Bob Menendez

Mr. MENENDEZ

Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions meet in executive session during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, April 18, 2007 at 10 a.m. in SH-216. We will be considering the following: Agenda 1. S. 1082, The Prescription Drug User Fee Amendments of 2007, as amended by the Food and Drug Administration Revitilization Act. 2. The following nominations: Douglas G. Myers, of California, to be a Member of the National Museum and Library Services Board; Jeffrey Patchen, of Indiana, to be a Member of the National Museum and Library Services Board; Lotsee Patterson, of Oklahoma, to be a Member of the National Museum and Library Services Board; Stephen Porter, of the District of Columbia, to be a Member of the National Council on the Arts; Cynthia Wainscott, of Georgia, to be a Member of the National Council on Disability.

Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry be authorized to conduct a hearing during the session of the Senate on Wednesday April 18, 2007, at 9:30 a.m. in SD-106, Senate Dirksen Office Building. The title of this committee hearing is ``Economic Challenges and Opportunities Facing American Agricultural Producers Today.''

Mr. MENENDEZ

Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. President, I rise today with an incredibly heavy heart to talk about the tragedy at Virginia Tech. Today families and loved ones across the Nation are grieving. A community, a college, and a nation are struggling to mourn the loss of more than 30 of its best and brightest. I rise to speak today because, as we know, it is not just Virginia that is suffering, but this is a pain that is felt all across the country. This tragedy hit particularly close to home in New Jersey. At least three New Jersey families have suffered unspeakable losses. They are enduring any parent's worst nightmare--losing a child. These three young people had yet to carve out their path in life, but each had promising ambitions, dreams they hoped to fulfill, and diverse interests that would, no doubt, have left their mark in this world. Matt LaPorte, a 20-year-old from Dumont, was a talented student and musician who hoped to serve in the Air Force. He was in the Air Force ROTC attending Virginia Tech on a scholarship. A former Boy Scout, Matt was known as a gifted cellist and was a drum major in his school's marching band. Julia Pryde, from Middletown, had graduated from Virginia Tech with a degree in biological systems engineering and was working on her master's degree. She was drawn to environmental engineering and was interested in clean water issues in South America, a passion that would no doubt have led her to further travel and work abroad. Friends have described her as having a bright spirit and as someone who loved to see the world. Michael Pohle, Jr., from Flemington, was preparing to graduate in just a few weeks. A biochemistry major, he was working on finding a job that was a good fit for him and that would keep him close to his girlfriend Marcy, whom he had planned to marry. A natural athlete, he was known for his outgoing personality and a glowing smile. These were young, innocent, and promising lives lost in Monday's vicious attack. Those who knew and loved them may never be the same. We cannot mend the hole in the hearts of the families who are suffering, but we can honor each life lost and carry on their memory. I join all of my fellow New Jerseyans in offering my condolences to the families and friends who knew and loved these three young people. I also extend my thoughts and prayers to a fourth New Jersey family who has been watching over their son, Sean McQuade. I join them in hoping and praying for his full recovery. My heart goes out to all the families who are suffering because of this senseless tragedy. Our Nation grieves with them, and we share in their sorrow. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. MENENDEZ

Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. President, today I am introducing the Teen Pregnancy Prevention Responsibility and Opportunity Act, legislation that creates a comprehensive approach to fighting teen pregnancy and giving young people the support they need to make informed decisions. The results of a 1997 congressionally-ordered study were released this month. The 6-year study found that youth who participate in abstinence education programs are no more or less likely to engage in sex than those who do not participate in abstinence education programs. Both groups are reported to have similar numbers of sexual partners, and to have sex for the first time at about the same age; around 15 years old. This proves that abstinence-only education isn't working. But rather than invest in proven programs, the Bush administration continues to insist on a narrow-minded, misguided approach of abstinence-only education. As this study demonstrates, abstinence-only just doesn't cut it. The United States continues to have the highest teen-pregnancy rate and teen birth rate in the western industrialized world. In a human context, this impacts one-third of all teenage girls. In a fiscal context, these unintended pregnancies cost the United States at least $9 billion annually despite Federal appropriations of about $176 million a year towards promoting abstinence until marriage. American taxpayers deserve a better rate of return on their investment. American youth deserve quality education, positive role models, effective after school programs, employment opportunities, and medically and scientifically accurate family life education. The time is now for a new direction in sex education. Adolescents need to know we care. They need to know we care as parents, as educators, as business people, as politicians, and as healthcare providers. They need to know we want them to become successful contributing members of society, but for that to happen we must commit to and invest in them. We need to be opening doors for these young people, and that is just what my Teen Pregnancy Prevention, Responsibility and Opportunity Act will do. The Teen Pregnancy Prevention, Responsibility and Opportunity Act will establish a comprehensive program for reducing adolescent pregnancy through education and information programs, as well as positive activities and role models both in school and out of school. While we have done a good job of progressively decreasing teen pregnancy, we can do better. With the sons of teen mothers more likely to end up in prison, and the daughters of teen mothers more likely to end up teen mothers themselves, we must act now to break this problematic cycle. The time is now to make a real difference in the lives of our youth, and to give them the support they need to grow and lead positive lives. Our schools, community and faith-based organizations need access to funds to teach age-appropriate, factually and medically accurate, and scientifically-based family life education. We need programs that encourage teens to delay sexual activity. We need to provide services and interventions for sexually active teens. We need to educate both young men and women about the responsibilities and pressures that come along with parenting. We need to help parents communicate with teens about sexuality. We need to teach young people responsible decision-making. And, we need to fund after school programs that will enrich their education, and offer character and counseling services. We know that after school programs reduce risky adolescent behavior by involving teens in positive activities that also provide positive life skills. Teenage girls who play sports, for instance, are more likely to wait to become sexually active, and to have fewer partners. They are consequently less likely to become pregnant. Let us join together to recommit ourselves to continuing to decrease the incidence of teen pregnancy, and recommit ourselves to offering family life education and positive after school programs that will foster responsible young adults. The time is now to invest in our teens. We cannot afford to let doors close on them. Instead we must continue to open the door of opportunity. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this important legislation.

Mr. MENENDEZ

Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. President, today I am introducing the Teen Pregnancy Prevention Responsibility and Opportunity Act, legislation that creates a comprehensive approach to fighting teen pregnancy and giving young people the support they need to make informed decisions. The results of a 1997 congressionally-ordered study were released this month. The 6-year study found that youth who participate in abstinence education programs are no more or less likely to engage in sex than those who do not participate in abstinence education programs. Both groups are reported to have similar numbers of sexual partners, and to have sex for the first time at about the same age; around 15 years old. This proves that abstinence-only education isn't working. But rather than invest in proven programs, the Bush administration continues to insist on a narrow-minded, misguided approach of abstinence-only education. As this study demonstrates, abstinence-only just doesn't cut it. The United States continues to have the highest teen-pregnancy rate and teen birth rate in the western industrialized world. In a human context, this impacts one-third of all teenage girls. In a fiscal context, these unintended pregnancies cost the United States at least $9 billion annually despite Federal appropriations of about $176 million a year towards promoting abstinence until marriage. American taxpayers deserve a better rate of return on their investment. American youth deserve quality education, positive role models, effective after school programs, employment opportunities, and medically and scientifically accurate family life education. The time is now for a new direction in sex education. Adolescents need to know we care. They need to know we care as parents, as educators, as business people, as politicians, and as healthcare providers. They need to know we want them to become successful contributing members of society, but for that to happen we must commit to and invest in them. We need to be opening doors for these young people, and that is just what my Teen Pregnancy Prevention, Responsibility and Opportunity Act will do. The Teen Pregnancy Prevention, Responsibility and Opportunity Act will establish a comprehensive program for reducing adolescent pregnancy through education and information programs, as well as positive activities and role models both in school and out of school. While we have done a good job of progressively decreasing teen pregnancy, we can do better. With the sons of teen mothers more likely to end up in prison, and the daughters of teen mothers more likely to end up teen mothers themselves, we must act now to break this problematic cycle. The time is now to make a real difference in the lives of our youth, and to give them the support they need to grow and lead positive lives. Our schools, community and faith-based organizations need access to funds to teach age-appropriate, factually and medically accurate, and scientifically-based family life education. We need programs that encourage teens to delay sexual activity. We need to provide services and interventions for sexually active teens. We need to educate both young men and women about the responsibilities and pressures that come along with parenting. We need to help parents communicate with teens about sexuality. We need to teach young people responsible decision-making. And, we need to fund after school programs that will enrich their education, and offer character and counseling services. We know that after school programs reduce risky adolescent behavior by involving teens in positive activities that also provide positive life skills. Teenage girls who play sports, for instance, are more likely to wait to become sexually active, and to have fewer partners. They are consequently less likely to become pregnant. Let us join together to recommit ourselves to continuing to decrease the incidence of teen pregnancy, and recommit ourselves to offering family life education and positive after school programs that will foster responsible young adults. The time is now to invest in our teens. We cannot afford to let doors close on them. Instead we must continue to open the door of opportunity. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this important legislation.

