. The Americans Outdoors Act dedicates assured funding for four distinct programs and honors promises made long ago to the American people. The four programs include: Coastal impact assistance--$500 million to oil and gas producing coastal States to mitigate the various impacts of States that serve as the ``platform'' for the crucial development of Federal offshore energy resources from the Outer Continental Shelf as well as provide for wetland restoration. This program merely acknowledges the impacts to and contribution of States that are providing the energy to run our country's economy. The Outer Continental Shelf supplies 25 percent of our Nation's oil consumption, more than any other country including Saudi Arabia, with the promise of more, expected to reach 40 percent by 2008. Since this frontier was officially opened to significant oil and gas exploration in 1953, no single region has contributed as much to the nation's energy production as the OCS. The OCS accounts for more than 25 percent of our Nation's natural gas and oil production. With annual returns to the Federal Government averaging $5 billion annually, no single area has contributed as much to the Federal Treasury as the OCS. In fact, since 1953, the OCS has contributed $140 billion to the U.S. Treasury. Allocation to States would be based on their proximity to production. Thirty-five percent of the State's allocation would be shared with coastal political subdivisions based on a formula of 50 percent proximity to production, 25 percent miles of coastline and 25 percent coastal population; $450 million for the State side of the Land and Water Conservation Fund, LWC, to provide stable funding to States for the planning and development of State and local parks and recreation facilities. The allocation to States would be 60 percent equally among all 50 States and 40 percent based on relative population. This program provides greater revenue certainty for State and local governments to help them meet their recreational needs through recreational facility development and resource protection--all under the discretion of State and local authorities while protecting the rights of private property owners; Wildlife conservation, education and restoration--$350 million is allocated to all 50 States through the successful program of Pittman- Robertson for the conservation of nongame and game species, with the principal goal of preventing species from becoming endangered or listed under the Endangered Species Act. By taking steps now to prevent species from becoming endangered we are able to not only conserve the significant cultural heritage of wildlife enjoyment for the people of this country, but also avoid the substantial costs associated with recovery for endangered species. Allocations to States would be based on a formula of \2/3\ relative population and \1/3\ relative land area; and The Urban Parks and Recreation Recovery Program, UPARR--$125 million in the form of matching grants, 70 percent to provide direct assistance to our cities and towns so that they can focus on the needs of their populations within the more densely inhabited areas around the country where there are fewer green-spaces, playgrounds and soccer fields for our youth. I would also like to acknowledge our interest in several programs that are not part of this initial package but will be considered as the bill moves through the process. For example, the Federal side of the Land and Water Conservation Fund which focuses primarily on Federal land acquisition. The goal of the Federal side of the LWCF was to share a significant portion of revenues from offshore development with States to provide for protection and public use of the natural environment. It is our intention to discuss this program with our colleagues on the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee with the goal of developing a compromise that will garner broad support. In addition, other worthy programs that are not part of the legislation we are introducing today but ideally would be part of a larger more comprehensive effort include Historic Preservation, Payment in Lieu of Taxes, PILT, and the Forest Legacy program. While we confront a time of war, budget deficits and a struggling economy, setting aside a portion of oil and gas royalties to our states and localities for initiatives such as outdoor spaces or recreation facilities for our children to play could not be more crucial. Programs such as the State side of the Land and Water Conservation Fund are in fact the economic stimulus that our States and cities need in these times. The time has come to take the proceeds from a non-renewable resource for the purpose of reinvesting a portion of these revenues in the conservation and enhancement of our renewable resources. To continue to do otherwise, as we have over the last 50 years, is fiscally irresponsible. As I said, the legislation we introduce today, therefore, provides a reliable, significant, and steady stream of funding that cannot be manipulated or tampered with at the whim of this or that, but will be there for conservation efforts that our local communities and States can count on to provide this great legacy and heritage for our grandchildren. What makes more sense than taking a portion of the offshore oil and gas revenues that have generated almost $130 billion since the first well was drilled off of our shore on the Continental Shelf almost 100 years ago? What would make more sense than taking a small portion of that money and giving it back to the environment, back to our mountain ranges, to our marshes, to our coastal areas, protecting and preserving our great land for generations to come? The American Outdoors Act does exactly that. It dedicates and assures funding for four distinct programs: Coastal impact assistance, of which Louisiana and other coastal States would benefit. Of course, we are proud to serve as oil and gas producers, helping us secure our energy independence from foreign sources, providing much critical feedstock, if you will, for our energy industry in the State, and expanding our economic opportunities. Because we produce so much oil and gas, we would deserve help with our vanishing coastline. In addition, the other segment of this bill would fund the Land and Water Conservation Fund State side. As the Senator from Tennessee noted, he and I are firmly committed to also providing support and full funding for the Federal side of land and water, as this bill moves through the process. Wildlife conservation, education, and restoration would be fully funded. That helps all of our States. The Urban Parks and Recreation Program, which has been so critical for quality-of-life issues and economic development in our cities, in our suburbs, our urban centers, would also be funded. Time is not on our side. While other issues might be able to wait and other issues could maybe be funded gradually over time, for every month we delay, for every year we delay, we lose acres and acres, miles and miles of land we will never be able to recover. Louisiana itself is literally washing away. We have lost the size of the State of Rhode Island off our coast in the last 100 years. If some foreign country attacked our country and tried to take a portion of land away from us, we would fight with every strength and every tool and every resource available. But we stand here literally in some ways twiddling our thumbs while this land is washed away into the Gulf of Mexico. And not just any land but very productive land and very necessary land, not just for Louisiana but for the entire United States. I close with a quote from Teddy Roosevelt because it is appropriate. He was a great conservation President. Over 100 years ago he started many programs. I love taking my children to Theodore Roosevelt Island. We ride our bikes over there. I love telling them the story of Teddy Roosevelt. I explain many stories about what he did, hunting in Louisiana, the history of the black bear, et cetera. In his autobiography he wrote of his experiences in Coastal Louisiana: And to lose the chance to see frigate birds soaring in circles above the storm or, a file of pelicans winging their way homeward across the crimson afterglow of the sunset, or a myriad of terns flashing in the bright light of midday as they hover in a shifting maze above the beach, why, the loss is like the loss of a gallery of masterpieces of the artists of old time. This is what he said when he recalled his trip to Breton Island Sound, the second of over 540 national wildlife heritage areas designated in the last 100 years. The land in this picture is gone. It no longer exists because we have twiddled our thumbs for almost 100 years. Today we introduce a bill to stop us from twiddling our thumbs, direct our resources, get serious about conservation, serious about the taxpayer money, and do something with it that the overwhelming majority of the taxpayers would stand up and cheer, if they had the chance to vote on it. I thank the Chair. It will be a pleasure working with the Senator from Tennessee as we lead this great effort.