John McCain

Mr. McCAIN

Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that at the conclusion of my remarks, letters from the Navy League of the United States and from Abraham Sofaer of the Hoover Institution to Patrick Leahy, which I think are important documents as far as constitutional aspects of this issue, be printed in the Record.

Mr. McCAIN

Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I am very proud to join Senator Bunning, who many know is a Major League Baseball Hall of Famer. Not many know he was a founding member of Major League Baseball's Players Union. He brings to this issue impeccable credentials and an enormous amount of passion. I am pleased to be supportive of his leadership in this effort. It is my hope this legislation would not be necessary. Senator Bunning and I both come to this legislation with great reluctance. But as Senator Bunning pointed out, the Major League Baseball players said they would, by the World Series, come up with an agreement. That has not happened. The legislation is an effort to set minimum standards that have proven effective in Olympic sports and would also introduce independence--and this is crucial--into the drug testing programs of professional leagues. Without an independent entity, such as the U.S. Anti-doping Agency that establishes and manages a testing and adjudication program, the fox will continue to guard the henhouse. That is exactly the problem that the U.S. Olympic movement faced several years ago, and they brought integrity back to American Olympic sports by putting the responsibility for testing in the hands of an independent entity. There are some who argue that Senator Bunning and I have no business legislating an issue which is basically a labor-management issue. We agree. We agree. We do not want to have to legislate. We do not want to have to force both entities to do something they otherwise should have done, but we have no choice. As the Senator from Kentucky has so eloquently pointed out, our obligation is not to the people who are making millions of dollars this year. Our obligation is not even to those who are members of professional sports. Our obligations are to the families of the young people who believe the only way they can make it in the major leagues is to inject these substances into their bodies. Anybody who followed the hearing on the House side, where there was testimony from parents of young men who had committed suicide as a result of the use of these substances, knows this issue has now transcended a labor-management issue. Senator Bunning and I come to this floor more in sorrow than in anger that we have had to take this extraordinary step. But we will take it; we will take it for the benefit of young Americans who believe the only way they can make it in the major leagues is by using these substances and to give hope to others who refuse to do it and want to make it on their own merits. Mr. President, I again thank the Senator from Kentucky, who has been a role model to so many millions of young Americans for so many years, for his involvement in this effort. Mr. President, I yield the remainder of my time.

Mr. McCAIN

Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, today the Senate will vote on the conference report to H.R. 2744, the Agriculture Appropriations bill for fiscal year 2006. Unfortunately, I cannot support final passage of this bill. The conference agreement to H.R. 2744 appropriates about $100.9 billion in spending, an amount that is approximately $848 million over the administration's request, $258 million more than the Senate- approved bill and $660 million more than the House-passed bill. As is the case with many of the appropriations bills that come to the floor, this bill and its accompanying report contain earmarks and pork projects which have not been authorized or requested. I believe that some Federal involvement is necessary to assist low- income families under the Food Stamp Program and that we ensure that our farmers stay out of the red. And to this end, many of the programs under the Agriculture Department are worthwhile and I support their funding. I know that many of my colleagues have spoken before the Senate about the economic struggles of America's farmers, but as Congress looks ahead towards legislating a new farm bill in the near future, we once again conform to the practice of diverting taxpayer dollars into an array of special interest pork projects. Let's take a look at some of the earmarks that are in this bill: $350,000 for a report on the economic development of the sheep industry in the United States; $1,250,000 for the National Sheep Industry Improvement Center; $210,000 to the Little Red River Irrigation project, Arkansas; $1,800,000 for the Muskingam River Watershed, Mohican River, Jerome and Muddy Fork obstruction removal projects, Ohio; $1,000,000 for a flood prevention project in Kane County, Illinois; $200,000 for a grant to administer a private lands wildlife management program in Alaska; $1,000,000 for a grant to the Ohio Livestock Expo Center in Springfield, OH; $2,250,000 for a grant to the Wisconsin Federation of Cooperatives for pilot Wisconsin- Minnesota health care cooperative purchasing alliance; $200,000 for a grant to the Utah State University for a farming and dairy training initiative; and $500,000 for a grant to the Nueces County, Texas Regional Fairground. It is a violation of Senate rules to legislate on an appropriations bill, and this fact is far too often overlooked. Authorizing policy is a function reserved for the authorizing committees, not the appropriations committee. As is done far too frequently, this appropriations bill includes a variety of policy changes. Examples include: The conference agreement authorizes the purchase of land by the Agriculture Research Service in Florence, SC. The conference agreement authorizes the lease of 40 acres of Federal ARS land to the Colorado State University system. The conference agreement authorizes the ARS to convey 19 acres of Federal land to Oktibbeha County, MS. The conference agreement allows for the granting of easements at the Beltsville, MD, Agricultural Research Center. The conference agreement amends the Rural Electrification Act of 1936 regarding Federal loans. The conference agreement amends the Immigration and Nationality Act. The conference agreement amends the Organic Food Production Act of 1990. The conference agreement amends the Federal Meat Inspection Act. The statement of managers that accompanies this conference report also includes hundreds of earmarks and questionable projects. Here are some examples: $300,000 for beaver management in North Carolina; $625,000 for game bird predation work with the University of Georgia; $50,000 for control of feral hogs in Missouri; $50,000 for animal tracking projects in the State of Washington; $380,000 to continue control measures for minimizing blackbird damage to sunflowers in North Dakota and South Dakota; $196,000 for geese control in the State of New York; $75,000 for research into peanut production, Dawson, GA; $75,000 for research into seafood waste, Fairbanks, AK; and $250,000 for turf grass research, Beaver, WV. Despite high gas prices, despite a swelling budget deficit, despite our military operations overseas, and despite our domestic emergencies, pork continues to thrive in good times and bad. The cumulative effect of these earmarks erode the integrity of the appropriations process and, by extension, our responsibility to the taxpayers. We can do better for our farmers and the American people.

