Barbara Mikulski

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Will the Senator yield?

Ms. MIKULSKI. Madam President, I want to bring to the Senator's attention that this amendment is paid for by offsets that had been cleared and verified by the Budget Committee. So it is paid for. I wanted to have that said for the Senator's clarification. I thank my colleague for his sympathetic comments about steelworkers.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Thank you very much, Mr. President. Again, I know Senator Biden is bringing a very important NATO debate here, and I do not want to delay it. What concerns me about our amendment is that we are not going to get an up-and-down vote. It is going to be hidden behind parliamentary procedures. We thank Senator Nickles for coming and at least engaging in an honest set of questions with us. They were questions worthy of debate: How much does it cost? Is a 35-year-old eligible? All those questions. But to have an empty Chamber, to threaten a filibuster, and not even come here and talk, and then, again, hide behind a filibuster, where we have to get cloture, and go through so many hoops, I think the discussion of trade is important, I think our amendment is a critical one, but let's have it, and get rid of all this hiding behind parliamentary maneuvers that require 60 votes. So we really ask our colleagues who agree with us to come to the floor. And for those who don't, let's just have it out. We respect them. We respect their opinions. We think ours are the best. We hope we prevail. We think the Senate way, the American way is, let's just come and let the majority prevail and not need a supermajority to overcome a parliamentary obstacle. Let's have a majority vote on a policy issue. I thank the Chair and look forward to continuing this conversation later on.

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Nevada for not only his kind but encouraging words. You see, I agree with him.

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, before he leaves the floor, I congratulate the Senator from Minnesota. I thank him for his passion. I thank him for his persistence. I thank him for his eloquence on this issue and others on behalf of people from his own State and all over our country who feel pretty powerless. They feel powerless because of forces outside of their control, such as unfair trade practices. We thank you for speaking up about this. I look forward to our continued debate.

Ms. MIKULSKI. Yes.

Ms. MIKULSKI. We know there is an important debate on NATO, so we are not going to continue this discussion until later on, over the weekend.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Yes.

Ms. MIKULSKI. Usually after 20.

Ms. MIKULSKI. First of all, I am so glad that the Senator from Oklahoma is in the Chamber. We are glad that Members who have concerns or even opposition are here. Let's do the clarification. The Senator asked about the annual cost, $179 million over 10 years. First, in the year 2003, $85 million; 2004, $25 million because of a population dip; then up to $50 million in 2005; $18 million in 2006; and $2 million in 2007. And this is sunsetting at 2007. So the bill has a sunset.

Ms. MIKULSKI. I just wanted to add about the complexity of going to the family because you see these retirees, and the way this would work is that it is a tax credit to the risk pool that takes this on. So we are not quite sure what the individual family premiums would be. We asked Joint Tax and the Budget Committee, those who advise us, to tell us what would be the annual estimates, and then an estimate between now and 2007.

Ms. MIKULSKI. That would vary company by company.