Mr. MENENDEZ

Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. President, I appreciate the Senator from Iowa yielding time, and I appreciate his leadership on this issue. Mr. President we are back again--almost a year after Congress passed breakthrough legislation--discussing embryonic stem cell research and, again, I rise in strong support of this lifesaving, life-enhancing legislation. I am a proud cosponsor of S. 5, the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act, because I believe the bill has the potential to make a profound and positive impact on the health of millions of Americans. I believe that it can do so in an ethical manner. We know embryonic stem cells have the unique ability to develop into virtually every cell and tissue in the body. We know numerous frozen embryos in fertility clinics remain unused by couples at the completion of their fertility treatments. Why should they not be allowed to donate those embryos to Federal research to save lives? We allow people to donate organs to save lives. Why couldn't a couple, if they so choose, donate their frozen embryos instead of simply discarding them, throwing them away, throwing away hope? We can do this ethically and still cure illnesses, enhance lives and, hopefully, even save lives. But the truth is, we should not even be having this debate right now because if the President had done his duty last year and not vetoed H.R. 810, this bill would already be law, and this country's dedicated medical researchers would be well on their way to discovering treatments and cures for many of the most savage diseases afflicting us. But when given the opportunity to carry out the will of the people, he stood for ideology and ignorance over science and research. Mr. President, enough is enough. It is time for a change. I have no doubt that the Senate will pass this important legislation and thus seek to advance federally funded research on embryonic stem cells. I have no doubt that if it becomes law, the bill would save and improve lives all over America. I have no doubt that the majority of Americans want us to pass this bill into law. My only doubt is whether our President will do his duty and sign it into law. During the last Congress, President Bush vetoed H.R. 810, crushing the hopes of millions of Americans. This year, I fear and suspect that he will follow the same misguided path. But before he takes us down that route, one that leads to more heartbreak and suffering, I have one question. Why? Why is he standing in the way of research that will save lives? Why is he keeping our parents, our children, and our friends locked in wheelchairs and hospital beds? Why is he letting conservative ideology rob the lives of so many suffering Americans? The simple fact is, whatever the claims of those who ignore science in favor of ideology, embryonic stem cell research offers one of the most promising leaps forward in the history of medicine. Speak to those who are eager to do the research and you hear of potential cures for juvenile diabetes, Alzheimer's, Parkinson's disease, and spinal cord injuries. If we unlock the door to this research, we can find treatments and cures for these debilitating and painful diseases. We owe it to our parents, our children, and our grandchildren to unlock that door. But President Bush prefers ignorance and pain over mercy and miracles. Where is the compassion he often speaks of? His own scientists are trying to explain the power of this research, but he continues to turn a deaf ear, refusing to listen to common sense and reason. Mr. President, it is time to start listening. The preamble of our Constitution says all Americans have the right to ``life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.'' I believe this implies the freedom to be physically able. By not allowing embryonic stem cell research, we are prohibiting individuals from pursuing their rights. We are blocking them from a possible cure or treatment. And we are standing in the way of their freedom. Last Congress, the interim chair of the National Institutes of Health stem cell task force, bravely and bluntly spoke of the importance of embryonic stem cell research and the drawbacks of the current policy prohibiting research. He said: Science works best when scientists can pursue all avenues of research. If the cure for Parkinson's disease or juvenile diabetes lay behind one of four doors, wouldn't you want the option to open all four doors at once instead of one door? How can we tell our loved ones that their cure could be waiting behind a laboratory door, but that door is locked? We must pursue all avenues of research and unlock the potential that embryonic stem cell research holds. But if that isn't enough, recently, before the Health Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, the Director of the NIH, Elias Zerhouni, said the great promise of human embryonic stem cell research is being impeded by President Bush's policy. He said: It is in the best interest of our scientists, our science, and our country that we find ways and the nation finds a way to go full speed across adult and embryonic stem cells equally. So if President Bush won't listen to his own scientists, who will he listen to? Perhaps he will listen to the American people who are crying out in virtual unison for change. More than 70 percent of Americans support embryonic stem cell research. Three out of four Americans understand the hope and promise this research provides. This bill means all the prayers for cures and therapies for Alzheimer's disease, muscular dystrophy, heart disease, and other illnesses could be answered. This bill provides a promise that families might no longer have to see a loved one suffering. This bill means hope for individuals challenged and fighting to live a life with dignity. I have met with children and families all over New Jersey who have shared their daily struggle with diseases and conditions that could be cured or treated if we were to pursue embryonic stem cell research. Young children have come to my office and told me how they have to prick themselves with a needle, administer insulin shots, or use an internal pump on the side of their body in order to keep their juvenile diabetes under control. These children might be freed of this grave responsibility if we support embryonic stem cell research. Don't we owe them the opportunity of a better life? Don't we owe it to the husband whose wife shakes uncontrollably from Parkinson's disease to help find a cure that will restore her body? Don't we owe it to the athletes who told me about their life-altering spinal cord injuries, to give them the freedom to walk again? None of these individuals chose their current situations. But we can choose to help get them out of those situations. We owe it to the American people, to the millions of Americans and their families suffering from life-altering disabilities and diseases, to demonstrate our Nation's full commitment to finding a cure and doing all we can to help their dreams and hopes come true. Stem cell research has vast potential for curing diseases, alleviating suffering, and saving lives. I know my colleagues recognize the enormous potential of this research, too. It is time for the President to start listening. The question is, Why does President Bush continually ignore the American people? He ignores what the American people are saying about Iraq, and now he ignores what they are saying about embryonic stem cell research. Both decisions result in lost lives, and both decisions cause pain and suffering. This is unacceptable to me and the overwhelming majority of Americans. It should be unacceptable to the President as well. I am very passionate and dedicated to this cause because the promise of stem cell research has personally captivated my family, like it has so many other American families. My mother suffers from severe Alzheimer's disease. When I look at her empty gaze and her shriveled body, I cannot help but wonder if we had started embryonic stem cell research years ago, would she still be suffering today, would she be cured, would she at least be able to recognize her children and her grandchildren, would she have been with me on the day I took the oath of office in this Chamber. I don't want my children to be asking the same types of questions. We cannot wait any longer. The Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act is an ethical life-enhancing, lifesaving piece of legislation. I believe it is the moral obligation of the United States Government and the President of the United States to allow this process--these potential cures--to be fully explored. Embryonic stem cell research holds the promise of hope and the possible restoration of life. We owe it to current and future generations to ensure that their lives remain as bright and prosperous as today's science allows. It is time for the President to start listening to the American people and to the scientists, not just special interests. It is time for him to sign this important piece of legislation into law and open the door to the hope and promise of embryonic stem cell research. It is time for hope and cures--not despair and disease. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. MENENDEZ

Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. President, this week, our Nation comes together to honor one of our Nation's foremost civil rights and labor leader, Cesar Estrada Chavez. I rise today, along with my colleague Senator Ken Salazar, to submit a resolution honoring the accomplishments and legacy of Cesar Chavez. Cesar Estrada Chavez was born 80 years ago, on March 31, 1927, in Arizona to poor migrant farm workers. He and his family struggled to survive at a time when ``Whites only'' signs were still on display and when it was necessary to trade in his school books to support his family working full-time in the fields. ``But rather than just survive those times, Cesar Chavez turned his experiences into ammunition to help fight for a better life for all Americans, becoming one of our Nation's most inspirational leaders. Following the principles of Mahatma Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr., in 1962 Cesar Chavez co-founded the first successful farm workers union in the United States--the United Farm Workers (UFW). Through the UFW, Chavez brought many farm workers together, including Mexican- and Filipino-Americans, to fight for common goals. He also inspired hope in these workers through his great rallying catchphrase, ``Si Se Puede.'' In one of their major victories, after 5 years of boycotting table grapes, the United Farm Workers gained the first-ever collective bargaining agreement between farm workers and growers in the history of our country. As the son of poor, working-class parents who were not afforded the benefits of a union, I am moved by Cesar Chavez's selfless work on behalf of others. Remembering his legacy reinforces my belief that all hard-working individuals deserve the right to bargain collectively to achieve better wages, better health benefits and suitable working conditions. I am happy that New Jersey has a proud labor tradition, which would not have been possible without people committed to fairness, social justice and equality. The legacy of Cesar Chavez still resonates today, from the rural agricultural fields to the urban centers all across this Nation, and his achievements are an inspiration to all hard-working Americans who want to achieve a better quality of life. Senator Robert F. Kennedy rightly said that Cesar Chavez was ``one of the heroic figures of our time,'' and I believe our resolution reinforces that statement. Therefore, I urge my colleagues to support this resolution, and by doing so, acknowledge that Cesar Chavez is truly an American hero.

Mr. MENENDEZ

Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. President, unfortunately, I must object to the Senator's request. We passed money for the shortfall in the supplemental and we should not extend the program at the expense of the current coverage. I look forward to working with the Senator from Georgia on reauthorization that preserves the program and the coverage that is needed, and toward that end, I ask unanimous consent that my bill dealing with SCHIP, introduced earlier today, S. 1023, be considered, read a third time, passed, and the motion to reconsider be laid on the table.

Mr. MENENDEZ

Mr. MENENDEZ. I believe there is an appropriate process to consider the Senator's request, but at this time I object.

Mr. MENENDEZ

Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. President, in an era of energy insecurity, countries around the world are constantly being challenged to come up with new ways to meet the energy needs of their citizens. The Republic of Cyprus is currently working to develop the oil and gas deposits under the island's southern continental shelf in order to expand and diversify its energy supplies. If successful, Cyprus will also be in a position to aid its neighbors in addressing their energy needs. Unfortunately, these plans are being hindered by individuals in Turkey and the Turkish Cypriot community who are trying to dissuade foreign partners from working with Cyprus. I believe that the Republic of Cyprus has the right to explore the natural resources located in Cypriot waters, and it is my understanding that international law would support Cyprus's actions. It is my hope that the Turkish government and members of the Turkish Cypriot community will accept Cyprus's legal right to explore these resources and will cease their attempts to sabotage future business partnerships. After years of strained relations between the Cypriot communities, I fear that such provocations will only serve to augment divisions and prevent future reunification of the island. Cyprus's peaceful energy initiatives will promote economic development for the country and its neighbors, and it is important that such efforts proceed uninhibited. Additionally, I believe these efforts must be taken in an environmentally responsible manner. I hope that those persons currently working to derail this process will come to their senses and realize the positive effects that increased energy supplies will have on the stability and prosperity of the entire region.