Mr. McCAIN

Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, this amendment does one very simple thing. It would move the DTV transition date forward by 1 year, making the completion date April 7, 2008. My colleagues will be asked to believe the earlier date is not doable. Do not believe it. We have the ability. We have the technology. It can be accomplished. It is supported by every first responder organization in America, every single one. The National Governors Association: We support the amendment, based upon certain clearing of channels. People's lives are at stake. The only people who are against this amendment are the National Association of Broadcasters. We will see if they win again.

Mr. McCAIN

Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I would be prepared to set aside the pending amendment until such time as anyone else wants to come and talk on it or that my time expires so the other Members may proceed with Senate business. I ask unanimous consent that my amendment be set aside pending the arrival of another Senator who may want to speak on this amendment. In the meantime, other Senators may be recognized.

Mr. McCAIN. I thank the Chair. I yield the floor.

Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, the amendment would do one very simple thing: It would move the DTV transition date forward by 1 year, making the completion date April 7, 2008, rather than April 2009. This would accomplish the crucial goal of providing first responders with critically needed spectrum one year sooner than is required in the reconciliation bill. This amendment, if adopted, could provide a greater benefit to the American public than perhaps any other provision in this bill. We know that first responders' ability to communicate during times of tragedy can be literally a matter of life and death for them and the victims of natural and manmade catastrophes. This is a lesson that has been presented to us over and over again, well before Katrina and even several years after 9/11. Yet to this date, we have not made a commitment to allocate the needed spectrum as soon as possible. Almost 10 years ago, a coalition of public safety groups issued a report asking Congress and the Federal Communications Commission for additional first responder spectrum. In 1996, Congress promised first responders would be provided with adequate spectrum for communications by December 31, 2006. However, shortly thereafter, Congress effectively reneged on that promise and set a bar for its fulfillment that would be unobtainable for decades. During a hearing held just last year by the Senate Commerce Committee, then-chairman of the FCC, Michael Powell, predicted it could be even ``multiple decades'' before the turnover of spectrum to first responders under existing law. That provision, which required 85 percent of homes to be available for high-definition television, would have effectively prevented the analog spectrum from ever being returned, and that provision was never run through the Commerce Committee that I was chairman of at the time. It was never debated or discussed. It was snuck into a bill by individuals at the request of the National Association of Broadcasters. It could have been no one else. That is a terrible way to do business. Unfortunately, more and more we are doing business by adding little lines into appropriations bills which never see the light of day. I am sick and tired of it, and the American people are sick and tired of it. We are sick and tired of all the earmarks, and we are sick and tired of the billions of dollars of pork-barrel spending that occurs. We are sick and tired of mortgaging our children's futures. I am, most of all, sick and tired that the National Association of Broadcasters is able to prevent this transition from taking place at the risk of American lives, our bravest Americans, our first responders. I will tell you what the Fraternal Order of Police say: As Hurricane Katrina so clearly demonstrated, the ability to communicate and transmit information can often mean the difference between life and death. Congress should no longer delay public safety access to this spectrum. Every year we wait is another year too late. We cannot wait any longer for Congress to deliberate over this issue. Therefore, we ask you to support a transition date as close to December 31st, 2006, as possible. That plea comes from the Congressional Fire Services Institute, the International Association of Arson Investigators, International Association of Firefighters, International Fire Service Training Association, National Fire Protection Association, the National Volunteer Fire Council, the North American Fire Training Directors, and the International Association of Fire Chiefs. Every day police, fire, and emergency personnel face communications problems due to dangerously congested radio communications systems. We need Congress to pass legislation to complete the transition to digital TV and free the spectrum for public safety use. The lives of first responders and the citizens we serve are at risk. That is signed by Chief Mary Ann Viverette, president of the International Association of Chiefs of Police. Here we are, the lineup again, our first responders, the brave men and women who put their lives on the line in defense of the lives of their fellow citizens who have already given their lives, who have performed so magnificently, who want to be able to talk to each other, who want the spectrum freed up. And what do we do here in Congress? We delay it as long as possible. It is disgraceful conduct on our part. Let me tell you what the NAB says, the National Association of Broadcasters: On behalf of America's local television broadcasters, I am writing to urge your support for the digital transition provisions included in the Senate reconciliation package. In particular, we are concerned about floor amendments that would harm television VIEWERS by either moving forward the hard date or reducing the revenue allocated to assist consumers in making this transition. Get it? ``We are concerned about floor amendments that would harm television viewers.'' They are worried about harming television viewers when the heads of the policemen, the firemen, all of the first responders, everybody is worried about saving lives. So we are going to decide, again, whether the National Association of Broadcasters carries the day or whether we take care of those men and women who literally are putting their lives on the line every single day. I have a quote here from Tom Kean, Chairman of the 9/11 Commission, concerning his frustration and that of the 9/11 Commission, probably one of the most respected persons in America: What's frustrating is it's the same thing over again. I mean, how many people have to lose their lives? It's lack of communication, our first responders not being able to talk to each other. . . . Basically it's many of the things that, frankly, if some of our recommendations had been passed by the United States Congress, could have been avoided. But on the ground, the people that get there first can't talk to each other because radio communications don't work. They haven't got enough of what's called spectrum. So there is a bill in Congress to provide first responders spectrum. The bill has been sitting in Congress, nothing has been happening and, again, people on the ground--police, fire, medical personnel--couldn't talk to each other. That's outrageous and it's a scandal and I think it costs lives. I will repeat what Tom Kean, Chairman of the 9/11 Commission says: That's outrageous and it's a scandal and I think it costs lives. I would like to have it earlier than 2008. I would prefer to offer an amendment to set a date of 2007, as I did during the Commerce Committee's executive session on this matter. Prior to that session, the Congressional Budget Office expressed concerns about the revenue impact of that earlier 2007 date. By the way, I don't begrudge the Congressional Budget Office for expressing fiscal concerns about perhaps not as much revenue as they can get. But is it revenue we are worried about or people's lives? The amendment failed very badly in the Commerce Committee. However, I am informed that a date of April 2008 would likely generate considerably more revenue than the committee's reconciliation instruction of $4.8 billion, much closer to the level of revenues expected under the April 2009 date than the January 2007 date that I proposed in committee. As such, this amendment's 2008 date should not raise any potential violation of the budget rules. It is the best option we have at this time. I have a memorandum from the following organizations in support of establishing a firm DTV transition date as soon as possible to clear the megahertz ban for public safety use nationwide, the 700 megahertz ban: Association of Public-Safety Communication Officials, International; Congressional Fire Services Institute; International Association of Chiefs of Police; International Association of Fire Chiefs; the Major Cities Chiefs Association; Major County Sheriffs' Association; and the National Sheriffs' Association. Their memorandum is to Members of the U.S. Senate, dated November 2, 2005. Subject: DTV transition. The Senate Commerce Committee, in addressing DTV transition, has set a hard date of April 7, 2009 by which television broadcasters must vacate the 24MHz of spectrum and the 700MHz band allocated to public safety. We applaud the efforts of the Commerce Committee to address this critical issue. Now, Senator John McCain will introduce an amendment to set the date one year earlier--April 2008. In 1997, as part of budget reconciliation, Congress set December 31, 2006 as the date for broadcasters to vacate the four television channels allocated to public safety. The above listed organizations have sought ever since to assure that date. Senators are well aware of the urgent need for this spectrum to be made available, nationwide, to public safety and our quest for the earliest transition date possible. Senator McCain's amendment is an improvement in that regard, and it has our support. Here we are again, as we have been in the past. All of the brave men and women who don't stand to make a penny from this transition. There is no revenue that accrues to the National Association of Chiefs of Police, to the sheriffs, to all of the medical personnel. They are not going to make a dime out of this. What they are going to do is carry out their mission, which is to save lives. It is their view and that of the 9/11 Commission and, frankly, that of any objective observer that these people are unable to save people's lives because of a lack of ability to communicate with each other, and the National Association of Broadcasters is again flexing its muscles to the point where it can very likely cost people's lives. So I hope for once when we go home and talk about how much we support all these great public servants and what a great job they do--our chiefs of police, our sheriffs, all of the people who guard us every day--maybe the best way we can show our appreciation to them is to approve this amendment and get them the spectrum they need in order to be prepared to save lives in the event of another disaster. I do not have a lot more to say on this except that I ask for the yeas and nays on the amendment.

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

Mr. McCAIN. Then I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays on the McCain amendment.