Ms. MIKULSKI. I thank the Chair. Madam President, I join with pride and enthusiasm my colleagues, Senator Rockefeller and Senator Wellstone, in supporting this amendment to provide a safety net for American steelworkers who have been battered by decades of unfair and illegal trade practices. American steelworkers and their retirees worked very hard and played by the rules. They have served our country in war, building our ships, tanks, and weapons. I was so proud of the fact that in my own hometown of Baltimore, at Bethlehem Steel, we made the steel to repair the U.S.S. Cole so it could go back out to sea and continue to defend America. That is what steel is all about. It builds America. It makes us strong. It has made us strong in war, and it has made us strong in peace, making the steel for our buildings, our cars, our bridges, our roads. Yet for decades, our Government has watched as the steel industry withered, not because steel was unproductive, not because steel was overpriced, but because of cheap, subsidized foreign steel that has been dumped on our markets and, I might add, below the cost of production. That is what makes it illegal. The goal of the foreign steelmakers is to destroy our American steel industry. Then foreign producers will be free to raise prices and control production, and the United States of America, the home of the free and the land of the brave, will be dependent on foreign steel for keeping our domestic economy going and keeping America strong. What would it have been if the U.S.S. Cole, banged by a terrorist attack, had had to limp home only while we dialed Russia, Thailand, or Brazil to get the steel parts to send them out to sea? I think it is wrong to let our steel industry die. While we are going to fight for steel and its future--and we thank our President, President Bush, for the temporary tariffs to give steel a break--our steelworkers are facing a crisis because so many steel companies are in bankruptcy. What that means is, their health care benefits are now at risk. The Rockefeller-Mikulski-Wellstone-Stabenow amendment seeks to help those steelworkers who have suffered the most from unfair trade practices: the retirees whose companies are now bankrupt and whose health care benefits are now at risk. Our amendment is a simple one, and it is an affordable one. It would provide a 1-year temporary extension of health care benefits for steel retirees who lose their health insurance because of trade-related bankruptcy of their company. Guess what. We have even sunsetted it in the year 2007. This is a bridge to help them. Madam President, about whom are we talking? Who are the steelworkers? Who are the steel retirees about whom we are talking? First, the numbers: 600,000 retirees and their dependents; 33,000 in my own home State of Maryland are retired. But it is not about numbers and statistics. It is about people and it is about families. Who are they? Guess what. They have two characteristics in common: One, they all work for steel; two, they have all been good, outstanding citizens of the United States of America. In my hometown, Bethlehem Steel every year has been the largest contributor to United Way. Those men and those mills, those hot, steamy mills, are the first to sign up for dues checkoff so the Girl Scouts, Boy Scouts, Legal Aid, Meals on Wheels could have their contribution. They are also very often the first to volunteer for any good cause in our community. When you also look at the data on who are the steelworkers, you find that a high percentage of them are veterans. They were called up and they went to World War II. They went to Korea. They went to Vietnam. And guess what. While they were busy storming Iwo Jima or climbing the cliffs at Normandy, they were fighting for America. When they tried to make their way up Pork Chop Hill to plant the flag, they were fighting for America. When they were in that hell hole of the Mekong Delta in Vietnam, they were fighting for America. Now when is America going to fight for them? I think it is time America fights for them. The industrial unions had the highest compliance with the draft than any other sector of our society. They did not take academic deferments. They did not go to Harvard to get a theological degree. They did not get a parade when they came home. By God, they ought to at least be able to get their health care in their retirement. Now that is about whom I am talking. We are talking about the lifeblood of our communities and people who have been giving their red blood for America. This generation has the values that we cherish: Hard work, patriotism, habits of the heart, neighbor helping neighbor. Can we not at least find a couple of million bucks to provide a 1-year bridge to help them get the health care they need? Last week, I told my colleagues about Gertrude Misterka. Gertrude and I grew up in the same neighborhood. It is a neighborhood called Highlandtown. Our Baltimore neighborhoods have names like that. I know Gertrude because we not only grew up in the same neighborhood, but when I was first running for the city council, going door to door, she and her husband Charlie were living in the neighborhood and said they absolutely would back me. It was great to see her at my hearing in March, but, my gosh, what an incredible reunion. Gertrude is now a widow. She was married to a Bethlehem Steel worker named Charlie. Charlie worked with Bethlehem Steel for over 35 years. He was also a veteran. Charlie thought that for his 35 years at Bethlehem Steel, he would have a secure pension for himself and his bride. He also believed if he passed away, she would have a widow's benefit, she would have Social Security, and his mind was at peace because she would have her health care. Even after his death, he thought he could provide for her because the men at the mills believe you ought to really provide for your family. Well, Gertrude relies on this health care at Bethlehem Steel. She has diabetes, high blood pressure, and asthma. I said: Gertrude, the naysayers are saying you get gold-plated, lavish health care. Tell me what you get. She said: Barb, guess what. I get a $100 monthly pension. I do not get a COLA. When you retire at Bethlehem Steel you take what you get, but you do not get a COLA. My pension is frozen. Out of a $100 monthly pension, she pays $78 each month for her health