Mr. MENENDEZ

Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. President, I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. Amendment No. 716

Mr. MENENDEZ

Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. President, today I wish to honor Las Plantadas, a group of women incarcerated for resisting the dictatorial regime of Cuba for nearly half a century. The National Association of Cuban American Women will gather on Saturday, March 24, 2007, to honor a group of Las Plantadas--Ana Lazara Rodriguez, Miriam Ortega, Genoveva Felixgraw, Clara Berta Canton Gomez, Olga Morgan and Gladys B. Campaneria Herrera--with the Elena Mederos Award during a Women's History Month Celebration at Schuetzen Park, in North Bergen, NJ. The Elena Mederos Award was instituted by the National Association of Cuban American Women in memory of Dr. Elena Mederos, 1900-1981, a human rights activist, who is considered the most prominent Cuban woman of the 20th Century. Ana Lazara Rodriguez, a doctor, was imprisoned when she was a 19- year-old medical student for participating in protests against the Cuban dictatorship. She was released in 1979 and traveled to the United States via Costa Rica. In May 1995, she published ``Diary of a Survivor,'' a book detailing her experiences while incarcerated. Miriam Ortega was born in Ciego de Avila, Cuba. She was imprisoned for 18 years for working against the Castro regime. She was released and moved to the United States, where she continues in her determination to fight for a free Cuba. Clara Berta Canton Gomez was born in Havana, Cuba. In 1962, State security agents searched the home of her parents seeking her brother who was involved in efforts against the Castro regime. Because they did not speak against their family member, Clara and her parents were incarcerated and sentenced to serve 30 years in prison. Released after 7 years, Clara has dedicated her time to fight for the release of political prisoners. She dreams of returning to see a free Cuba. Olga Morgan was born in Santa Clara, Las Villas. When she was working against the Batista dictatorship, she met her husband, William Alexander Morgan, with whom she has two children, Olguita and Loretta. Olga and her husband were imprisoned in 1960 and 1961. Her husband was executed with the regime proclaiming both he and Olga a ``high risk for the revolution.'' Olga was released in 1971, and after being denied a travel document in 1978, she reached the shores of the United States in the 1980 Mariel boatlift. Gladys B. Campaneria Herrera was born in Matanzas and raised in Havana. Between 1959 to 1963 she fought against the Castro regime, for which she was arrested in 1964 and sentenced to 3 years in prison. While she was in prison, she suffered greatly. She was released and moved to the United States, where she has lived in New York and worked in New Jersey as a reporter for various Spanish media outlets. An avid writer, Gladys has authored more than 150 poems and songs. She continues to fight for a free Cuba. The inspiring stories of these women, and of the nearly 3000 other Cuban women who have been imprisoned, tortured, and endured many punishments for refusing to accept a dictatorial regime are a symbol of the dignity and courage of women and a reminder of the need to continue to fight for human rights around the world. There is no doubt that Las Plantadas are exemplary leaders and profoundly committed individuals who are role models for the Nation. Therefore, I am pleased to pay tribute to Las Plantadas, and I know my colleagues will join in wishing them continued success in their quest for human rights and a free Cuba.

Mr. MENENDEZ

Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Simon Wiesenthal Holocaust Education Assistance Act. This important legislation would provide competitive grants for educational organizations to make Holocaust education more accessible and available throughout this Nation. I would like to thank Senators Lautenberg and Specter for co- sponsoring this bill, and I commend my former colleague in the House, Congresswoman Maloney, for her leadership on this issue. In January, the United Nations held a ceremony to commemorate the 62nd anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz and the second annual International Day of Commemoration in memory of the victims of the Holocaust. This event served as a reminder that people of all faiths strongly condemn the systematic, state sponsored genocide conducted by the Nazi regime. We will forever remember the approximately six million Jewish men, women and children, as well as millions of others who faced persecution and death. And we extend our gratitude to all who risked their lives trying to save others. We also honor Simon Wiesenthal, who dedicated his life to making sure that those who perpetrated the horrors of the Holocaust were brought to justice. After six decades, many of our youth may view the Holocaust as an event that occurred in the distant past. But the truth is this issue is part of our present day society. Just 3 months ago, Iran held a conference in Tehran to debate whether or not the Holocaust actually happened, and the Iranian government has established a fact finding commission to examine the issue further. Such despicable acts are an insult to the millions of people who were brutalized and murdered by the Nazis and to all who stand against genocide around the world. Clearly, false and destructive messages regarding the Holocaust are still being perpetuated, and such events highlight the importance of Holocaust education abroad and within our own Nation. Unfortunately, we have also seen that anti-Semitism continues to threaten the safety and well-being of Jewish men and women throughout the world. In February, a Polish member of the European Parliament published a booklet espousing anti-Jewish sentiments, and in Croatia, an investigation has begun after small sugar packets bearing Hitler's image and containing Holocaust jokes were found in some cafes. These tragic events underscore the need to be proactive in combating such bigotry and educating our youth. Although some States now require the Holocaust to be taught in public schools, the Simon Wiesenthal Holocaust Education Assistance Act goes further and makes grants available to organizations that instruct students, teachers, and communities about the dangers of hate and the importance of tolerance in our society. This legislation would give educators the appropriate resources and training to teach accurate historical information about the Holocaust and convey the lessons that the Holocaust can teach us today. We must recognize that by remembering the millions who were murdered in the Holocaust, we create a sense of responsibility to stop genocide wherever it takes place. It is in our common interest to raise our voices against anti- Semitism and against all hatred and discrimination. Funding accurate educational programs on the Holocaust is a step toward winning this battle. So as America stands with Israel and all followers of the Jewish faith in condemning anti-Semitism, let us do everything in our power to end discrimination and educate future generations about the danger of hatred and bigotry. I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.

Mr. MENENDEZ

Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Simon Wiesenthal Holocaust Education Assistance Act. This important legislation would provide competitive grants for educational organizations to make Holocaust education more accessible and available throughout this Nation. I would like to thank Senators Lautenberg and Specter for co- sponsoring this bill, and I commend my former colleague in the House, Congresswoman Maloney, for her leadership on this issue. In January, the United Nations held a ceremony to commemorate the 62nd anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz and the second annual International Day of Commemoration in memory of the victims of the Holocaust. This event served as a reminder that people of all faiths strongly condemn the systematic, state sponsored genocide conducted by the Nazi regime. We will forever remember the approximately six million Jewish men, women and children, as well as millions of others who faced persecution and death. And we extend our gratitude to all who risked their lives trying to save others. We also honor Simon Wiesenthal, who dedicated his life to making sure that those who perpetrated the horrors of the Holocaust were brought to justice. After six decades, many of our youth may view the Holocaust as an event that occurred in the distant past. But the truth is this issue is part of our present day society. Just 3 months ago, Iran held a conference in Tehran to debate whether or not the Holocaust actually happened, and the Iranian government has established a fact finding commission to examine the issue further. Such despicable acts are an insult to the millions of people who were brutalized and murdered by the Nazis and to all who stand against genocide around the world. Clearly, false and destructive messages regarding the Holocaust are still being perpetuated, and such events highlight the importance of Holocaust education abroad and within our own Nation. Unfortunately, we have also seen that anti-Semitism continues to threaten the safety and well-being of Jewish men and women throughout the world. In February, a Polish member of the European Parliament published a booklet espousing anti-Jewish sentiments, and in Croatia, an investigation has begun after small sugar packets bearing Hitler's image and containing Holocaust jokes were found in some cafes. These tragic events underscore the need to be proactive in combating such bigotry and educating our youth. Although some States now require the Holocaust to be taught in public schools, the Simon Wiesenthal Holocaust Education Assistance Act goes further and makes grants available to organizations that instruct students, teachers, and communities about the dangers of hate and the importance of tolerance in our society. This legislation would give educators the appropriate resources and training to teach accurate historical information about the Holocaust and convey the lessons that the Holocaust can teach us today. We must recognize that by remembering the millions who were murdered in the Holocaust, we create a sense of responsibility to stop genocide wherever it takes place. It is in our common interest to raise our voices against anti- Semitism and against all hatred and discrimination. Funding accurate educational programs on the Holocaust is a step toward winning this battle. So as America stands with Israel and all followers of the Jewish faith in condemning anti-Semitism, let us do everything in our power to end discrimination and educate future generations about the danger of hatred and bigotry. I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.