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I am pleased to join my colleague Senator Alexander as we introduce this very significant conservation legislation. The junior Senator from Tennessee has been a long-time effective advocate for the environment and for conservation, not only in his own State of Tennessee but for our Nation. The legislation we introduce today is a new, enhanced version of a piece of legislation that was introduced several years ago. We believe it is a very promising approach to launch one of the most significant conservation efforts ever considered by Congress. The American Outdoors Act is a landmark multiyear commitment to conservation programs directly benefiting all 50 States and hundreds of local communities. It creates a conservation royalty derived from the production of oil and gas on the Outer Continental Shelf and directs it toward the restoration of coastal wetlands, preservation of wildlife habitat, and it helps build and maintain local and State parks for our children, our children's children, for generations to come. By enacting this legislation, we will make the most significant commitment of Federal resources to conservation ever and ensure a positive legacy of protecting and enhancing critical wildlife habitat, estuaries, marshlands, mountain ranges, open green spaces, and expanded recreational opportunity for Americans today and generations to come. The legislation builds on a great and notable effort made during the 106th Congress that was supported by Governors, mayors, and a coalition of over 5,000 organizations throughout the country. Unfortunately, despite our bipartisan and very deep and widespread support, our efforts were cut short before a final bill could be signed into law. Instead, a commitment was made by those who opposed the legislation last time to guarantee funding for these programs. And unfortunately, we all know the story and the outcome of those promises. As we have painfully witnessed since then, these programs have not only been reduced, some of them have been eliminated completely, and are terribly underfunded in terms of the critical needs that are presented to us today. What has happened is exactly what those of us who initiated the effort always anticipated. Each of these significant programs has been shortchanged and a number of them have been left out altogether or forced to compete with each other for Federal resources. The legislation we are introducing today provides reliable, significant, and steady funding for the urgent and worthy conservation and outdoor recreation needs of our states and rapidly growing urban areas. What makes more sense than to take a portion of revenues from a depleting capital asset of the Nation--offshore Federal oil and gas resources--and reinvest them into sustaining the natural resources of our Nation: wetlands; parks and recreation areas and wildlife. The Americans Outdoors Act dedicates assured funding for four distinct programs and honors promises made long ago to the American people. The four programs include: Coastal impact assistance--$500 million to oil and gas producing coastal States to mitigate the various impacts of States that serve as the ``platform'' for the crucial development of Federal offshore energy resources from the Outer Continental Shelf as well as provide for wetland restoration. This program merely acknowledges the impacts to and contribution of States that are providing the energy to run our country's economy. The Outer Continental Shelf supplies 25 percent of our Nation's oil consumption, more than any other country including Saudi Arabia, with the promise of more, expected to reach 40 percent by 2008. Since this frontier was officially opened to significant oil and gas exploration in 1953, no single region has contributed as much to the nation's energy production as the OCS. The OCS accounts for more than 25 percent of our Nation's natural gas and oil production. With annual returns to the Federal Government averaging $5 billion annually, no single area has contributed as much to the Federal Treasury as the OCS. In fact, since 1953, the OCS has contributed $140 billion to the U.S. Treasury. Allocation to States would be based on their proximity to production. Thirty-five percent of the State's allocation would be shared with coastal political subdivisions based on a formula of 50 percent proximity to production, 25 percent miles of coastline and 25 percent coastal population; $450 million for the State side of the Land and Water Conservation Fund, LWC, to provide stable funding to States for the planning and development of State and local parks and recreation facilities. The allocation to States would be 60 percent equally among all 50 States and 40 percent based on relative population. This program provides greater revenue certainty for State and local governments to help them meet their recreational needs through recreational facility development and resource protection--all under the discretion of State and local authorities while protecting the rights of private property owners; Wildlife conservation, education and restoration--$350 million is allocated to all 50 States through the successful program of Pittman- Robertson for the conservation of nongame and game species, with the principal goal of preventing species from becoming endangered or listed under the Endangered Species Act. By taking steps now to prevent species from becoming endangered we are able to not only conserve the significant cultural heritage of wildlife enjoyment for the people of this country, but also avoid the substantial costs associated with recovery for endangered species. Allocations to States would be based on a formula of \2/3\ relative population and \1/3\ relative land area; and The Urban Parks and Recreation Recovery Program, UPARR--$125 million in the form of matching grants, 70 percent to provide direct assistance to our cities and towns so that they can focus on the needs of their populations within the more densely inhabited areas around the country where there are fewer green-spaces, playgrounds and soccer fields for our youth. I would also like to acknowledge our interest in several programs that are not part of this initial package but will be considered as the bill moves through the process. For example, the Federal side of the Land and Water Conservation Fund which focuses primarily on Federal land acquisition. The goal of the Federal side of the LWCF was to share a significant portion of revenues from offshore development with States to provide for protection and public use of the natural environment. It is our intention to discuss this program with our colleagues on the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee with the goal of developing a compromise that will garner broad support. In addition, other worthy programs that are not part of the legislation we are introducing today but ideally would be part of a larger more comprehensive effort include Historic Preservation, Payment in Lieu of Taxes, PILT, and the Forest Legacy program. While we confront a time of war, budget deficits and a struggling economy, setting aside a portion of oil and gas royalties to our states and localities for initiatives such as outdoor spaces or recreation facilities for our children to play could not be more crucial. Programs such as the State side of the Land and Water Conservation