Mr. McCAIN

Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, today I am introducing a bill to reauthorize the Indian Child Protection and Family Violence Prevention Act. This bill is intended to reauthorize appropriations for child sexual abuse prevention and treatment grants, to identify the scope of child abuse and family violence in Indian country by requiring annual comprehensive data gathering, to encourage inter-agency coordination between the Indian Health Service and public and private medical or treatment organizations in the treatment and examination of children through the use of telemedicine, and to conform the Act to other Federal child abuse reporting and confidentiality laws. The bill provides a 4-year reauthorization of appropriations for the Act. The Indian Child Protection and Family Violence Prevention Act was enacted in 1990 to address findings of the Senate Select Committee on Indian Affairs and the Special Committee on Investigations as it examined the Federal trust relationship with Indian tribes. Through public hearings, these Committees found that, at the time, Indian country was a safe haven for child abuse perpetrators. I will not forget the testimony of parents whose children fell prey to the notorious cases of multiple child sexual abuse that occurred on the Hopi, Navajo, and Cherokee reservations over the course of many years. The Federal investigation and prosecution of these crimes revealed that child abuse perpetrators were aware that the conditions of reporting, investigating, and preventing crimes upon children were in such a sorry state that their crimes would rarely be detected. Needless to say, the consequences proved tragic to hundreds of child victims, their families and their communities. We enacted this law to give the Federal Government an opportunity to meet its responsibility to Indian children and families by establishing policies and programs to prevent child abuse and family violence. To accomplish this, appropriations were authorized to establish prevention and treatment programs within the BIA and IHS. The Act also authorized the BIA and IHS to assist tribes in establishing on-reservation child abuse prevention and treatment programs. The Act also provided criminal sanctions for professionals who failed to report acts of abuse or suspected abuse and prescribed a child abuse reporting process for law enforcement. I don't believe that the possible benefits of the Act have been fully realized. Neither the BIA nor the IHS have successfully requested or received appropriations to fully implement the programs envisioned by the Act. Today, tribal governments rely on special appropriations, congressional earmarks and piecemeal grants. And, we still do not have a firm idea of the extent to which child sexual or physical abuse is occurring in Indian communities or the degree of success that we are having in treating victims of child abuse. Surely, we can do better than this. This bill provides for a comprehensive approach to gathering this information on child abuse in Indian country. Under current law, the FBI is responsible for gathering this data. At the time, the FBI was primarily responsible for investigating acts of felony child abuse in Indian country. Today, we know that many Indian tribal police agencies, operating under Indian Self-Determination and Educational Assistance Act compacts and contracts, jointly investigate these felony crimes and that they are also responsible for responding to and investigating tribal offenses. The bill requires a comprehensive sharing of numerical data by all Federal, tribal and State law enforcement agencies. In addition, the Act requires all local law enforcement agencies to document incidents of child abuse and to submit this documentation to the Federal Bureau of Investigation. The Act, however, does not provide for use of this valuable information. This bill permits the FBI to continue to gather conviction data and to make this information available, on a limited basis, to specific agencies requiring such information in the course of their professional duties. It permits agencies to access information in the course of conducting background checks on those who seek employment in an area involving children. Finally, the bill authorizes the Indian Health Service to use advances in telemedicine to bring expert advice and training to the examination and diagnosis of child abuse. This new provision recognizes that children, when victimized, require immediate and expert diagnosis and treatment. This section will help supplement stretched or unavailable IHS resources in the most isolated Indian communities. This body recently sent a clear message on domestic violence and sexual predators. This bill furthers that message by continuing to protect Indian children and families and ensuring that they continue to receive prevention and treatment resources to address the impact of these crimes in their own communities. I look forward to receiving the comments from the Administration and working with my colleagues toward final passage of this bill. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. McCAIN

Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, today I am introducing a bill to reauthorize the Indian Child Protection and Family Violence Prevention Act. This bill is intended to reauthorize appropriations for child sexual abuse prevention and treatment grants, to identify the scope of child abuse and family violence in Indian country by requiring annual comprehensive data gathering, to encourage inter-agency coordination between the Indian Health Service and public and private medical or treatment organizations in the treatment and examination of children through the use of telemedicine, and to conform the Act to other Federal child abuse reporting and confidentiality laws. The bill provides a 4-year reauthorization of appropriations for the Act. The Indian Child Protection and Family Violence Prevention Act was enacted in 1990 to address findings of the Senate Select Committee on Indian Affairs and the Special Committee on Investigations as it examined the Federal trust relationship with Indian tribes. Through public hearings, these Committees found that, at the time, Indian country was a safe haven for child abuse perpetrators. I will not forget the testimony of parents whose children fell prey to the notorious cases of multiple child sexual abuse that occurred on the Hopi, Navajo, and Cherokee reservations over the course of many years. The Federal investigation and prosecution of these crimes revealed that child abuse perpetrators were aware that the conditions of reporting, investigating, and preventing crimes upon children were in such a sorry state that their crimes would rarely be detected. Needless to say, the consequences proved tragic to hundreds of child victims, their families and their communities. We enacted this law to give the Federal Government an opportunity to meet its responsibility to Indian children and families by establishing policies and programs to prevent child abuse and family violence. To accomplish this, appropriations were authorized to establish prevention and treatment programs within the BIA and IHS. The Act also authorized the BIA and IHS to assist tribes in establishing on-reservation child abuse prevention and treatment programs. The Act also provided criminal sanctions for professionals who failed to report acts of abuse or suspected abuse and prescribed a child abuse reporting process for law enforcement. I don't believe that the possible benefits of the Act have been fully realized. Neither the BIA nor the IHS have successfully requested or received appropriations to fully implement the programs envisioned by the Act. Today, tribal governments rely on special appropriations, congressional earmarks and piecemeal grants. And, we still do not have a firm idea of the extent to which child sexual or physical abuse is occurring in Indian communities or the degree of success that we are having in treating victims of child abuse. Surely, we can do better than this. This bill provides for a comprehensive approach to gathering this information on child abuse in Indian country. Under current law, the FBI is responsible for gathering this data. At the time, the FBI was primarily responsible for investigating acts of felony child abuse in Indian country. Today, we know that many Indian tribal police agencies, operating under Indian Self-Determination and Educational Assistance Act compacts and contracts, jointly investigate these felony crimes and that they are also responsible for responding to and investigating tribal offenses. The bill requires a comprehensive sharing of numerical data by all Federal, tribal and State law enforcement agencies. In addition, the Act requires all local law enforcement agencies to document incidents of child abuse and to submit this documentation to the Federal Bureau of Investigation. The Act, however, does not provide for use of this valuable information. This bill permits the FBI to continue to gather conviction data and to make this information available, on a limited basis, to specific agencies requiring such information in the course of their professional duties. It permits agencies to access information in the course of conducting background checks on those who seek employment in an area involving children. Finally, the bill authorizes the Indian Health Service to use advances in telemedicine to bring expert advice and training to the examination and diagnosis of child abuse. This new provision recognizes that children, when victimized, require immediate and expert diagnosis and treatment. This section will help supplement stretched or unavailable IHS resources in the most isolated Indian communities. This body recently sent a clear message on domestic violence and sexual predators. This bill furthers that message by continuing to protect Indian children and families and ensuring that they continue to receive prevention and treatment resources to address the impact of these crimes in their own communities. I look forward to receiving the comments from the Administration and working with my colleagues toward final passage of this bill. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. McCAIN

Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, today I am introducing a measure with Senator Dorgan to amend P.L. 107-153, which deems that certain reports prepared for the Department of the Interior relating to Indian tribal trust accounts were received by the tribes no earlier than December 31, 1999. The intent of this law was to eliminate contentions that the tribes received notice of potential claims against the United States prior to that date for purposes of the statute of limitations. This amendment changes the date set forth in P.L. 107-153 to December 31, 2005, in order to facilitate discussions and negotiations between the Indian tribes and the United States regarding potential claims without pressure on the tribes to file lawsuits out of concern that the statute of limitations will run out on their claims. It is my understanding that this measure has support both among the Indian tribes and the administration.

Mr. McCAIN

Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I appreciate the concern of my friend from North Dakota, who is a vigilant guardian of taxpayer dollars. I point out that the Armed Services Committee is doing work literally every day and every week on this issue. We also have Appropriations Committee oversight on much of this, and I believe that under the existing structure we have today, including the excellent leadership of our chairman and vice chairman of the Homeland Security Committee, that this amendment is not necessary. I understand the concern of the Senator from North Dakota. I just do not believe it is necessary at this time.

Mr. McCAIN

Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, today I am introducing a measure with Senator Dorgan to amend P.L. 107-153, which deems that certain reports prepared for the Department of the Interior relating to Indian tribal trust accounts were received by the tribes no earlier than December 31, 1999. The intent of this law was to eliminate contentions that the tribes received notice of potential claims against the United States prior to that date for purposes of the statute of limitations. This amendment changes the date set forth in P.L. 107-153 to December 31, 2005, in order to facilitate discussions and negotiations between the Indian tribes and the United States regarding potential claims without pressure on the tribes to file lawsuits out of concern that the statute of limitations will run out on their claims. It is my understanding that this measure has support both among the Indian tribes and the administration.