Mr. MENENDEZ

Mr. MENENDEZ. I worked to include language in the markup that ensures improving this backlog is a top priority, and I commend the effort by Senator Lincoln to dedicate funding to fixing the flawed claims process. This budget will do what should have been done long before our troops began coming home from Iraq and Afghanistan--begin to repair a broken system that has failed our veterans. Our budget will also ensure that as we wage a war abroad, we do not forget our fight here at home to protect our Nation. This budget not only rejects the President's shortsighted proposal to slash more than $1 billion from first responder programs, but it provides much needed increases for homeland security grants, including enough to fund port security grants at their authorized level of $400 million, doubling rail and transit security, and doubling chemical security funds. We also restore the President's cuts to the COPS Program, which would have left almost no funds to help law enforcement hire additional officers and improve technology. We reject the President's proposal to slash firefighter grants in half and eliminate SAFER grants. This budget means the difference between shortchanging our police and fire departments and providing them the resources to meet the challenges in our communities. Finally, the bottom line is our Nation will see a difference when we pass this budget. They will see a brighter outlook down the road. The Nation is watching. They have called on us to focus and change the priorities and values we have seen in previous resolutions by the previous majority. This budget ultimately encompasses the values of Americans across this country. I commend Chairman Conrad for his work on crafting this budget. It was difficult. It is a careful balance. But at the end of the day, it accomplishes the key investments that are most important to the Nation's future, to its vitality, to the human capital, to our children--our greatest asset and also our most fragile asset. I urge my colleagues to continue to reject the amendments that undermine the ability for this new blueprint and to adopt the resolution tomorrow so we can build a stronger Nation. With that, Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. President, I have a different view than my distinguished colleague from New Mexico. This week, what we are seeing is the proof of new leadership in this Congress. I am proud, as a member of the Budget Committee, that we have a budget resolution before us that provides a blueprint for how we can build a stronger nation--a nation that will not be drowning in debt but can save for its children's future, a nation that will not undermine the education of its young people but that invests in building global competitiveness from start to finish, a nation that will not abdicate its responsibility to provide health insurance to those most in need but that is committed to covering every child, and a nation that will not neglect the needs of its soldiers and veterans but that will provide the level of care their sacrifices deserve. Our budgets are indicative of the values we hold, individually and collectively. In this budget, one thing is very clear: We see a different set of priorities and values for our Nation. From health care to education to our veterans to the safety of our communities, Americans will see that this budget charts a new course. Perhaps most importantly, however, this budget reaches all of these priorities in a framework that is fiscally responsible. With this budget, we will end the days of spending now and figuring how to pay for it later. Instead of making lofty promises we cannot afford, instead of pretending we can have it all while we are sinking deeper and deeper into debt, instead of leaving a multibillion-dollar mess for our grandchildren to clean up years from now, with this budget we make a clear declaration: We must pay for what we spend as we go along, not push it off for another day. This is something Americans do every day. It is how all of us conduct our personal daily lives. Yet, until recently, it is something which Congress has been incapable of. With this budget, we have a chance to change that. Without question, one of our highest priorities is the health care of our Nation's most vulnerable children. I find it embarrassing that some in Washington, those who have some of the best health care coverage in the world, have proposed to cut coverage to America's neediest children. Yesterday, we defeated an amendment that would have jeopardized the health care of children and parents all over America. I know the battle is not over, but let me assure my colleagues, we will win the fight so children across this country will have the health insurance they deserve. I applaud the Budget Committee chairman for working to make this funding a priority in the resolution. I am proud of the Senate's support for the Baucus amendment to increase funding for SCHIP. I am proud that a majority of this Chamber realized we had a responsibility to fix the shortcomings of the President's budget that would have had millions of children across the Nation not insured and that we ensured America's neediest children have the care and health coverage they need. In this budget, we make it clear who our focus is. We will no longer follow blindly down the President's path to provide costly tax breaks for the wealthiest Americans while we rack up trillions in debt for future generations to pay off. That is why I am proud this budget includes an amendment by Senator Baucus to extend key tax provisions which will benefit millions of students and hard-working families but which do not drown us in debt. The message is clear: We Democrats believe we can extend tax credits that help students afford college. We can ensure families continue to claim the child tax credit. We can provide income tax relief, and we don't have to do it while sweeping the cost under the rug for another day. In this budget, we provide a light at the end of the tunnel for so many children, teachers, and administrators who have been strained to meet requirements without resources, who have seen promises broken year after year. With this budget, we start to fix the many holes in our education funding. This budget funds education $9.2 billion above the President's request. We increase grant aid so that students who rely on Perkins loans, work study, and other grants will continue to have the extra assistance that will help them earn their degree. For me, this is not a policy debate; it is real life. I would not be here in the Senate today without the help of Pell and Perkins when I was trying to go to college. Having grown up poor, in a tenement, and being the first of my family to do so, that educational opportunity created a foundation that helped me achieve what I have today. I want to make that a birthright for each and every one of our children who has the ability and is willing to work hard and give something back to their country. We provide the largest increase in elementary and secondary education since 2002. We will have done more in this budget resolution in 3 months than has been done by the administration in the past 4 years so that we can start to fill the massive shortfalls that have plagued our schools and denied opportunities to students. We restore programs such as Safe and Drug-Free Schools, education technology, and other critical investments that have been on the chopping block year after year. Our budget also marks a turning point for an area which has been shamefully neglected--the care of our Nation's veterans. I recently visited veterans at the VA hospital in East Orange, NJ, and soldiers who have returned from Iraq and Afghanistan currently at Fort Dix and service men and women from across the country, not just New Jersey. I have seen how without adequate funding our VA system has become overloaded, new veterans hang in limbo, and soldiers who have made unimaginable sacrifices are left wondering just how much the Nation values their services. Too many of our soldiers are trapped in a system that keeps them in limbo. They are too injured to serve, yet they cannot be fully discharged until their paperwork has been processed and their health determinations have been decided. The time they spend waiting can grow from weeks to months and, yes, even years. It is appalling. It is unacceptable. We have to work to improve this process. This budget allows for that. It would increase veterans funding $3.5 billion above and beyond the President's request. It will ensure funding is dedicated to improving the claims backlog that is plaguing our discharge process. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent for an additional 2 minutes.

Mr. MENENDEZ

Mr. MENENDEZ. Madam President, we need to defeat the Cornyn amendment. We need to keep the reality of where SCHIP is today: insuring our children and their families and making sure we are preserving that human capital.

Mr. MENENDEZ. Madam President, I thank the distinguished chairman of the Budget Committee for yielding, and let me get right to it. Only in Washington, with those who have some of the best health care coverage in the Nation, would there be a proposal to cut coverage to America's neediest children. An example of what would happen if this were to be passed: In New Jersey alone, more than a half million children depend upon our State's successful SCHIP program. Providing less than what is required to keep these children safe and healthy isn't only reckless, it is a dereliction of our duty here in Congress. The President is spending a lot of time this week talking about Congress's role and responsibilities. The President had a responsibility to send us a budget that took care of children in this country, and we have had members of his administration cite the successes of what we have done in New Jersey and, therefore, in other places in the country. Tom Scully, who is the CMS administrator, said: Even in tight economic times New Jersey is setting an example of how Federal waivers can help them cut into the numbers of citizens with no health coverage. That is what he said on January 31 of 2003. If the Cornyn amendment is passed, as many as 30,000 children in New Jersey could lose coverage for needed medical service. Worse still, it would prevent another 75,000 children in New Jersey from even being eligible for the critical health coverage they need. That is not only bad policy, it is downright reckless and it is flatout wrong. We live in the greatest country in the world, and there is no reason our neediest children should go without the medical services they need. No child in America should go to sleep at night in pain because they don't have the health care coverage they need or, as we saw recently, a young boy in Maryland who had a toothache, and it abscessed and it ended up getting infected and he died. No child in America should face that reality. We know the success of covering parents, because when we cover parents, we end up covering children. That is not because I say it, but look at what the CMS administrator Mark McClellan said last year before the Senate Finance Committee. He said: Extending coverage to parents and caretaker relatives not only serves to cover additional insured individuals, but it may also increase the likelihood that they will take the steps necessary to enroll their children. Extending coverage to parents and caretakers may also increase the likelihood that their children remain enrolled in SCHIP, and that is our experience. That is New Jersey's experience. Who are we talking about, not only in New Jersey but across the country? We are talking about some of the children in our Nation who come from communities that already have great health disparities. Yet when we see what SCHIP has done, we have seen those disparities narrow. Here is a chart that shows before enrollment in SCHIP what many children faced--White, African American, and Latino children--and after the enrollment, the percentage of children lacking a regular source of care dramatically reduces; dramatically reduces. Now, Latino and African-American children in this country will represent over 40 to 45 percent of all of the Nation's schoolchildren. Would we leave 45 percent of any capital, human capital in this case, unhealthy, uneducated? That is what this amendment seeks to do.

Mr. MENENDEZ

Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. President, I rise today along with several of my colleagues to introduce the Healthy Farms, Foods, and Fuels Act of 2007. I am also proud to be joined in this effort by my friend and former colleague, Representative Ron Kind of Wisconsin, who is introducing this legislation today in the House of Representatives. This legislation is crucial because we have a tremendous opportunity this year to set a healthier course for American agriculture. To allow our farmers, ranchers, and foresters to thrive while giving them the tools they need to meet our environmental and energy challenges; to open up new markets and opportunities for our small farmers; and to provide consumers and schoolchildren with more fresh fruits and vegetables, and make it easier for low-income Americans and the elderly to have access to healthier foods. Like all legislation, a Farm Bill is a statement of priorities and of values. And the Healthy Farms, Foods, and Fuels Act embodies many of the priorities and values that I believe we as a nation should be focused on. Although many people are not aware of New Jersey's thriving agricultural sector, the fact is that we are the Garden State, and a healthy agricultural sector nationwide--one that addresses the needs of all of our farmers, whether they grow corn in the Midwest or blueberries in the Mid-Atlantic--is essential for New Jersey to remain the Garden State. However, New Jersey's farmers are under a tremendous amount of pressure. They operate in a very high-cost environment and see development encroaching on their farms from all sides. Conservation programs are crucial to the survival of agriculture in the Garden State, as well as for the protection of sensitive wetlands and animal habitats, which is why the Healthy Farms bill increases funding and expands eligibility for the Environment Quality Incentives Program, Conservation Reserve Program, Conservation Security Program, Farmland and Ranchland Protection Program, Wetlands Reserve Program, and Wildlife Habitat Incentive Program. New Jersey's farmers are also among the most prolific in the country in growing fruits and vegetables, yet they are often just a few miles from distressed communities where children struggle for access to nutritious food. That's why the Healthy Farms bill expands the Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program to schools in all states, giving more children access to healthy snacks. The bill also expands the Farmers Market Promotion Program, and provides additional funding for programs that allow seniors and low-income families to obtain food at farmers markets. Not only do these programs help people eat healthier, they provide an additional market for local farmers. This bill is, of course, just the start of this conversation. As we move forward this year, we must work together on issues of farm profitability, entrepreneurship and innovation, toward a Farm Bill that emphasizes flexibility, efficiency and equitable distribution of government programs. This will help to ensure success for our farm family enterprises and the wider community of Farm Bill beneficiaries, both large and small, near urbanized areas and in more rural settings, throughout all regions of the country. Ideally, an emphasis on the diversity of agricultural and related businesses, their interaction with the citizens who are their ultimate customers, and the role these enterprises play in addressing issues of nutrition, hunger and economic growth throughout our nation will join with conservation and environmental issues to form a comprehensive Farm Bill that will serve the nation well for the next five years and beyond.