Fund are in fact the economic stimulus that our States and cities need in these times. The time has come to take the proceeds from a non-renewable resource for the purpose of reinvesting a portion of these revenues in the conservation and enhancement of our renewable resources. To continue to do otherwise, as we have over the last 50 years, is fiscally irresponsible. As I said, the legislation we introduce today, therefore, provides a reliable, significant, and steady stream of funding that cannot be manipulated or tampered with at the whim of this or that, but will be there for conservation efforts that our local communities and States can count on to provide this great legacy and heritage for our grandchildren. What makes more sense than taking a portion of the offshore oil and gas revenues that have generated almost $130 billion since the first well was drilled off of our shore on the Continental Shelf almost 100 years ago? What would make more sense than taking a small portion of that money and giving it back to the environment, back to our mountain ranges, to our marshes, to our coastal areas, protecting and preserving our great land for generations to come? The American Outdoors Act does exactly that. It dedicates and assures funding for four distinct programs: Coastal impact assistance, of which Louisiana and other coastal States would benefit. Of course, we are proud to serve as oil and gas producers, helping us secure our energy independence from foreign sources, providing much critical feedstock, if you will, for our energy industry in the State, and expanding our economic opportunities. Because we produce so much oil and gas, we would deserve help with our vanishing coastline. In addition, the other segment of this bill would fund the Land and Water Conservation Fund State side. As the Senator from Tennessee noted, he and I are firmly committed to also providing support and full funding for the Federal side of land and water, as this bill moves through the process. Wildlife conservation, education, and restoration would be fully funded. That helps all of our States. The Urban Parks and Recreation Program, which has been so critical for quality-of-life issues and economic development in our cities, in our suburbs, our urban centers, would also be funded. Time is not on our side. While other issues might be able to wait and other issues could maybe be funded gradually over time, for every month we delay, for every year we delay, we lose acres and acres, miles and miles of land we will never be able to recover. Louisiana itself is literally washing away. We have lost the size of the State of Rhode Island off our coast in the last 100 years. If some foreign country attacked our country and tried to take a portion of land away from us, we would fight with every strength and every tool and every resource available. But we stand here literally in some ways twiddling our thumbs while this land is washed away into the Gulf of Mexico. And not just any land but very productive land and very necessary land, not just for Louisiana but for the entire United States. I close with a quote from Teddy Roosevelt because it is appropriate. He was a great conservation President. Over 100 years ago he started many programs. I love taking my children to Theodore Roosevelt Island. We ride our bikes over there. I love telling them the story of Teddy Roosevelt. I explain many stories about what he did, hunting in Louisiana, the history of the black bear, et cetera. In his autobiography he wrote of his experiences in Coastal Louisiana: And to lose the chance to see frigate birds soaring in circles above the storm or, a file of pelicans winging their way homeward across the crimson afterglow of the sunset, or a myriad of terns flashing in the bright light of midday as they hover in a shifting maze above the beach, why, the loss is like the loss of a gallery of masterpieces of the artists of old time. This is what he said when he recalled his trip to Breton Island Sound, the second of over 540 national wildlife heritage areas designated in the last 100 years. The land in this picture is gone. It no longer exists because we have twiddled our thumbs for almost 100 years. Today we introduce a bill to stop us from twiddling our thumbs, direct our resources, get serious about conservation, serious about the taxpayer money, and do something with it that the overwhelming majority of the taxpayers would stand up and cheer, if they had the chance to vote on it. I thank the Chair. It will be a pleasure working with the Senator from Tennessee as we lead this great effort.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I speak today to honor the service of CPT Chris Christopher, who is currently the deputy director for future operations, communications and business initiatives at NMCI. Captain Christopher comes to this position after nearly 20 years of distinguished service to the Navy in the fields of aviation, public affairs, and intelligence. Captain Christopher has spent most of his life in New Orleans, and he has made a wonderful home there with his wife Patti and their two daughters. He received undergraduate and graduate degrees from the University of New Orleans, and his work with NMCI still brings him back to the UNO campus. Though he is now stationed in Virginia, his heart and family remain in New Orleans. As a Louisiana Senator, I like that. Captain Christopher's work at NMCI has been truly outstanding. The Navy Marine Corps Intranet is a progressive project whose ultimate goal is to transform the Department of the Navy's computer networks. NMCI will revolutionize command and control efficiencies within the Navy, and between the services, to ensure that our forces are operating in unison. This will save American lives, increase combat readiness and effectiveness, and, ultimately, make us stronger. Under Captain Christopher's leadership, many of these goals have been brought closer to reality. From June 20 to 23, Captain Christopher organized the 2004 Navy Marine Corps Intranet Symposium in New Orleans. This event was an opportunity for all parties involved in NMCI to continue their dialogue on reshaping information technology in the Navy and Marine Corps. Captain Christopher made this event happen, and according to all parties involved, it was a complete success. I once again thank my friend, CPT Chris Christopher, for his efforts on America's behalf. Future generations of sailors and marines will no doubt reap the benefits of his labor and America will be safer as a result. I am proud of your `Louisiana-bred' success Chris, and I wish you well in your future endeavors.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. I appreciate the cooperation of the chairman and ranking member. I know we are working toward finishing this very important bill. I appreciate them giving me the opportunity to call up this amendment because it is a very important amendment among a list of very important issues we are debating. The amendment number is 3315, and I ask it be called up.