Mr. McCAIN

Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, the pending measure, H.R. 2863, the Defense Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2006, will provide our men and women in uniform with the equipment, benefits, and programs they need to carry out their critical missions at home and overseas. Having said that, I must again voice my dismay at the Senate's inability to authorize these appropriations. Critical programs and benefits have not been authorized. The authorizers layout the priorities, and the appropriators fund. Unfortunately, this time honored practice is not being upheld. As I look over the bill, I see that, as reported in the Senate, it trims $7 billion from the administration request, leaving that amount available for nondefense appropriations. I am pleased that the cuts are reductions for programs that were underexecuted in the last fiscal year. Unfortunately, and not surprisingly, the bill also includes a large number of unauthorized and unrequested provisions. I hope that the sponsors will carefully reconsider these damaging provisions as the bill works its way through the legislative process. While I appreciate the hard work and the laudable intentions of the members of the Committee, we must all be alarmed at these appropriations earmarks. They limit the ability of our Defense Department to expend needed resources according to its funding priorities. I have already spoken at length during debate on this bill, so I will not take up much more of the Senate's time again. I am pleased that the Senate recognizes the importance of America's greatest strength, the acknowledgment that we are different and better than our enemies. We are Americans, and we hold ourselves to humane standards of treatment of people no matter how evil or terrible they may be. To do otherwise would undermine both our security and our greatness as a Nation. The Senate spoke with a strong voice this week, and I urge the conferees to include the detention-related amendment in the conference report that will be sent to the President. With Americans deployed across the globe fighting terror, deployed at home in recovery of Hurricane Katrina, and with looming budget deficits, the Senate faces some tough choices. We must maintain our fiscal responsibility while providing for our military needs. The cost of the conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq demand a new fiscal sanity in our appropriations bills. A half-a-trillion dollar budget deficit means we simply cannot afford business as usual. We simply cannot continue the binge of pork barrel spending that consumes an ever growing proportion of our federal budget. While the cost of an individual project may get lost in the fine print of lengthy bills, together, they all do real damage. Collectively, these earmarks represent a significant burden to American taxpayers. Some of the more egregious examples of earmarks, either in the bill or in the accompanying report, include: The bill includes language to provide $10 million for the Joint Interagency Training Center-East and the affiliated Center for National Response at the Memorial Tunnel in West Virginia. The bill includes language to provide $3.5 million above the President's budget request to procure aircraft and aviation equipment for the Civil Air Patrol. The bill includes language to provide $19,000 above the President's budget request to procure vehicles for the Civil Air Patrol. The bill includes language to provide $3 million to support the National Museum of the United States Army at Fort Belvoir, VA. The bill includes language to provide $2 million for the installation, repair, and maintenance of an on-base and adjacent off- base wastewater/treatment facility at Naval Computer Telecommunications Area Master Station, NCTAMS, in Hawaii. The bill includes language to prohibit the procurement of foreign ball and roller bearings. This ``Buy America'' restriction with regard to the procurement of ball and roller bearings may cost the taxpayers more than purchasing ball and roller bearings from a foreign source. The bill includes language to direct the Secretary of the Army to fully plan, budget, program finance the Non-Line of Sight Future Force cannon and re-supply vehicle program, NLOS-C, in order to field this system in fiscal year 2010. Furthermore, the bill language directs that if the plan to field the Future Combat System, FCS, in fiscal year 2010 is delayed then it directs the Secretary of the Army to develop the NLOS-C independent of the broader FCS development timeline to achieve fielding by fiscal year 2010. Moreover, the bill directs the Army to deliver 8 combat operational pre-production NLOS-C systems by the end of calendar year 2008, in addition to those systems necessary for developmental and operational testing. Section 8103 to H.R. 2853 Separating the Non-line-of-sight cannon, NLOS-C, program from the Future Combat System, FCS, will increase costs and program risk because it invalidates one of the key underpinnings of the FCS program which is to have a family of systems based on equipment commonality. The original concept for the development of the manned ground vehicle was to design and produce a common chassis for all manned ground vehicles. Separating NLOS-C from FCS fundamentally changes this principle and further complicates the development of this already complex and yet critical Army weapons system. Furthermore, bisecting FCS will increase development and sustainment costs and negatively impact systems interoperability. The AirLand Subcommittee on the Senate Armed Services Committee is the appropriate subcommittee of jurisdiction in this matter. Although we had hearings on FCS in the subcommittee this year, we did not hear expert testimony in support of this specific provision. As a result, I intend to offer legislation to repeal this provision in the Defense Authorization bill at the appropriate time. The bill includes language that authorizes the Secretary of the Air Force to spend $32 million to make upgrades, repairs, and build additions to buildings and other types of infrastructure associated with military ranges in Alaska. The bill includes language to provide $12.9 million in grant money and directs the Secretary of Defense to spend the money for the following: $850,000 to the Fort Des Moines Memorial Park and Education Center; $2 million to the American Civil War Center at Historic Tredegar; $3 million to the Museum of Flight, American Heroes Collection; $1 million to the National Guard Youth Foundation; $3 million to the United Services Organization; $2 million to the Dwight D. Eisenhower Memorial Commission; and $1 million to the Iraq Cultural