care premium. So she has this little pension. She has Social Security, but out of her Bethlehem Steel, frozen with no COLA, she pays 78 bucks. She told me she asked her pharmacist what her medications cost. If she did not have health care, she would have to pay $6,716 for her medication. Now, she is a diabetic. You do not cheat on your diabetes medicine. What are we going to do if Gertrude goes into a coma? She is going to go into the hospital, and that is mega bucks. You have to take your test. You have to take your insulin. You have to regulate your blood pressure, and you have to take care of that asthma so it does not cause other complications. I listened to Gertrude that day and my heart went out to her and other steel retirees. I promised her I would fight to help those retired steelworkers. They need a safety net so they do not lose their health care. Then the only reason they will lose their health care is because their companies are in trouble and are going bankrupt because of documented unfair trade practices. These families worked hard for America, some for nearly 50 years, doing back-breaking work in hot mills and in cold mills. Families now need our help. Retired steelworkers who thought 30 or 40 years of hard work meant security for their families, widows who sent their husbands off to these mills every day: these are the true victims of years of unfair trade practice. So this is why we have our amendment. American steel is in crisis. Our steel companies are filing for bankruptcy protection; 31 since 1997, 17 last year. Steel mills are shutting down. Steelworkers are losing their jobs. Why are they doing this? Again, this is not happening because of the steelworkers being at fault, the retirees being too greedy, or the companies being poorly managed. The cause of the steel crisis is well-known: Unfair foreign competition has brought American steel to its knees. Foreign steel companies, subsidized by their governments, are dumping excess steel into America's open market at fire sale prices. This is not rhetoric. This is fact, documented by the International Trade Commission. Last year, they found these violations unanimously. Let me give an example. The Russian Government keeps about 1,000 unprofitable steel plants open through subsidies. That is not 1,000 steelworkers; that is 1,000 steel companies. Well, it is real easy to compete with them, is it not? The Russians are our newfound friends, but the Russians will not let us export our chicken legs to them. South Korea has nearly doubled its production capacity since 1990, without the domestic demand to support it. So, zip, in comes their steel. When Asian countries had the collapse of their economies, they again dumped the steel. Was any action taken? Oh, no. The globalizers backed it. I know we are going global, but while they are going global, we do not have to abandon the people who fought for America. I said earlier in my remarks about why steel is important: The railroads, the bridges, the ships, the tanks. Saving steel is not an exercise in nostalgia. It is a national security issue. We need to maintain production in very important sectors. No more than we want to be food dependent should we be steel dependent. Our President, George Bush, said steel is an important issue and he said it is an important national security issue. I could not agree with him more. Quoting Senator Stevens, a great patriot: During World War II, we produced steel for the world. We produced steel for the allies. We rebuilt Europe. Could we do it again? I am not so sure. America must never become dependent on foreign suppliers such as Russia or China for the steel we need to defend our Nation and keep our country on the go. Tariffs have been imposed by President Bush. I am going to reiterate what I said earlier in my remarks: I really do thank the President for doing that. Those tariffs were temporary, limited to 3 years. They were specific and they were well documented through the ITC. I appreciate the President's action, and that was a very important step, but now we need the next step. Tariffs help the industry. Now it is also time to help the workers and their retirees who will lose their health care if their companies go under. Senator Daschle has led the way to provide a temporary 1-year extension of health benefits to qualified steelworkers. I sure support that. We are also helping with other issues related to current workers. Like the temporary work tariffs gave the companies breathing room to recover, we need a temporary extension of benefits to give workers and retirees breathing room to find health care. This is what we need to do. I was moved at a hearing by the stories of people such as Gertrude Misterka and others. I have been to the rallies. I have been to the meetings. I feel very close to these workers. I grew up in Baltimore in a neighborhood where most of the people in that community worked either at Bethlehem Steel, Western Electric, or General Motors. Western Electric has since closed. General Motors, we are not sure about its future there. Bethlehem Steel is in bankruptcy. We have real problems. This is our industrial base. In that neighborhood where I grew up, my father had a neighborhood grocery store. He opened it early every day so that the steelworkers on the early morning shift could come by and buy their lunch. These were the people I knew. These are not numbers and statistics, these are people with names such as Stanley, Henry, and Joe. These workers at Bethlehem Steel were not units of production, they were our neighbors. They were my neighbors, but they are your neighbors. What did we know about Bethlehem Steel? In Baltimore, we thought it was a union job with good wages and good benefits. Our neighbors could go to work and put in an honest day's work, get fair pay, and come back and build our communities. Right now, most of the Bethlehem Steel workers work very hard. Their commitment to Bethlehem Steel is a commitment to America, doing the work that needs to get done for fair pay and a secure future. We are proud of our workers at Bethlehem Steel. We are proud of what they did at the mill. We are proud of how they defended America. We are proud of the way they prepare the U.S.S. Cole. I think it is time we repair the agreements to assure our retirees have the health care they need. I yield the floor.