Ms. LANDRIEU. The front page of this contract says that for the spouses and/or eligible children, full coverage provides an annuity of 55 percent of retired pay. This is the contract that service personnel sign, in plain English. Full coverage provides an annuity of 55 percent of retired pay. What is happening now--after people signed up for this, paid into the program, and had some confidence their spouses would receive 55 percent of their retirement--is they are told they can only get 35 percent because we do not have enough money to live up to the terms of this contract. Right now a sergeant first class, in retirement, would be making about $771 per month--not a huge sum, by any means. Compare that amount of money to the contribution of this American: 20 years of his life putting his life on the line, putting the uniform on every day, for 20 years. The grand sum for him is $771 a month. We have money for every tax cut and drive businesses offshore, we can give tax cuts to everybody but we cannot find enough money for the spouse, who has moved every 2 years for 20 years. It is tough to hold down a job when you are moving, no matter how smart you are, no matter how high your grades were in school, or how hard you work. It is hard to keep up a career while moving to a different community, with children most of the time, every 2 years. We want to tell this spouse she is now only entitled to $491 a month, down to $5,000 a year. Families are filing for bankruptcy. Let me share some stories of the hardships spouses face because of the widow tax. Marion Charles is age 78. Marion's husband Ed died in 2002. Her husband was a Navy diver in WWII. He retired in 1966, as a crew member on one of America's first nuclear subs. Mrs. Charles had no idea her first pension payment would be reduced to 35 percent. Her husband joined SBP when it began. She said: I was so shocked, I almost fell out of the chair and wondered why God hadn't taken me, too, when he took Ed. She was left with $21,000 in bills. She said: Neither my husband nor I realized there would be an offset--no one ever told us. I find myself under a lot of stress getting over his death and trying to do something with the large bills facing me. Mrs. Charles nearly lost her home and almost declared bankruptcy. Miriam Joy Parker is from Huntsville, AL. Her husband served for 32 years. She followed her husband across the world for those 32 years. Mrs. Parker had to tighten her budget to live on the 55 percent pension she received before she turned 62. At age 62, the widow tax cut her annual income by nearly $10,000. She cannot live on the 35 percent rate and Social Security. She has had to begin working in her sixties. She never knew there was an offset. Betty Wells is from Ocala, FL. The widow tax has cost Ms. Wells $8,400 a year. At age 67, she took a job to make ends meet. Diane Worth is from Phoenix, AZ. The widow tax cut her annual income by $2,400. She may have to sell her home. The offset has cost her nearly $10,000. My amendment corrects this grave injustice. A spouse of a lieutenant colonel would see their pension cut from $1,595 a month, under our new rules, to $1,015 a month, for a grand total of $12,180 a year, after 20 years of service keeping the hearth going when their spouse was putting on that uniform and protecting us. I think we can do better. That is what my amendment does, and about 15 Senators on both sides of the aisle agree. They are joining me, including Senator Daschle, Senator Reid, and others. I am joined by Senator Snowe, who is the lead sponsor of this amendment on the other side. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that a piece in the Washington Times entitled ``Survivor Benefit Plan needs reform'' be printed in the Record.

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, the focus and purpose of this amendment is very simple, it is easy to understand, and it is quite clear. In the 5 minutes I have, I will try to lay out that purpose, its cost, and the reasons it is very important for this Senate to act affirmatively on this amendment. My amendment will fix and make clear that the Survivor Benefit Plan offered in 1972 to our men and women in uniform, of which they pay more than 80 percent of this benefit for themselves, so it is modestly subsidized by the taxpayer, my amendment will make it clear that the survivors of our veterans--in most cases they are women but, obviously, not in every case--at the age of 62 will be able to retain what they thought they signed up for, which is 55 percent of the benefit, instead of what is occurring today, which is cutting that benefit down to 33 percent. There are all sorts of reasons people will hold out as to why this is happening, but it is clear it needs to be fixed. It is also clear there is plenty of money in this bill to fix it. We are going to spend over $400 billion this year on the Defense bill. This amendment will only cost about $400 million a year to fix. Somewhere in this bill of hundreds of billions of dollars, I am certain we can find the $400 million to live up to a promise made to our military men and women and to give them the benefit of which actually they are paying 80 percent. This is not a taxpayer giveaway; this is honoring a commitment made when we set up a program. The men and women who serve in the military not only are brave and courageous, they are also usually concerned about setting up the appropriate death benefits for their spouses and their children. We have a system that will allow retirees to get 55 percent of their pay. The argument against this is that when this program was started by some in the Pentagon, they say it was never publicized that service members would get 55 percent, so why are people complaining today about getting 35 percent. I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record a document related to the Survivor Benefit Plan which I believe the chairman and ranking member have read. It is important to the hundreds of organizations that support this amendment.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I wish to take this opportunity to report back to my colleagues on some observations during my recent visit to the nation of Uganda. The Congressional Coalition on Adoption is a bipartisan, bicameral caucus that enjoys the support of nearly 200 members of Congress. I am fortunate to cochair this organization with my friend and colleague, the Senior Senator from Idaho. Every year, we have been taking a delegation of members and staff to a nation which plays, or could play, a leading role in assuring every child a loving family. In recent years, we have lead delegations to Romania, Russia, China, and Guatemala. However, this month, we traveled to a spot that is truly special in the world--Uganda. I am sad to say that if Americans know anything about Uganda, they know its tragic history. Since independence from Britain, Uganda has moved from tragedy to tragedy. Famously called the ``Pearl of Africa'' by Sir Winston Churchill, decades of misrule and grisly dictatorship left Uganda destitute and denied her proper role in the family of nations. Yet, the spirit of the people of Uganda seems indomitable. Despite Amin, despite Obote, despite HIV/AIDS, despite brutal terrorists in the north, Ugandans continue with a joy of life that is almost impossible to accept in our own terms. The people there have an amazing capacity to look past their personal tragedies and continue to strive for a better life for their children. Perhaps no man better captures the spirit of the people of Uganda than their current President, Yoweri Museveni. When Idi Amin staged his coup in 1971, now-President Museveni went into exile and began a history of resistance to dictatorship and misrule that has earned him comparisons with our own George Washington. Since his National Resistance Movement took power in 1986, Uganda has enjoyed the first sustained period of growth and stability that it has known since independence. As is often mentioned, President Museveni also exerted personal and farsighted leadership in the struggle against AIDS. The difference between this kind of personal leadership and its absence can be found by comparing the AIDS infection rates in Uganda with those of the rest of sub-Saharan Africa. Thus, Uganda is a country with capable and proven leadership, with an industrious people who are eager for more contact with the United States, and with an amazing natural beauty that is unparalleled in my own experience. However, Uganda faces two enormous challenges, and that is what drew the Congressional Coalition on Adoption to the country. Sadly, both of these challenges have contributed to the creation of orphans. They are the epidemic of HIV/AIDS and the ongoing terrorism by the Lord's Resistance Army in northern Uganda. Uganda has a population of 25 million people, and estimates suggest that nearly 10 percent of Uganda's population are orphaned. The good news is that Uganda has tackled one of the great orphan-generating disasters by acknowledging AIDS as a threat that can shake a country to its core. AIDS infection rates in some sections of Uganda were greater than 50 percent. From that devastating past, and with the good work of President Museveni and the First Lady, Janet Museveni, they have brought infection rates in Uganda to less than 6 percent. However, we must continue our support for the President's ``ABC'' program that endorses abstinence, being faithful, and