Heritage Assistance Project. Section 8062 of the General Provisions. The text states that, ``each contract awarded by the Department of Defense during the current fiscal year for construction or service performed in whole or in part in a State which is not contiguous with another State and has an unemployment rate in excess of the national average rate of unemployment as determined by the Secretary of Labor, shall include a provision requiring the contractor to employ, for the purpose of performing that portion of the contract in such State that is not contiguous with another State, individuals who are residents of such State and who, in the case of any craft or trade, possess or would be able to acquire promptly the necessary skills.'' I am not making this text up. Let's call a spade a spade. This provision directly protects the jobs of only Hawaiians and Alaskans. And 2.2 million for the Lewis and Clark Bicentennial celebration. You don't need to have the exploration skills of Lewis and Clark to see that this is a path to higher deficits. And $65 million for the Additional Procurement of F-15s. The Air Force has decided to procure the F-22 to replace the F-15. Yet this earmark keeps the F-15 production line open, so I question the necessity of the F-22 procurement in the numbers of aircraft and at the funding levels requested by the Air Force. Apparently we just decided to pay for both. And $2 million for the Air Battle Captain Program at the University of North Dakota. This provision sends students from West Point to North Dakota for their flight lessons. Instead of letting flight schools compete for the ability to train these cadets, we have earmarked their training to North Dakota. We are putting parochial interests over the necessity to provide the best training possible for the best price to our Army cadets. And $8 million for repairs to a specific building at Rock Island Arsenal. I can think of 8 million reasons why the military, not the Senate should allocate funds to fix their priorities. And $10 million for repairs to utility tunnels at Fort Wainright. The tunnels aren't broken, mind you, but the owners would like new doors put on them. This appropriation looks to me like an open door to fiscal irresponsibility. The damage these earmarks do is deadly serious. They pull money away from legitimate funding priorities and they waste taxpayer dollars. Each year, many of the same earmarks appear in appropriations legislation, and each year I come to the floor and point them out to my colleagues. Some of the appropriators' favorite projects include: The $25 million for the Hawaii Federal Health Care Network. I remember only 2 years ago when this particular project was given $23 million dollars. Some things never change. And $2 million for the brown tree snakes. Once again, the brown tree snake has slithered its way into our defense appropriation bill. This funding does not belong in the Defense Appropriations Act. There are many earmarks that funnel dollars to worthy medical research programs, such as breast cancer research, but there is no compelling national defense reason for these items to be in this piece of legislation. This type of critical research should be funded through the Labor/HHS Appropriations bill. Our soldiers and sailors need to be provided with the best equipment, housing, and support possible. Scarce defense dollars should be used for these defense purposes, not others. I could go on and on--and on and on and on--listing all of the examples of pork in this legislation. We simply need to reassess our priorities. This year's bill also includes a number of ``Buy America'' provisions. For example, it prevents the foreign purchase of welded shipboard anchor and mooring chain four inches in diameter and under. Another provision ensures that all carbon, alloy or steel plates are produced in the United States. Whew. I know we'll sleep better at night knowing that all of our carbon plates are manufactured in the U.S. Yet another section prohibits the Department of Defense from purchasing supercomputers from a foreign source. I continue to be very concerned about the potential impact on readiness of our restrictive trade policies with our allies. Every year, Buy America restrictions cost the Department of Defense and the American taxpayers $5.5 billion. From a philosophical point of view, I oppose these types of protectionist policies, and from an economic point of view they are ludicrous. Free trade is both an important element in improving relations among nations and essential to economic growth. From a practical standpoint, ``Buy America'' restrictions could seriously impair our ability to compete freely in international markets and also could result in the loss of existing business from long- standing trade partners. Some legislative enactments over the past several years have had the effect of establishing a monopoly for a domestic supplier in certain product lines. This not only adds to the pressure for our allies to ``Buy European'' but it also raises the costs of procurement for DOD, and cuts off access to potential state-of-the-art technologies. In order to maintain our troop strength and force readiness, the DOD must be able to be equipped with the best technologies available, regardless of country of origin. This would ensure both price and product competition. Defense exports improve interoperability with friendly forces-- increasingly necessary as we operate in coalition warfare and peacekeeping missions. Exports lower the unit costs of systems to the U.S. military, and provide the same economic benefits to the U.S. as all other exports--well paying jobs, improved balance of trade, and increased tax revenue. These are really issues of acquisition policy, not appropriations matters. There is no justification for including these provisions in the Appropriations Act. This bill spends money on Lewis and Clark and funnels cash into military museums. It protects the mooring chain industry and ensures that we only buy American ball bearings. There is enough pork in this bill to feed an army--if only that we used our defense appropriations to do that. I suppose it is more important to appease local constituencies and special interests. I wish it were not necessary for me to come to the Senate with every appropriations bill to criticize the amount of unrequested spending in the legislation. I do so because I believe it is critical for American taxpayers to understand where the money in their pockets is really going. I urge my colleagues to stop ``porking up'' our appropriations bills. In a time of huge spending deficits and scarce dollars, it is long past time to stop feeding at the trough.