Ms. MIKULSKI. Yes. The eligibility is based on the status of the company, meaning is it bankrupt; No. 2, if the individual has worked for the company for 15 years, not less, and if they have taken retirement. Now, they could be 38 years old. The company could be bankrupt. They could be out of work. That doesn't mean they have become retirees. So your scenario, though I think it would be technically correct, is not operationally correct. So 75 percent are Medicare-eligible. The other 25 percent usually are over 55, but are primarily between 60 and 65. This is why we are calling part of this a bridge. For some, it would be 1 year to even get them to Medicare.

Ms. MIKULSKI. Under 65.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Madam President, I am very concerned about some actions that were taken yesterday. Guess what. On May 8, the administration issued its statement of administration policy on the trade bill. I was looking forward to that because I thought George Bush was a friend of the American steel industry. I was absolutely shocked to read that policy and find out the administration opposes the provision to provide a safety net for American steel retirees. I was shocked because just a few months ago, President Bush stood up for steel when he issued those temporary steel tariffs, and I thought we could count on him now as we were working our way through the Trade Adjustment Act. I was taken aback to hear the opposition to the amendment that Senator Rockefeller and I have, that provides a very modest temporary bridge to help steel retirees keep their health benefits until we can work out a larger compromise. This statement is terrible. It abandons the steelworkers. It abandons steel retirees. It is just plain wrong. We do need steel and we do need steelworkers. They are suffering at the hands of unfair trade competition, and George Bush's own administration helped us document that. That is what is so breathtaking. On one hand we have done it, and then on the other hand we said even though steel companies are in bankruptcy because of unfair trade practices, we will not help the steelworker retirees keep their health benefits. I am fighting for American steel, those steelworkers and those retired steelworkers who, after years of hard work, believed that by working down in the mills they would have security for their families in retirement. Those widows who sent their husband off to the mills every day, like Bethlehem Steel in my own hometown, with pride and love and a lunch bucket thought that they could count on their pension and their health care. These are the true victims of years of unfair trade practices. Year after year, we debate trade and people say: Well, I am for fair trade. I don't know when trade gets fair. I just never know when trade is going to get fair. I have been a Member of the U.S. Congress for 25 years and I have never seen a trade deal that came out fair yet. What are the consequences of that? People losing their pensions, people losing their health care, and people losing their jobs--this is unfair trade. People have been injured by these practices and I want to help them. I heard the stories of my steelworkers and the retirees. I have been to the rallies. I have been to the meetings. I have been down to the union halls. I even held a hearing on this topic. I heard their stories about their fear of losing their health care and their pensions. I met, at my hearing, Gertrude Misterka. She is a woman my own age, from my own hometown of Baltimore, who is terrified she is going to lose her health care. Her husband Charlie died 5 years ago. He worked at Bethlehem Steel for 35 years. He was loved by his wife, a friend to his fellow steelworkers. He is greatly missed. The Misterkas thought that after 35 years of working at Bethlehem Steel, they would have a secure future. Charlie thought his wife would be taken care of even after his death. He was a good, kind guy. Let me tell you about her. She has diabetes, high blood pressure, and asthma. She pays $78 a month for her health care premium. Even with this coverage she pays $100 monthly for her prescriptions. But let me tell you, because of being a diabetic, because of having complications around diabetes, guess what her prescription drug bill is every year: $6,716.16. You tell me what is going to happen to her if she loses her health insurance. Oh, yes, let's give somebody a tax credit or a voucher to go into the private market. You tell me how Gertrude, at age 65, with diabetes and all the complications, is going to go shopping. Medicare Choice has already collapsed. HMOs are not of any value to her. Nobody will take