condoms in that priority. The three pronged approach has been very successful, and we must ensure that ideological differences do not undermine our support for a program with such an amazing success rate. Additionally, we observed some very important clinical work with the drug Nevirapine. It is one of those small miracles that should do wonders in theory, but as a practical matter, the results are somewhat more troubling. Nevirapine has been shown to reduce mother-to-child HIV transmission rates by 50 percent. German pharmaceutical companies are providing the drug for free in Uganda. Nevertheless, because the healthcare infrastructure is so fragile and, in much of Uganda, nonexistent, Nevirapine has been subject to something called the ``cascade effect.'' Effectively, this means that since Nevirapine treatment requires a number of steps, at each stage we lose participation of mothers. So, when 6,000 women enter a clinic's door seeking treatment, we end up saving about four babies at a cost of $5,000 for each child. It is not that those children are not worth saving, we should do everything we can to save every child. However, when we tackle an enormous problem with finite resources, we must devote our efforts to the most effective treatments available. As the administration unrolls its funding strategy for the global effort against AIDS, I think we must examine this question of mother- to-child transmission carefully. In addition to the cascade effect, we must be careful not to ``create'' orphans with our healthcare funding choices. If all of our efforts go into saving infants, and we do less to help the mothers, we have only added to Uganda's difficulties with a large orphan population. But the real pressure creating new orphans in Uganda also deserves American attention. The Lord's Resistance Army, LRA, has been operating in Uganda since 1989. Suffice to say that its origins can be found in the delusional preachings of a self-proclaimed priestess, and since that time, it has lost whatever purpose it might have claimed. Fifteen years later, the LRA is lead by Joseph Koney, and his acts of cruelty can only rank with those of Hitler and Stalin. I heard personal testimony from an 11-year-old girl who was forced to kill her own mother in front of her siblings. This rag-tag group of brigands, thieves, and terrorists prey on the weakness of children. They swell their own meager ranks of 2,000 men by abducting children out of their homes. Young children are made to carry equipment, frequently starving to death during their treks of hundreds of miles to the LRA bases in southern Sudan. Older males are forced to fight or be killed. Girls are brutally raped and used as sex slaves for years. Child soldiers are regrettably not unique to Uganda. However, Koney's pathological desire to have children murder their own families and their fellow villagers leaves scars that are harder to heal than in other parts of the world. Despite this reality, U.S. military assistance to Uganda is a pittance. It is certainly true that the Ugandan army has a checkered past. It is also true that President Museveni has intervened in other conflicts, such as Rwanda. Yet, whatever harm might conceivably come from greater military assistance the United States would provide Uganda, it is overwhelmed by the horror of the status quo. If there is a moral obligation to use military force to defeat terrorists anywhere on Earth, I cannot conceive of a better place for the use of force than against the LRA. East Africa is an unstable and difficult neighborhood. Nearby Somalia is a failed state. Sudan has actively harbored terrorists, including Osama bin Laden. The Congo is an ongoing battleground. Rwanda experienced the worst genocide since Nazi Germany. This is a place that needs some attention and would benefit from a more robust American role. I am certain that we will need a real partner in this region--a partner in our fight against terrorism, an economic partner that demonstrates the success of the African Growth and Opportunity Act, and a regional model for the combat of AIDS. I believe that Uganda could be such a partner, and this Senator will pursue those steps available to me that would cement this relationship. Finally, let me say a word about intercountry adoption. President Museveni graciously received our delegation, and we had the opportunity to explain our position. Namely, the coalition feels that children flourish with loving families, but suffer in institutions. Of course, Uganda's traditional culture would normally absorb orphaned children in precisely the way we think is most appropriate--first with their family, secondarily within their community. However, we feel that where these social systems have been overwhelmed, as they have been in Uganda, a country should consider the option of international adoption. We believe that a nation can have no better ambassador to the United States than a child who has been adopted into a U.S. family and now has an active interest in their home country. We have seen it in China, Korea, and Russia. The process of intercountry adoption simply connects Americans to another country in a way they otherwise never would be. So with these thoughts in mind, President Museveni has agreed to review our request that Uganda ratify the Hague Convention on Intercountry Adoption. International adoption is not going to be a solution to the very important tasks ahead of Uganda. However, in the lives of the children who find parents this way, intercountry adoption will be a true blessing. I am also very pleased to announce that President Museveni and his wife Janet have kindly accepted my invitation to join us for a reception in their honor at my home. This will be an excellent opportunity for the Washington community to welcome this distinguished leader and build upon the foundations of partnership that have already been laid. I look forward to seeing many of my colleagues there.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I speak today to honor the service of Captain Chris Christopher, who is currently the Deputy Director for Future Operations, Communications and Business Initiatives at NMCI. Captain Christopher comes to this position after nearly 20 years of distinguished service to the Navy in the fields of aviation, public affairs and intelligence. Captain Christopher has spent most of his life in New Orleans, and he has made a wonderful home there with his wife Penny and their two daughters. He received undergraduate and graduate degrees from the University of New Orleans, and his work with NMCI still brings him back to the UNO campus. Though he is now stationed in Virginia, his heart and family remain in New Orleans. As a Louisiana Senator, I like that! Captain Christopher's work at NMCI has been truly outstanding. The Navy Marine Corps Intranet is a progressive and comprehensive project with an ultimate goal to transform the Department of the Navy's computer and information networks in a way that increases combat readiness and effectiveness. NMCI will revolutionize command and control efficiencies within the Navy, and between the services, to ensure that our forces are operating in unison. This will save American lives, increase combat readiness and effectiveness, and, ultimately, make us stronger. Under Captain Christopher's leadership, many of these goals have been brought closer to reality. I once again want to thank my friend, Captain Chris Christopher, for his efforts on America's behalf. Future generations of Sailors and Marines will no doubt reap the benefits of his labor and America will be safer as a result. I am proud of your `Louisiana-bred' success Chris, and I wish you well in your future endeavors.