Mr. McCAIN

Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I know the Senator from Rhode Island is waiting, and I will be very brief. First, it is not a happy day for this body when we are in this kind of imbroglio where we are unable to accept as an amendment on an appropriations bill the authorization for the men and women who are fighting in our Nation's defense around the world. It seems to me the least we can do, however this is sorted out, is to have the distinguished leaders--Senators Stevens, Inouye, Levin, and Warner--sit down and see if there is a way to work this out. It may require the participation of the respective leaders. But we should not be in a situation where the best option is to attach an entire authorization bill as an amendment to an appropriations bill. It is a sad commentary on the way we do business. Amendment No. 1977

Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, if I can ask the indulgence of my friend from Rhode Island for 1 minute, I would like to read a statement into the Record. It reads: GEN Colin L. Powell, USA (Retired), Alexandria, VA, October 5, 2005. Dear Senator McCain: I have read your proposed amendment to the Defense Appropriations Bill concerning the use of the Army Field Manual as the definitive guidance for the conduct of our troops with respect to detainees. I have also studied your impressive statement introducing the amendment. I fully support this amendment. Further, I align myself with the letter written to you by General Shalikashivili and a distinguished group of senior officers in support of the amendment. Our troops need to hear from the Congress, which has an obligation to speak to such matters under Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution. I also believe the world will note that America is making a clear statement with respect to the expected future behavior of our soldiers. Such a reaction will help deal with the terrible public diplomacy crisis created by Abu Ghraib. Sincerely, Colin Powell. I hope my colleagues will pay very careful attention to our former Secretary of State and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. I do not have to tell any of my colleagues of his outstanding and superb record of service to this Nation and the depth of his knowledge as it pertains to this and many other national security issues. I am very grateful he has come forward with this statement, and I hope my colleagues will pay attention to it. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I have had to come to this Chamber many times and have had the privilege of doing so since 1987 when I entered this body. I never thought I would have to come to the Senate floor to defend the integrity and the reputation of a brave young American who has put his life on the line for his country defending the freedom of Afghan and Iraqi people. The remarks of the Senator from Alabama concerning his allegations of abuse and his disparagement of his word and his conduct is unacceptable. This young man, Captain Fishback, served in Afghanistan and Iraq, is a member of the 82nd Airborne, was highly decorated, and had the courage to come forward because of his deep-seated dedication to this Nation and his desire to see that we do the right thing in the treatment of prisoners of war. He says very eloquently: . . . Do we sacrifice our ideals in order to preserve security? Terrorism inspires fear and suppresses ideals like freedom and individual rights. Overcoming the fear posed by terrorist threats is a tremendous test of our courage . . . Captain Fishback is a noble, brave young American. He does not deserve to be disparaged on the Senate floor by any Senator, and the Senator from Alabama owes him an abject and deep apology. I yield back the remainder of my time.