Mr. MENENDEZ

Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. President, I rise today along with several of my colleagues to introduce the Healthy Farms, Foods, and Fuels Act of 2007. I am also proud to be joined in this effort by my friend and former colleague, Representative Ron Kind of Wisconsin, who is introducing this legislation today in the House of Representatives. This legislation is crucial because we have a tremendous opportunity this year to set a healthier course for American agriculture. To allow our farmers, ranchers, and foresters to thrive while giving them the tools they need to meet our environmental and energy challenges; to open up new markets and opportunities for our small farmers; and to provide consumers and schoolchildren with more fresh fruits and vegetables, and make it easier for low-income Americans and the elderly to have access to healthier foods. Like all legislation, a Farm Bill is a statement of priorities and of values. And the Healthy Farms, Foods, and Fuels Act embodies many of the priorities and values that I believe we as a nation should be focused on. Although many people are not aware of New Jersey's thriving agricultural sector, the fact is that we are the Garden State, and a healthy agricultural sector nationwide--one that addresses the needs of all of our farmers, whether they grow corn in the Midwest or blueberries in the Mid-Atlantic--is essential for New Jersey to remain the Garden State. However, New Jersey's farmers are under a tremendous amount of pressure. They operate in a very high-cost environment and see development encroaching on their farms from all sides. Conservation programs are crucial to the survival of agriculture in the Garden State, as well as for the protection of sensitive wetlands and animal habitats, which is why the Healthy Farms bill increases funding and expands eligibility for the Environment Quality Incentives Program, Conservation Reserve Program, Conservation Security Program, Farmland and Ranchland Protection Program, Wetlands Reserve Program, and Wildlife Habitat Incentive Program. New Jersey's farmers are also among the most prolific in the country in growing fruits and vegetables, yet they are often just a few miles from distressed communities where children struggle for access to nutritious food. That's why the Healthy Farms bill expands the Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program to schools in all states, giving more children access to healthy snacks. The bill also expands the Farmers Market Promotion Program, and provides additional funding for programs that allow seniors and low-income families to obtain food at farmers markets. Not only do these programs help people eat healthier, they provide an additional market for local farmers. This bill is, of course, just the start of this conversation. As we move forward this year, we must work together on issues of farm profitability, entrepreneurship and innovation, toward a Farm Bill that emphasizes flexibility, efficiency and equitable distribution of government programs. This will help to ensure success for our farm family enterprises and the wider community of Farm Bill beneficiaries, both large and small, near urbanized areas and in more rural settings, throughout all regions of the country. Ideally, an emphasis on the diversity of agricultural and related businesses, their interaction with the citizens who are their ultimate customers, and the role these enterprises play in addressing issues of nutrition, hunger and economic growth throughout our nation will join with conservation and environmental issues to form a comprehensive Farm Bill that will serve the nation well for the next five years and beyond.

Mr. MENENDEZ

Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. President, since the March 2003 start of the Iraq war, more than 24,042 members of our Nation's armed forces have been injured, more than 10,685 of them too severely to be returned to action. I have visited these soldiers at Walter Reed, at Fort Dix, and at the East Orange Veterans Hospital. I have heard stories consistently from our veterans about fighting against DoD and VA bureaucracy for months and even years simply to receive the basic benefits they are owed by a grateful Nation. The controversy at Walter Reed again brings to light the shortcomings in the process our returning veterans must deal with in their difficult transition from soldier to civilian. Just as the deplorable conditions that have come to light are unacceptable, so too are the countless stories detailing the maze of forms, hearings, and medical evaluations that prevent so many of our veterans from getting the health care and benefits they need. Too often, it seems that rather than thanking the soldier for their sacrifice, this system sets up yet another battle of bureaucracy. Too often, it seems that the system is stacked against the very soldiers it is designed to help. Too often, veterans must seek out their own treatment options and benefits or risk missing deadlines and losing benefits. It doesn't have to be this way. We have an obligation not only to fulfill the promises we make to America's fighting men and women, but to do so in a manner that ensures the benefits we owe them are made readily available. At the East Orange VA hospital in my State of New Jersey, for instance, we have a modern War-Related Illness and Injury Study Center that stands underutilized because many veterans aren't even informed that it's there. Patients whose quality of life could be drastically improved by the technology the center provides miss the opportunity simply because they are not aware the option is available. This country can do better; the will of the American people is to do better; now this government must do better. That's why I am proud to introduce the ``Veterans Navigator Act'', a bill that would expand and enhance the important work done by VSOs and other non-governmental organizations to guide our Nation's servicemen and women to and through the VA healthcare system. It would, in fact, acknowledge the work of these organizations by providing $25 million in grants over 5 years to augment their capabilities. The ``navigator'' concept is not new. It is similar to the Patient Navigator demonstration program I introduced and which was subsequently enacted into law. There, we also took a successful small-scale program being used at select medical facilities around the country and expanded it by providing grants for a scaled-up demonstration program to serve those with cancer and other chronic diseases, and in particular, to provide support to medically underserved populations. With the Veterans Navigator bill, I propose to do something similar, capitalizing on the successes of the Patient Navigator concept, to help our troops. The $25 million over 5 years in the bill would allow VSOs and other organizations to apply for grants so that they could hire and train navigators to provide assistance, on an individualized basis, to members of the Armed Forces as they transition from military service to the VA healthcare system. They would do so in coordination with DoD and the VA. Right now, many VSOs rely principally on donations to perform these services. At the end of the 5 years, the VA Secretary would submit a report to Congress on the effectiveness of the Veterans Navigator demonstration program and recommend whether or not it should be made permanent. Often called National Service Officers or counselors, a navigator is a ``sherpa'', a guide through the maze of paper and people and specialists and benefits. A navigator is an advocate for those no longer able to go it alone. A navigator is a facilitator, someone who will be with you through the process, to provide the expertise you will need to transition between active duty and veterans status and to get the urgent care you need. Let me be clear: a navigator does not supplant the role of the DoD or the VA. A navigator is meant to complement the work done by these organizations, particularly at a time when those systems are struggling to meet the needs of the soldiers returning from war and will continue to do so long after the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan have ended. While all veterans will benefit, the bill focuses particular attention on four underserved groups in the military community: the seriously injured or wounded soldiers, female soldiers, those suffering from psychological problems like Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, PTSD, and members of the activated National Guard and Reserves. These underserved groups have not been sufficiently served in existing VA and DoD transition programs and activities. It is these underserved groups who especially need continuity of care as they enter and wind their way through the VA medical system. Part of the reason they have not been adequately cared for is that the nature of the current wars we are fighting, in Iraq, in Afghanistan, is different from previous conflicts we've undertaken. During the Iraq and Afghanistan campaigns, we have the largest activation of National Guard and reservists since World War II. As of March 12, according to DoD, the United States had 141,000 military personnel deployed in Iraq. Of these, 119,005 were active component personnel and 21,995 were National Guard and Reserves. These numbers are set to increase due to the recent announcement by President Bush to send at least 20,000 more troops to Iraq by May. The GAG released a report in February 2005 citing deficiencies in benefits for these soldiers. The report concluded that National Guard and Reserve soldiers ``are given little help navigating a thicket of regulations and procedures necessary to gain access to military doctors.'' To complicate matters, members of our National Guard who seek medical care must file for an extension of their active duty status in order to continue to access military bases and hospitals. In its report, GAG also concluded that, and I quote, ``the Army has not consistently provided the infrastructure needed to accommodate the needs of soldiers trying to navigate their way through the ``active duty medical extension'' (ADME) process . . . this has resulted in injured and ill soldiers carrying a disproportionate share of the burden for ensuring that they do not fall off their active duty orders.'' The Veterans Navigator Act would help minimize such occurrences by providing National Guardsmen and Reservists someone to help bring them through the ADME process and to help correct any discrepancies before they cause a delay in accessing VA medical care. Veterans with psychological problems also need help. In the last several years, we've been hearing a lot more about post-traumatic stress disorder, or PTSD in veterans and those returning from conflict. The GAO report concluded that almost four out of five service members returning from Iraq and Afghanistan who were found to be at risk for PTSD were not provided appropriate medical assistance. All of these factors mean that now, more than ever, our Nation's soldiers need help moving between the DoD and VA realms. According to a recent study commissioned by the Department of Veterans Affairs, roughly 13 percent of service men and women returning from Iraq suffer from PTSD. GAO has concluded that roughly 78 percent of those service members at risk for PTSD do not get further evaluation. That means they return to active duty or are discharged without receiving the appropriate care. It is the nature of this disorder to appear not right after the traumatic event is experienced, but often not until an individual re- experiences an event, has a flashback or is somehow reminded of a battlefield event. That may not happen until after a service member has been discharged from service. Once PTSD does emerge, the veteran may not know how to access VA medical assistance, or he or she may not have yet enrolled into the VA medical system. Again, as in the case of the severely wounded, time is of the essence. PTSD can manifest itself so severely as to incapacitate a soldier, making medical care more urgent. In the case of returning National Guardsmen and Reservists, the problem is made more complex because of the 2-year time limit on filing for VA benefits. Since 1991, opportunities for women in our Nation's armed forces have grown. For the first time, the military is placing women in support units at the front line. This has come partly as the result of more than 10 years of policy changes making 91 percent of the career fields gender neutral. The Navy and the Air Force have begun to allow female soldiers to fly fighters and bombers. The Army has expanded the role of women in ground-combat operations. Right now, ``women command combat military police companies, fly Apache helicopters, work as tactical intelligence analysts, and serve in artillery units.'' This would have been unheard of a decade ago, but it's happening right now. Right now, record numbers of female soldiers are fighting on the front lines and, as a result, more are being seriously wounded or killed. A Baltimore reporter profiling women soldiers' participation in Iraq observed that ``the war in Iraq has been an equal opportunity employer, by killing and injuring a historic number of female soldiers in combat situations.'' Therefore, a VA medical system designed to treat wounded male soldiers must now ensure that female soldiers get the right kind of medical care. They will need help finding that care and getting access to that care. A veteran navigator can help them do that. Because of the length and size of the deployment, many more soldiers are being seriously wounded. According to the GAO, roughly 30 percent of U.S. soldiers wounded in combat during World War II later died. Today, that number has dropped to 3 percent for those serving in Iraq and Afghanistan due to advances in technology and protective gear. While this is clearly a positive development, it also means that many of these injured soldiers are returning home with severe disabilities, including traumatic brain injuries and missing limbs that require comprehensive inpatient rehabilitation services. But, severe injuries often mean a lengthy transition from active duty to veteran status. As my story earlier indicates, the physical evaluation of a seriously wounded service member to determine whether he or she can return to active duty can take months to complete. In the interim, the VA has to be able to identify these soldiers so that they can perform early outreach, provided that they have the information to do so. Despite this, the GAO observed in a March 2005 report that the VA faces ``significant challenges in providing services to seriously injured service members.'' In many cases, VA staff have reported that seriously injured service members are simply not ready to begin thinking about VA benefits or dealing with the VA system during the recovery process. The problem here, as GAO has pointed out, is that the VA has no policy for maintaining contact with these soldiers down the line, once they are discharged. Contact is often conducted on an ad hoc basis. Navigators can also help these seriously wounded soldiers. VSOs such as the Veterans of Foreign Wars, Disabled American Veterans, Jewish War Veterans and so many others have emphasized the importance of maintaining contact with seriously injured veterans who do not initially apply for VA health care benefits because it may be many months or even years before they are prepared to apply for them. The Veterans Navigator can help perform this function. Because this individual or individuals have reached out to the injured service member before his or her discharge, they can, in coordination with the VA caseworkers, remain in contact with them as they recover and prepare to re-enter civilian life. The navigator can also help obtain information from DoD on seriously injured soldiers earlier on so that they can help ensure that all service members and veterans benefit from VA health care services at the right time. At a time when many active duty service people and veterans have fought and often made the ultimate sacrifice for their country, we cannot risk having any soldier fall through the cracks. We cannot take the risk that our female soldiers, who are fighting alongside their male colleagues, may not receive the medical care they need. We cannot risk the lives and health of soldiers with PTSD. We cannot risk the lives and the health of any service member who put their lives at risk for our country. As we have seen with the situation at Walter Reed, DoD and VA simply do not have the manpower to effectively handle the influx of veterans cases coming into the system. With a backlog of over half a million claims, the VA can not adequately address the individual needs of America's warriors. Our service members didn't have to wait to sign up to serve their country; they shouldn't have to wait and fight to get the benefits they are seriously entitled to. The very least that we can do is to ensure that all of these brave men and women are able to access the medical benefits to which they are entitled, particularly in their time of greatest need. At some point in each of our lives, we might need a guiding hand to help us find our way. Today, I am proposing to provide that helping hand to our troops in a time of their greatest need. It is the very least that we can do.