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, today I wish to recognize George and Germaine Briant as Louisiana's longest married couple. George and Germaine Briant of Hammond, LA, were married over eighty years ago on July 20, 1921. The couple currently lives at Sunrise of Live Oak Village in Hammond where their affectionate displays of kissing, hugging, and dancing, regularly prove a true testament of their love. As the residents of Hammond would tell you, George never fails to sing ``Let Me Call You Sweetheart'' to Germaine, at every opportunity. The Briants contributions to our Nation go beyond their loving example. George served in World War I and was awarded many medals, including the Purple Heart and the French Legion of Honor, for his courageous and exceptional service to his country. The Briants only son, George H. Briant, a World War II pilot, gave his life for his country. Although the lives of George and Germaine Briant tell tales of patriotism, valor, and loss, the most salient characteristics of their marriage are commitment, loyalty, selflessness, and unconditional love. I am proud to announce that at a time when people may need shining examples of self-sacrifice and a reminder of the responsibility involved in a commitment to family, George and Germaine Briant offer a portrait of a genuine marriage that has fidelity and trust at its roots. I know that my colleagues here in the United States Senate join me today in congratulating this exceptional couple who have shown the strength of a marriage bond that has only deepened with time.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I am pleased to see that the Senate will reauthorize the National Flood Insurance program today. This is such an important program for the people of Louisiana. If there is a theme that runs through the social and economic history of my State, it is water. The Mississippi River, with its great southern port of New Orleans, has been a center of commerce and an economic gateway to the east. Smaller rivers, streams, and bayous run throughout our parishes. More than 8,277 square miles of Louisiana are covered by water, nearly 16 percent. The entire southern third of my State could be called a giant wetland, much of it below sea level, including the city of New Orleans. Floods are a part of life in Louisiana, particularly in the southern part of the State. Louisiana has more than 377,000 insured properties under the program as of 2003. That same year the program paid nearly 6,000 flood loss claims in Louisiana. The National Flood Insurance Program allows Louisianians to stay in their homes and protects them from the devastation nature can wreak. The flood program gives the housing, insurance, banking, and mortgage lending markets in my State greater stability. It also brings peace of mind to those families who need the program to protect their most important assets: their homes and businesses. However, when this reauthorization bill was reported out of the Banking Committee, I had deep concerns about a pilot program contained in the bill designed to address severe repetitive loss properties. These are properties that experience a lot of flooding. The Federal Emergency Management Agency estimates that these repetitive loss properties, while only making up about one percent of all the insured properties, cost the program $200 million annually. Some property owners have collected flood claims that are four or five times higher than the actual value of the property. They refuse to take any action to minimize the cost to the program and benefit from subsidized insurance rates. Under the pilot program, $40 million in funding would be available on an optional basis for States and communities to take steps to mitigate the flood damage potential on these properties. If a property owner receives a mitigation offer and turns it down, their flood insurance premiums would increase 50 percent, and would keep on increasing by 50 percent until it reached the actuarial rate for the property. This provision would help prevent some of the abuse in the program. Louisiana has the most repetitive loss properties in the county, about one-third of the total number nationwide. I had concerns about how this pilot program would impact low income property owners in my State and so I put a hold on the bill. I felt that even though State and local communities could opt into the program, they would not have as much control over how the program would get funding to property owners that want mitigation. FEMA held all the cards. Let me give an example of what I mean. Under the original bill, FEMA would award mitigation funds based upon what it felt was in the best interest of the flood insurance program. I believed that this gave FEMA the power to overrule local determinations of what kind of flood mitigation to offer and what properties to mitigate. For example, a local community that wanted to elevate a structure above the base flood elevation could be denied relief because FEMA decided that buyouts were in the best interest of the flood insurance program in order to permanently remove properties out of the flood insurance program altogether. The impact this could have on property owners could be devastating. I did not want to see low-income people facing a terrible choice: sell your property or see your rates go up. Many of these families have lived on this land for generations. It may flood regularly, but it is also home. I wanted to make sure the pilot program struck a proper balance between the needs of the flood insurance program and the rights of property owners. The chairman and ranking member of the Banking Committee, Senators Shelby and Sarbanes, and myself worked together to make changes to the bill that I believe have achieved this balance. The changes keep the pilot program in place but add safeguards requiring FEMA to pay greater deference to local decisions about what properties to mitigate and what kinds of mitigation offers are most appropriate. We added demolition and rebuild as an additional eligible mitigation activity under the bill, an option that Louisiana's flood plain managers wanted. We also included a funding formula that insures that Louisiana gets its fair share of funding under the pilot program. Under FEMA's current mitigation program, Louisiana only received about $1 million even though the State had more than $60 million in need. I thank Chairman Shelby and the ranking member of the Banking Committee, Senator Sarbanes, as well as their staffs for their willingness to work with me on these changes. We have made this important bill a better deal for local communities in my State and across the country.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, like so many of the people who were fortunate enough to know him, I was deeply saddened to learn of the passing of a dear friend and true leader, Dr. Charles Irvin Hudson. Dr. Hudson, known to many affectionately as ``Doc,'' died unexpectedly May 7, 2004, at Our Lady of the Lake Hospital in Baton Rouge, LA, at the age of 72. Doc Hudson was an educator and community leader in St. Landry Parish for nearly 50 years. He demonstrated his commitment to education by serving as a high school mathematics teacher for 10 years and later as the principal of two elementary schools, for which he received numerous awards and honors. But Doc Hudson was equally committed to public service, and served his community as an elected official for nearly 30 years. First elected to the Opelousas City Council in 1974, he was to serve for three consecutive 4-year terms before becoming deputy secretary for the Louisiana State Department of Transportation and Development from 1984- 88. Doc Hudson was then elected to the Louisiana House of Representatives in 1991 where he served till his passing. Throughout his remarkable career, Doc worked tirelessly for the people of St. Landry Parish and the State of Louisiana. He fought for both decency and accountability in our schools, worked to improve the quality of life for everyone in District 40, and developed warm, quality relationships with all who met him. It was my privilege to have worked very closely with Doc on a number of occasions and to benefit from the wisdom of his counsel and the breadth of his understanding. I am honored to have known and learned from a man of such high moral character. Representative Hudson will be remembered for his nearly 30 years of service in public life and 20 years as an educator, and for the great value he placed on developing relationships with people. He rooted his work in his personal experiences with the people affected by the issues. His dedication to people will stand as a legacy from which future generations will learn. On behalf of the entire State of Louisiana, I pay tribute to this courageous statesman and convey my most respectful condolences to his family and to all who knew him.