Mr. McCAIN. Reserving the right to object, I will not object. I do not know if I have seen that amendment.

Mr. McCAIN. I do not object. I think we have already seen that. Thank you.

Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, this amendment would prohibit, for 1 year, the transfer of $23 million in cash to the Government of Uzbekistan. Just this year, the government of President Islam Karimov has taken a number of actions so alarming, that one would think this body would be considering sanctions, not how to transfer millions of taxpayer dollars to this government. In May, the government massacred up to 1,000 people, mostly unarmed men, women, and children protesting the government's corruption, lack of opportunity, and continued oppression. The government has rejected all calls for an independent international inquiry and blamed a foreign conspiracy for the protest. It even placed blame on the United States for the events, saying that rebels received money from the U.S. embassy in Tashkent. The Uzbek government launched a campaign of anti-American propaganda after its massacre, staging rallies to denounce the United States. President Karimov suggested that the U.S. was behind not just the event in Andijan but also served as the ``scriptwriters and directors'' of the ``colored revolutions'' in other countries. In July, Karimov's government announced that the U.S. will no longer have access to the K2 base in Uzbekistan, and evicted all U.S. troops from the country. In addition, his government has terminated counterterrorism cooperation with the United States. This week the EU announced that it will impose sanctions against Uzbekistan. But the Pentagon wants to send $23 million to pay past bills. Paying our bills is important. But more important is America standing up for itself; avoiding the misimpression that we overlook massacres; and avoiding cash transfers to the treasury of a dictator just months after he permanently evicts American soldiers from his country. We should postpone the cash payment to the Government of Uzbekistan for 1 year, at which point the Congress can decide whether to renew the prohibition or make the payment. If it had not been authorization, I would have said until a complete and thorough investigation of the massacre was conducted.

Mr. McCAIN. I would be pleased.

Mr. McCAIN

Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, last evening, S. 1197, ;the Violence Against Women Act, was passed out of the Senate. I commend the Judiciary Committee for including Title 9, Safety for Indian Women, in its bill to reauthorize the act. Title 9 focuses on the needs of Indian tribes to enable them to reduce and treat incidents of domestic violence in Indian country. Among other things, it would authorize the creation of tribal criminal history databases to document domestic violence convictions and protection orders and it creates a new Federal criminal offense authorizing Federal prosecutors to charge repeat domestic violence offenders before they seriously injure or kill someone. S. 1197 also would authorize the Bureau of Indian Affairs police and certain tribal officers to make arrests for domestic violence assaults committed outside of their presence. Since 1999, the Department of Justice has issued various studies showing that Indian women experience the highest rates of domestic violence compared to all other groups in the United States. These reports state that one out of every three Indian women are victims of sexual assault; that from 1979 to 1992, homicide was the third leading cause of death of Indian females between the ages of 15 to 34; and that 75 percent of those deaths were committed by a family member or acquaintance. What we don't know, however, is the impact of these violent acts on law enforcement, judicial, mental or medical services in Indian country. I am, therefore, pleased to see that this bill would authorize a comprehensive study of domestic violence in Indian Country to gauge the impact of these acts to Indian tribes and their resources. The findings of such a study will help the Congress and the administration to better focus resources to areas with the greatest need. Earlier this Congress, Senator Dorgan and I introduced the Restoring Safety to Indian Women Act. We worked closely with the Senate Judiciary Committee to ensure that the provisions of this bill, some of which I mention here, were given due consideration. Throughout the more comprehensive S. 1197, Indian tribes would be eligible for various grants to enhance their victim services, judicial function, and law enforcement service capacity to the same extent as State and local governments are eligible. Domestic violence is a national problem and not one that is unique to Indian country. Yet, due to the unique status of Indian tribes, there are obstacles faced by Indian tribal police, Federal investigators, tribal and Federal prosecutors and courts that impede their ability to respond to domestic violence in Indian country. Title 9 of this bill goes a long way toward removing these obstacles at all levels and to enhance the ability of each agency to respond to acts of domestic violence when they occur. These critical changes to the current law will greatly curb violence against Indian women, and perhaps even save lives. Again, I thank the members of the Senate Judiciary Committee for their thoughtful consideration in drafting a bill that includes an often forgotten segment of our population, the Nation's Indian tribes.