Mr. MENENDEZ

Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. President, I wish to address one of the largest problems plaguing our home buyers today; that is, predatory lending. Over the past few days, the Wall Street Journal has written a number of articles about abuses in the subprime lending industry prompting a much needed crackdown on dishonest practices and deceitful lending. In addition, on Tuesday, the Mortgage Bankers Association reported that the number of new foreclosures reported during the fourth quarter of 2006 reached the highest level in 40 years. Not surprisingly, foreclosure and delinquency rates were highest among subprime lenders. Mr. President, enough is enough. The recent scandal at the New Century Financial Corporation, one of the largest subprime lenders, is a final straw. As the Wall Street Journal describes in one instance, an elderly woman was struggling to make her $952 monthly mortgage payments when a mortgage broker called and offered her a ``senior citizen's loan'' from New Century Financial. They told her she wouldn't need to make payments for years. Well, she didn't get years. Instead, her monthly payment skyrocketed to $2,200 per month, more than double her income. With the assistance of a lawyer, she escaped foreclosure, but many others are not as fortunate. This is a prime example of the consumer exploitation occurring in subprime lending, and it is simply unacceptable. Unfortunately, there are many more examples. Unscrupulous predatory lenders prey upon the innocent and unsuspecting. We know these lenders are more likely to target women, racial minorities, and the elderly. In fact, a recent academic study by the University of Denver found that more than 130 million Americans without prime credit scores--the type you need to get a low-cost loan--are disproportionately African American and Hispanic. How can we sit by while these groups are not only being robbed of their savings but robbed of their dream? For many, home ownership is the key to making the American dream a reality. I have been a longtime advocate for increasing home ownership in underserved and minority communities. More and more Hispanics, for example, are realizing their dream of home ownership, with more than 50 percent of all Hispanics in the country owning homes. But when an average of 63 percent of Hispanic household wealth comes from ownership equity alone--the highest percentage of any group--it becomes clear the power that home ownership has to bring more families out of poverty, increase safety in our neighborhoods, and help make the American dream a reality for all. I have worked to create innovative mortgage products to help more people achieve their dream of home ownership, and I strongly believe we should not act in such a way that we dry up access to capital and mortgage options for those who are legitimately prepared to take on the responsibilities of home ownership. There are legitimate lenders who fill that need, and we should continue to work with them to preserve safe and secure loan options for consumers. Unfortunately, predatory lending is making a mockery of the home- ownership dream for far too many individuals. Ironically, however, deceitful subprime lenders are living the dream. They are making enormous amounts, often making millions in profits. They do that by undermining the very essence of that dream for so many in our country. Last year, subprime loans totaled about $605 billion, which is one- fifth of the total overall market for U.S. home loans. We simply cannot ignore this segment of the market which serves some of the most vulnerable populations, including women, seniors, and minorities. Many Americans listening probably think they could never be a victim of these predatory lenders. Judging from their financial success and the significant impact their practices are having on the stock market and the economy as a whole, it is clear that far too many Americans are falling victim, in many instances through no fault of their own. In communities across America, people are losing their homes and their investments because of predatory lenders. Let me take a moment to list their tactics. Deceptive subprime lenders encourage borrowers to lie about their income, expenses, or cash available for downpayments in order to get a loan. They approve loan applications in which the income fields have been left blank. They knowingly lend more money than a borrower could possibly afford to repay. Furthermore, these lenders tell borrowers they have no other chance of getting a loan or owning a home. For many who dream of home ownership, it is hard to ignore. Home buyers are asked to sign sales contracts or loan documents that are blank or that contain information which isn't true. They sign forms where the cost- of-loan terms at closing are not what they agreed to. The lenders' tactics are deceptive, and their words are convincing. It is no wonder many Americans have fallen into the trap. That is why I believe those who engage in predatory lending practices must be held accountable. We should no longer sit by while our communities are being targeted by these individuals and companies. We must address predatory lending through vigorous enforcement of safety and soundness standards, consumer protection, financial education programs, and credit counseling. Well-informed consumers are less likely to be the victims of predatory lenders and more likely to make better choices. However, at the same time, there are market forces that absolutely, without a doubt, prey upon the innocent and unsuspecting. I would have preferred to have the industry fix this situation, but I personally am no longer willing to wait. This has been going on far too long. Time has run out, and I believe we need a legislative solution. As a member of the Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee, I look forward to working with the chairman of the committee, Senator Dodd, to address predatory lending and to develop a solution that will protect the Nation's home buyers. I wish to assure the American people, those who are currently struggling to pay their mortgage and those who are looking to own a home, that I will not rest until they are protected against the claws of predatory lenders. Enough is enough. American consumers deserve safe and secure mortgage options and new protections against predatory lending. Finally, for those across the country who believe this is an issue which affects just homeowners or minority communities or those who should know better, I say ``think again.'' As today's Wall Street Journal reports, this issue has a chilling rippling effect across our Nation's economy, leading to sharp declines in the stock market and a sense that we are ``kind of back to panic mode,'' according to one economist quoted in the article. So don't be fooled. This is a serious issue which has far-reaching effects across our economy. Without prompt action, we put not only more individuals at risk of deceitful predatory lending practices but we put our financial markets and our economy at risk as well. The time to act is now, and I look forward to working with my colleagues to do just that. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