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, there are 542,000 reasons that we should all be involved in recognizing May as National Foster Care Month. These reasons represent the number of children currently in the foster care system, roughly 126,000 of whom are waiting to be adopted. Over 70 percent of these children entered foster care because of abuse or neglect. And, the average length of time that these children stay in foster care is almost 3 years. For many of these children, the wait for a loving family where they are nurtured, comforted, and protected is endless. Every year, 25,000 children ``age out'' of foster care because they reach adulthood without ever being found a permanent home. These children are more likely to drop out of school and are more likely to be unemployed, welfare dependent, and homeless. In fact, roughly 30 percent of the Nation's homeless are former foster children. As Senators, we cannot allow over half a million children to continue languishing in the foster care system, vulnerable to facing these negative outcomes. During this National Foster Care Month or at any other appropriate time throughout the year, I ask that you focus attention on the need to find secure and supportive families for these children. Nurturing and stable environments can allow these children to achieve great success by helping them to overcome the challenges posed by involvement in the foster care system. One such example of the effect that a nurturing and stable environment can have on a foster child exists right in Congress's own backyard--the Mayor of Washington, DC, Anthony Williams. Mayor Williams' mother once told the story that when she visited the orphanage where she first met her son, she was told by the workers that he was not as advanced developmentally and intellectually as he should be for a child his age. These workers even indicated that little Anthony might have to be sent to an institution. And, they were right. His mother sent him off to two of the most prestigious institutions in our country--Yale University for college and Harvard University for law school. I invite all Members to come to the Senate floor to speak about former foster children such as Mayor Williams, about foster children currently waiting for loving families, or about the significance of foster care in your own life, in your State, or in the life of a child. But, I want to ask more of you than simply sharing these stories. I would like to urge my colleagues to commit their efforts to ensuring that we institute legislative reforms for the child welfare system that will emphasize permanency for foster children, whether that be reunification with families, adoption, or teaching youth skills to be able to live self-sufficiently after emancipation. The time is now for us to reform a foster care system that does not adequately address the needs of our most vulnerable children and families. One of the areas that will require the greatest reform is the Federal financing structure of child welfare services. Currently, the Federal financing system is structured in a way that provides the greatest financial support for a child by the Federal Government when that child is in the foster care system. In other words, it creates a funding incentive to keep children in foster care, rather than moving them towards re-unification or adoption. We must revise this system so that funding matches the Federal priorities. This means that Government should fund the programs and approaches that are actually working to provide safety and permanency to children. Decisions regarding the placement of a child should not be influenced by the type of placement that would offer the greatest resources for the child, but instead be based on the best interests of the child. Adequate resources should be available for children involved in any area of the child welfare system. Therefore, the money and resources should follow the child, whether that is in foster care, in an adoptive home, or after re- unification with the biological family. The current financing system includes a patchwork of programs, many of which are funded through discretionary spending that is vulnerable to cuts in the appropriations process. Reforms must be instituted that allow the child welfare system to encompass a more comprehensive approach that includes prevention, re-unification services, adequate foster care services, adoption resources, and post-permanency support. The time has come to fix these problems, to focus on the solutions in order to help our most vulnerable children. The Pew Commission on Children in Foster Care released a report this week that summarizes a 1-year study of the foster care system. This study includes the feedback of advocates, State service providers, lawmakers, judges, and former foster youth around the country. I respectfully ask my colleagues to carefully look at the recommendations of not only the Pew Commission but of the hundreds of other individuals, groups, and States that have studied this system and have provided valuable ideas for reform. Further, I hope that the leadership in the Finance Committee will hold hearings on the topic of Federal financing of the child welfare system to fully explore the problems in this system and the proposals for reform that will help to resolve these problems. I also ask all Members of Congress to make these reforms a priority during the remainder of this session and during the next session of Congress. I am personally committed to seeing reform done within this time period. And, I am hopeful that we will soon enact legislation that will help the hundreds of thousands of children in foster care in our country. Let us work together to ensure the success of our future by promoting safety and stability for our children today.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr President, 50 years ago, our Nation set out to give every child the chance for excellence and equality in education. In a quote from the Brown decision in 1954, the U.S. Supreme Court said, ``Today education is perhaps the most important function of State and local governments . . . It is a principal instrument in awakening the child to cultural values, in preparing him for later professional training, and in helping him to adjust normally to his environment. In these days, it is doubtful that any child may reasonably be expected to succeed in life if he is denied the opportunity of an education. Such an opportunity, where the State has undertaken to provide it, is a right, which must be made available to all on equal terms.'' We have made great progress in the past 50 years but we still have a long way to go. By fulfilling the promise of Brown, school systems have the ability to lay a great foundation for our Nation. Providing children with a high quality education, in a diverse classroom setting, gives our children the educational tools which they need to succeed. Additionally, it provides them with an environment which will equip them with the necessary tools to become true leaders. The goals of Brown were to provide to all children, excellent schools which were as diverse as possible. The greatest gift that we can give our children is to ensure that they receive nothing less. Fifty years after Brown, its full promise remains unrealized. Public education in our country has become more and more separate. In Washington, DC, public schools, nearly all students are attending segregated, poor schools. For example, 2,455 students are attending 12th grade. Of those, 121 are white, about 1,900 are black and the rest are primarily Latino and Asian/Pacific Islander. Of the white students, 116 attend just three schools with 88 of those at just one school. This scenario is happening not only in our Nation's capital but across the Nation. In my State of Louisiana, public schools in the City of Monroe have 88 percent minority students, while the surrounding rural district has 71 percent white students. Not only are our schools more separate, but they are also more unequal. Since 1988, the minority achievement gap in our country has continued to grow. Nationally, African