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

Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. President, I rise today to support the resolution on which I hope we will have an opportunity to vote. As we hear this debate, it is a good debate that should move forward. I hope we will actually get to vote on the resolution. I am amazed at some of our colleagues who would suggest that this debate shouldn't even take place. The Senate, the greatest marketplace of ideas, the clash of ideas, should be the place in which one of the most momentous issues facing the Nation should have the opportunity for those 100 Senators, elected by their constituencies across the country, to come and not only debate but cast a vote so that the American people know which way the Senate intends to lead on this question of changing the course in Iraq. What we seek to do is put forward a new direction and a clear plan for Iraq--a clear plan that is very different than the President's current plans to escalate the war in Iraq. We have a plan that, if effectuated, would end the war in Iraq. Our plan is relatively straightforward and says: One, our troops should leave Iraq by March 31, 2008, with a small number remaining to help with security and counterterrorism. Those who say we shouldn't have any date because the enemy will outwait us, we see that Sadr's militias have already retracted, that they are already willing to spend the time to wait until it is propitious to strike. Two, we should start the process of leaving within 120 days. Three, our troops' mission should immediately change to the priority of training--priority of training--Iraqi security forces, focusing on counterterrorism. I heard some of our colleagues talk about that element of al-Qaida in Anbar Province. Well, that is 5,000 or so. We have roughly 140,000 troops, and 140,000 U.S. troops could certainly take care of 5,000 elements of al-Qaida in Iraq and protecting U.S. personnel in Iraq. Or we should take all these steps as part of a comprehensive diplomatic plan, working with Iraq's neighbors and our allies to bring stability to Iraq. I support this plan. I would like to see it be much more than a goal. I would like to see it move more along the lines of a mandate. I support the plan because it matches the goals of the Iraq Study Group, a bipartisan group that met unanimously, agreed upon all of its recommendations, and who said that U.S. combat forces should leave Iraq by the end of March 2008. I know some of my colleagues have mentioned comments made by Democrats in previous statements. Well, I would point out that this was a bipartisan group and it had prominent Republicans on it, such as former Secretary of State James Baker, Lawrence Eagleburger, Ed Meese, Sandra Day O'Connor, and Alan Simpson. They all came to the conclusion, as we have in this resolution, that, in fact, our goal should be to have our troops out by March of 2008. I support the plan because it transitions the mission for our troops, instead of keeping them fighting in the middle of a civil war. I support the plan because it sets a clear timeframe for our troops to leave Iraq. In my mind, unlike the way in which our opponents in this regard pass a negative light on a timeframe, I think a timeframe is the most powerful element to achieve success in Iraq. It is only by setting a clear timeframe for our troops to leave that Iraqis will have to take the responsibility for security in their country and to work out their political power struggles. Some of these hearings that I have been part of in the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, you hear how so much of the struggle among Iraqis is about political power. Is it the mission of the U.S. troops, the sons and daughters of America, to sit in the crossfire as people are pursuing political power? I think not. Unless we have the Iraqis understand this is not an open-ended commitment, they will never make the hard choices, compromises, and negotiations necessary for a government of national unity, if that is possible. They will never get there so long as they believe we will shed the blood and our national treasure in an unlimited fashion. It is only by setting a clear timeframe for our troops to leave that Iraq's neighbors will start to take responsibility for ending the chaos inside of Iraq. Right now, that violence hasn't reached the tipping point for them to get Iraq's neighbors involved. Ultimately, it is not in their national security interest to have the conflict spill across their borders and have Iraq disintegrate, but they do not yet feel the pressure to do this. By setting a date certain to leave, we create a new incentive for Iraq's neighbors to help quell the violence. It is only by setting a clear timeframe for our troops to leave that the international community will take its responsible and necessary role in Iraq. Right now, the international community sees this as America's war. Once we make it clear we will not be there permanently or indefinitely, they, too, will have an incentive in getting involved to help preserve security in a region that is incredibly important to them, much closer to Europe than the United States. By setting a clear timeframe for our troops to leave, we actually motivate Iraq's neighbors and the international community to take the steps necessary to stabilize Iraq. Let me be clear, for my friends who are saying we shouldn't vote for this resolution. They say we shouldn't try to micromanage the war. No one is trying to micromanage a war. There is a constitutional responsibility by Members of the Senate to act as a legislative body. I say the era of blank checks, both in lives and national treasure, is over. They say don't micromanage the war. Well, you have had a blank check under this administration. You have rubberstamped everything they have wanted, with virtually no oversight, until this new Congress started. That is not the responsible exercise of the Senate. They say slow bleed. How about the endless bleeding going on now? Let me take a moment to talk about the President's plan to escalate the war and stay there without any timeframes that bind. First, let's be frank. I simply don't believe the recent escalation of troops in Iraq is a temporary surge. I believe it is a long-term escalation. Even General Petraeus has said we are in it for the long haul, and that, to me, is undefined. I wish this administration would be honest with the American people and the Congress about the total cost of the escalation and the total number of troops needed for the escalation. I sit as a member of the Budget Committee, and we had the Deputy Secretary of the Department of Defense, Mr. England, testifying in a hearing. I said to him: If the chairman would put you under oath, would you say that the $5.6 billion that you want in addition for the escalation of the war would be the total amount; the total cost? He told me: Yes, even if I was under oath it would be roughly that amount. Of course, depending on the needs of the commanders. And then that weekend--that weekend, after the hearing--the administration said they needed another $2 billion. They needed $2 billion more over a weekend? That is not a small amount of money that he didn't know about. We are also told the administration will need more troops, and there may be additional billions added to the supplemental. Each time we ask, we get a different answer. I, for one, would like a clear and honest answer for the total number of troops and the total cost of the troop escalation. Staying indefinitely in Iraq isn't in the national interest or the national security interest of the United States. Our troops are caught in the middle of a civil war they can't solve. Adding more troops will only put them more directly in the middle of an Iraqi fight. Keeping our troops there or adding more troops is trying to solve a political problem with a military solution. I have heard General Pace and others in the past say: You know, we have to get the Iraqis to love their children more than they hate their neighbors. That is a powerful truism. We have to get the Iraqis to love their children more than they hate their neighbors. That, however, cannot be accomplished by military might. That is accomplished by reconciliation measures. That is accomplished by confidence- building measures. That is accomplished by revenue sharing. That is accomplished by power sharing. It cannot be accomplished at the point of a gun. It cannot be accomplished at the point of a gun. Staying there would only continue to empower and embolden Iran, a country that has turned out to be, by many experts who have testified before the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, one of the biggest winners in our war with Iraq. Staying in Iraq actually keeps the Iraqis from making the hard choices, compromises, and negotiations necessary to achieve a government of national unity. Frankly, what we hear from the other side doesn't make sense to me. They talk about victory. What is the definition of victory? Is it when the President landed on the aircraft carrier, fully decked out, and said, ``Mission accomplished''? Is it the many times we have heard the administration say, victory is right around the corner? How many lives, how much national treasure, what victory are we talking about? They talk about benchmarks for the Iraqis, but they set no consequences. Benchmarks without consequences are simply aspirations, nothing more. Victory. How many lives must we lose? How much more money must we spend? How long will we be in this war under a plan without end of the President? I believe it is long past time to change the course in Iraq. That is why this vote to allow us to move forward, to allow us to have a final vote on changing the course in Iraq and laying out a plan that can create the best possibility for victory in Iraq is essential, and that is what I hope we will do between today and tomorrow. Finally, in the time it takes me to finish my remarks this afternoon, the United States will have spent over $2 million on the Iraq war today. Our Nation spends over $8 billion a month in Iraq. We spend $2 billion a week in Iraq. We spend $280 million every day. And the loss in money pales, pales in comparison to our Nation's loss of our best and our brightest, with almost 3,200 lives lost in the conflict and over 24,000 who have been wounded. I visited them again this past weekend in New Jersey at the Veterans Hospital at Fort Dix. I listen to the stories they tell me, especially now as they face challenges in this part of their life. I know that may be another subject matter, but it is something for which we have to be responsible. A grateful Nation does not just say they are grateful, a grateful Nation takes care of those who serve their country, in how we treat them in their health care, how we treat them in their disability, and how we treat their families, for those who commit the ultimate sacrifice on behalf of the Nation. The stories I heard from those soldiers do not indicate a grateful Nation. I didn't vote for the Iraq war when I was in the House of Representatives. I believe that was one of the most important votes I ever cast. I don't support the President's escalation of the war. I was in the minority when I voted against the war in 2002, and there were those who said voting against the war would be political suicide. Even with that knowledge, I put my seat in the Congress on the line because my conscience told me this was simply not the right thing to do. In a speech about the war, the President said the following: In speaking of the consequences of a precipitous withdrawal, I mentioned that our allies would lose confidence in America. Far more dangerous, we would lose confidence in ourselves. Oh, the immediate reaction would be a sense of relief that our men were coming home. But as we saw the consequences of what we had done, inevitable remorse and divisive recrimination would scar our spirit as a people. The President added: I recognize that some of my fellow citizens disagree with the plan for peace I have chosen. Honest and patriotic Americans have reached different conclusions as to how peace should be achieved. I share your concern for peace. I want peace as much as you do. I have chosen a plan for peace. I believe it will succeed. That plan did not succeed. The man speaking wasn't President Bush but President Richard Nixon, and the war he spoke of was not the war in Iraq but the war in Vietnam. It is painful to hear the similarities between what was said by the President of the United States in that conflict and the one in which our Nation is currently ensnared. It is even more painful to see an administration and a President similarly disconnected from the American people. In soaring speeches, President Bush, the Vice President, and Republican allies invoke the ``will and courage'' of the American people. They say, if the American people would have the ``will and the courage'' to persevere in Iraq, then we can succeed militarily. This administration fails to understand this war is not just about will and courage, it is also about wisdom and clarity of judgment, traits that have been sorely lacking in this administration. No one should doubt the will of the American people. In fact, they expressed their will last November, a point that seems to elude many Members of this Chamber. The American people have the will, they have the nerve. What they no longer have is patience with this administration and the continued failed policy in Iraq, and they are losing patience with Members of this body. It is time for the Senate to take a stand against the President's failed plan in Iraq and to vote for a new plan, a new plan and a new course to end the war in Iraq. I urge my colleagues to support the ability to move ahead, to have a final vote, and then I urge them to support the resolution that would lead us out of the war in Iraq, that could give us the greatest opportunity for victory, that would give the greatest opportunity for the Iraqis to make the hard choices, compromises, negotiations for a government of national unity, and in doing so would honor those who have served their country with courage, with valor, and with distinction. I yield the floor.

Mr. MENENDEZ

Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. President, since the March 2003 start of the Iraq war, more than 24,042 members of our Nation's armed forces have been injured, more than 10,685 of them too severely to be returned to action. I have visited these soldiers at Walter Reed, at Fort Dix, and at the East Orange Veterans Hospital. I have heard stories consistently from our veterans about fighting against DoD and VA bureaucracy for months and even years simply to receive the basic benefits they are owed by a grateful Nation. The controversy at Walter Reed again brings to light the shortcomings in the process our returning veterans must deal with in their difficult transition from soldier to civilian. Just as the deplorable conditions that have come to light are unacceptable, so too are the countless stories detailing the maze of forms, hearings, and medical evaluations that prevent so many of our veterans from getting the health care and benefits they need. Too often, it seems that rather than thanking the soldier for their sacrifice, this system sets up yet another battle of bureaucracy. Too often, it seems that the system is stacked against the very soldiers it is designed to help. Too often, veterans must seek out their own treatment options and benefits or risk missing deadlines and losing benefits. It doesn't have to be this way. We have an obligation not only to fulfill the promises we make to America's fighting men and women, but to do so in a manner that ensures the benefits we owe them are made readily available. At the East Orange VA hospital in my State of New Jersey, for instance, we have a modern War-Related Illness and Injury Study Center that stands underutilized because many veterans aren't even informed that it's there. Patients whose quality of life could be drastically improved by the technology the center provides miss the opportunity simply because they are not aware the option is available. This country can do better; the will of the American people is to do better; now this government must do better. That's why I am proud to introduce the ``Veterans Navigator Act'', a bill that would expand and enhance the important work done by VSOs and other non-governmental organizations to guide our Nation's servicemen and women to and through the VA healthcare system. It would, in fact, acknowledge the work of these organizations by providing $25 million in grants over 5 years to augment their capabilities. The ``navigator'' concept is not new. It is similar to the Patient Navigator demonstration program I introduced and which was subsequently enacted into law. There, we also took a successful small-scale program being used at select medical facilities around the country and expanded it by providing grants for a scaled-up demonstration program to serve those with cancer and other chronic diseases, and in particular, to provide support to medically underserved populations. With the Veterans Navigator bill, I propose to do something similar, capitalizing on the successes of the Patient Navigator concept, to help our troops. The $25 million over 5 years in the bill would allow VSOs and other organizations to apply for grants so that they could hire and train navigators to provide assistance, on an individualized basis, to members of the Armed Forces as they transition from military service to the VA healthcare system. They would do so in coordination with DoD and the VA. Right now, many VSOs rely principally on donations to perform these services. At the end of the 5 years, the VA Secretary would submit a report to Congress on the effectiveness of the Veterans Navigator demonstration program and recommend whether or not it should be made permanent. Often called National Service Officers or counselors, a navigator is a ``sherpa'', a guide through the maze of paper and people and specialists and benefits. A navigator is an advocate for those no longer able to go it alone. A navigator is a facilitator, someone who will be with you through the process, to provide the expertise you will need to transition between active duty and veterans status and to get the urgent care you need. Let me be clear: a navigator does not supplant the role of the DoD or the VA. A navigator is meant to complement the work done by these organizations, particularly at a time when those systems are struggling to meet the needs of the soldiers returning from war and will continue to do so long after the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan have ended. While all veterans will benefit, the bill focuses particular attention on four underserved groups in the military community: the seriously injured or wounded soldiers, female soldiers, those suffering from psychological problems like Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, PTSD, and members of the activated National Guard and Reserves. These underserved groups have not been sufficiently served in existing VA and DoD transition programs and activities. It is these underserved groups who especially need continuity of care as they enter and wind their way through the VA medical system. Part of the reason they have not been adequately cared for is that the nature of the current wars we are fighting, in Iraq, in Afghanistan, is different from previous conflicts we've undertaken. During the Iraq and Afghanistan campaigns, we have the largest activation of National Guard and reservists since World War II. As of March 12, according to DoD, the United States had 141,000 military personnel deployed in Iraq. Of these, 119,005 were active component personnel and 21,995 were National Guard and Reserves. These numbers are set to increase due to the recent announcement by President Bush to send at least 20,000 more troops to Iraq by May. The GAG released a report in February 2005 citing deficiencies in benefits for these soldiers. The report concluded that National Guard and Reserve soldiers ``are given little help navigating a thicket of regulations and procedures necessary to gain access to military doctors.'' To complicate matters, members of our National Guard who seek medical care must file for an extension of their active duty status in order to continue to access military bases and hospitals. In its report, GAG also concluded that, and I quote, ``the Army has not consistently provided the infrastructure needed to accommodate the needs of soldiers trying to navigate their way through the ``active duty medical extension'' (ADME) process . . . this has resulted in injured and ill soldiers carrying a disproportionate share of the burden for ensuring that they do not fall off their active duty orders.'' The Veterans Navigator Act would help minimize such occurrences by providing National Guardsmen and Reservists someone to help bring them through the ADME process and to help correct any discrepancies before they cause a delay in accessing VA medical care. Veterans with psychological problems also need help. In the last several years, we've been hearing a lot more about post-traumatic stress disorder, or PTSD in veterans and those returning from conflict. The GAO report concluded that almost four out of five service members returning from Iraq and Afghanistan who were found to be at risk for PTSD were not provided appropriate medical assistance. All of these factors mean that now, more than ever, our Nation's soldiers need help moving between the DoD and VA realms. According to a recent study commissioned by the Department of Veterans Affairs, roughly 13 percent of service men and women returning from Iraq suffer from PTSD. GAO has concluded that roughly 78 percent of those service members at risk for PTSD do not get further evaluation. That means they return to active duty or are discharged without receiving the appropriate care. It is the nature of this disorder to appear not right after the traumatic event is experienced, but often not until an individual re- experiences an event, has a flashback or is somehow reminded of a battlefield event. That may not happen until after a service member has been discharged from service. Once PTSD does emerge, the veteran may not know how to access VA medical assistance, or he or she may not have yet enrolled into the VA medical system. Again, as in the case of the severely wounded, time is of the essence. PTSD can manifest itself so severely as to incapacitate a soldier, making medical care more urgent. In the case of returning National Guardsmen and Reservists, the problem is made more complex because of the 2-year time limit on filing for VA benefits. Since 1991, opportunities for women in our Nation's armed forces have grown. For the first time, the military is placing women in support units at the front line. This has come partly as the result of more than 10 years of policy changes making 91 percent of the career fields gender neutral. The Navy and the Air Force have begun to allow female soldiers to fly fighters and bombers. The Army has expanded the role of women in ground-combat operations. Right now, ``women command combat military police companies, fly Apache helicopters, work as tactical intelligence analysts, and serve in artillery units.'' This would have been unheard of a decade ago, but it's happening right now. Right now, record numbers of female soldiers are fighting on the front lines and, as a result, more are being seriously wounded or killed. A Baltimore reporter profiling women soldiers' participation in Iraq observed that ``the war in Iraq has been an equal opportunity employer, by killing and injuring a historic number of female soldiers in combat situations.'' Therefore, a VA medical system designed to treat wounded male soldiers must now ensure that female soldiers get the right kind of medical care. They will need help finding that care and getting access to that care. A veteran navigator can help them do that. Because of the length and size of the deployment, many more soldiers are being seriously wounded. According to the GAO, roughly 30 percent of U.S. soldiers wounded in combat during World War II later died. Today, that number has dropped to 3 percent for those serving in Iraq and Afghanistan due to advances in technology and protective gear. While this is clearly a positive development, it also means that many of these injured soldiers are returning home with severe disabilities, including traumatic brain injuries and missing limbs that require comprehensive inpatient rehabilitation services. But, severe injuries often mean a lengthy transition from active duty to veteran status. As my story earlier indicates, the physical evaluation of a seriously wounded service member to determine whether he or she can return to active duty can take months to complete. In the interim, the VA has to be able to identify these soldiers so that they can perform early outreach, provided that they have the information to do so. Despite this, the GAO observed in a March 2005 report that the VA faces ``significant challenges in providing services to seriously injured service members.'' In many cases, VA staff have reported that seriously injured service members are simply not ready to begin thinking about VA benefits or dealing with the VA system during the recovery process. The problem here, as GAO has pointed out, is that the VA has no policy for maintaining contact with these soldiers down the line, once they are discharged. Contact is often conducted on an ad hoc basis. Navigators can also help these seriously wounded soldiers. VSOs such as the Veterans of Foreign Wars, Disabled American Veterans, Jewish War Veterans and so many others have emphasized the importance of maintaining contact with seriously injured veterans who do not initially apply for VA health care benefits because it may be many months or even years before they are prepared to apply for them. The Veterans Navigator can help perform this function. Because this individual or individuals have reached out to the injured service member before his or her discharge, they can, in coordination with the VA caseworkers, remain in contact with them as they recover and prepare to re-enter civilian life. The navigator can also help obtain information from DoD on seriously injured soldiers earlier on so that they can help ensure that all service members and veterans benefit from VA health care services at the right time. At a time when many active duty service people and veterans have fought and often made the ultimate sacrifice for their country, we cannot risk having any soldier fall through the cracks. We cannot take the risk that our female soldiers, who are fighting alongside their male colleagues, may not receive the medical care they need. We cannot risk the lives and health of soldiers with PTSD. We cannot risk the lives and the health of any service member who put their lives at risk for our country. As we have seen with the situation at Walter Reed, DoD and VA simply do not have the manpower to effectively handle the influx of veterans cases coming into the system. With a backlog of over half a million claims, the VA can not adequately address the individual needs of America's warriors. Our service members didn't have to wait to sign up to serve their country; they shouldn't have to wait and fight to get the benefits they are seriously entitled to. The very least that we can do is to ensure that all of these brave men and women are able to access the medical benefits to which they are entitled, particularly in their time of greatest need. At some point in each of our lives, we might need a guiding hand to help us find our way. Today, I am proposing to provide that helping hand to our troops in a time of their greatest need. It is the very least that we can do.