American and Latino 17-year-olds demonstrate reading and math skills that are virtually indistinguishable from white 13-year-olds. In my own State of Louisiana, there is a 42.9 point gap between the performance of African American students and their white peers. These statistics can be explained by many different variables. Poor and minority students are one-third more likely to be taught by an unqualified teacher than their peers. Students of color and low-income students do not receive curriculum and instruction that is as challenging or rigorous as other students. According to the U.S. Department of Education, less than a third of students from low-wealth families were enrolled in the college prep track, while two-thirds of students from high-wealth families were in college prep. What is worse, we have put educational funding on its head. In a majority of States, the more students of color you have, the less likely you are to receive State and local funds. The founding principle of No Child Left Behind was that all children can learn. There are hundreds of examples, many of which you will hear in commemoration of the Brown decision, to demonstrate this fact to be true. Centennial Place Elementary School in Atlanta, GA is 91 percent African American and 79 percent low-income and is in the top 10 percent of the entire State of Georgia in reading. Moreover, Centennial Place Elementary outscored 88 percent of other Georgia schools on the State's math test. In my home State of Louisiana, Claiborne Fundamental Elementary School has an 80 percent minority student body, 60 percent of which are in poverty. Yet they finished in the 94th percentile on LEAP testing and finished in the top 10 percent in closing the achievement gap. These are only a few examples of success in schools which support the principles of No Child Left Behind. For the first time, the Federal Government has rejected the bigotry of lower expectations and has required States and local school districts to do something about the growing gap of opportunity in our schools. If we are to realize the promise of Brown we must ensure that each and every child, regardless of race or income, has an opportunity to realize their potential. The links between all of these examples of success are accountability, full and equal funding, and teacher quality. If we can set clear, measurable goals for performance and continue to hold schools accountable for results, we can truly measure success and failure. Backlash against No Child Left Behind is in part because people are being forced to face the reality that gaps do exist. Under the old system, schools with huge gaps in the performance of their students were labeled as being successful. Nationally, 4th grade African Americans lag behind their white peers in reading, with 39 percent of white students considered proficient but only 12 percent of black students. Things are similar in 8th grade mathematics, 36 percent of white students are labeled proficient, but only 7 percent of black students fall into the same category. While we continue to make schools accountable, we must also ensure that they are fully and equally funded. Over the past four years, Title I of No Child Left Behind has been underfunded by the President's Budget by $22.3 billion. In my State of Louisiana, that means that 135, 962 disadvantaged children, 6,029 English-learners, and 62,977 preschool children are left behind. We cannot continue to expect our schools to perform, if we do not give them the tools they need. This funding must also be equal. In 22 States, the highest poverty school districts receive less per-student funding from State and local sources than the lowest-poverty school districts. This is also true of the Nation as a whole. The top 25 percent of school districts in terms of child poverty nationwide receive less funding than the bottom 25 percent. Similarly, in 28 States the local districts with the highest percentage of minority children receive less funding than districts with the fewest minority children. These increases in funding will go towards many different aspects of our children's education but also towards recruiting the best and the brightest teachers. The difference between an effective teacher and an ineffective teacher can be a whole grade level in school. In a recent study in Dallas, students who had the added value of a good teacher 3 years in a row were scoring in the 76th percentile; while students who had a bad teacher 3 years in a row were performing in the 27th percentile. We can help recruit and retain quality teachers by increasing their opportunity for professional development, increasing the pay for teachers who work in high challenge areas, merit pay and bonuses for good teachers, and by increasing administrative and professional support for teachers in schools. The principles laid out in No Child Left Behind give our Nation the opportunity to fully realize the promise of Brown v. Board of Education. If we can continue to fund initiatives which encourage accountability and excellence for all students we can continue to close the achievement gap that plagues our Nation's schools. In 1960, four black 6-year-old girls were the first to integrate two white schools in my home town of New Orleans. These brave children set out as pioneers to create a school system in this country which was equal for all children regardless of race or religion. We must keep these children in our hearts as we set forth to make their dream truly a reality. On this 50th commemoration of the Brown decision, I hope that my colleagues will join with me in ensuring that every child receives access to the same high quality education.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I rise today to support this legislation, as it recognizes America's fighting men and women serving today in Iraq and Afghanistan. These soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines are serving their country, in harms way, in two distinct theaters, and it is time that we recognize them appropriately. The armed forces of this country have defended us valiantly for the last two hundred and twenty nine years. When our Nation has been challenged, each generation has risen to the occasion. And I do need to inform anybody in this chamber that the current generation has done the same, and that they are fighting valiantly in Iraq and Afghanistan. America knows all too well that many of our troops have given what President Lincoln called the ``last full measure of devotion.'' The generation that fought in Vietnam was given a medal for their service, as were the men and women who served in Korea. The generation that fought in World War II was awarded with a medal commemorating the victory, as well as service in the Pacific, European/African, and American theaters. And today we bestow the same honors upon the current generation that their fathers and grandfathers received. This legislation is the right thing to do, and I am proud to join my colleague, Senator Bingaman, in this effort.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Lake Pontchartrain.

Ms. LANDRIEU. If the Senator will yield for a moment, I thank the Senator for those kind remarks. The Senator is invited to come back any time for that famous Moon Landrieu peanut brittle. I am motivated to speak on the floor about this particular subject because in our household our parents helped to educate nine of us on a shoestring budget. It became such a passion of mine, as I could see how that has helped each of us to go forward in our lives and to see what it had done for my father and mother. They both came from families where only one grandparent had gone to college. In my father's case, neither of his parents even went to high school. So when I come to the floor--I know you graduated from that large school of yours, with eight in the graduating class--you can appreciate the importance of the work regarding education, fighting hard to make sure every family is like the Landrieu family or Reid family--at least having a chance for a good education. If we write good laws and policies, it happens. If we don't, it doesn't. I thank the Senator for those comments and I am happy to share my few thoughts about the underlying bill.