her because of her preexisting condition. Listen, we have to do something to help her and to help all others like her. I promised that I would fight to help her keep her health care. Families who worked hard for America and spent all those years at backbreaking work should be able to count on us. These costs will only go up as prescription drug costs continue to skyrocket. I listened to Mrs. Misterka that day, and my heart went out to her and all the women like her. I promised her that I would fight to help current and retired steelworkers and their families--families that need a safety net so they don't lose their healthcare overnight if their companies go under; families who worked hard for America, some for nearly 50 years of back-breaking work in the hot mills and the cold mills; and families that now need our help. America's steel industry is in crisis. American steel companies are filing for bankruptcy protection--31 since 1997, including 17 in the last year alone. Steel mills are shutting down. In the last year, at least 40 mills and related facilities have been shut down or idled. The closed mills represent nearly one-fifth of America's steelmaking capacity. Steelworkers are losing their jobs. Nearly 47,000 steelworkers have lost their jobs since 1998, including about 30,000 in the last year alone. We now have less than half as many steelworkers as we did in 1980. Most of these jobs are gone for good. The cause of this crisis is well-known. Unfair foreign competition has brought American steel to its knees. Foreign steel companies are subsidized by their governments, and they dump excess steel into America's open market at fire sale prices. This isn't rhetoric. This is fact. Last year, the International Trade Commission unanimously found that ``a substantial part of the industry is being injured by increased imports'' under section 201 of the Trade Act. As Commerce Secretary Evans said last June: For over 50 years, foreign governments have distorted the market through subsidies of their steel industries. The Russian Government keeps about 1,000 unprofitable steel plants open through subsidies. South Korea has nearly doubled its production capacity since 1990 without the domestic demand to support the increase. Millions of tons of foreign steel are sold in the United States every year below the cost of production to keep these subsidized foreign mills in business. America's steel industry is under siege and has been under siege for decades. They've been fighting an uphill battle against competitors that don't play by the rules. The true cost of foreign steel sold at ``bargain'' prices is lost American jobs, is broken promises to American workers, and threats to American security. Why is steel important? Steel built America, the railroads and bridges that keep our country connected, the cars and trucks and buses and trains that make our Nation move, the buildings where we live and work and shop and worship, and the ships, tanks and weapons that we need during times of war. Yet saving steel is not an exercise in nostalgia. President Bush said: Steel is an important jobs issue, it is also an important national security issue. I couldn't agree more. The distinguished ranking member of the Appropriations Committee and of its Defense subcommittee, Senator Stevens, recently made this point eloquently here on the Senate floor: During World War II, he said, `we produced steel for the world. We produced the steel for the allies. We rebuilt Europe. We built the tanks in the United States, and the planes and the ships that saved the world.' Could we do it again? That is a serious question. Bethlehem Steel's Sparrows Point plant near Baltimore recently produced the steel plate to repair the USS Cole. It is the only mill in America that still produces the armor plate for Navy ships. America must never become dependent on foreign suppliers--like Russia and China--for the steel we need to defend our nation and freedom around the world. But we are headed in that direction. Already, the United States is one of the few steel-producing countries that is a net importer of steel. America imported more than 30 million tons of steel last year. President Bush took an important first step to help America's steel industry by imposing broad temporary tariffs on imported steel. I was disappointed that the tariffs are 30 percent or less--phased out over the 3 years they are in effect rather than 40 percent tariffs for 4 years the steel industry and steelworkers sought. I was disappointed that the tariffs don't cover slab steel. But I appreciate the President's action under section 201. Tariffs are an important step to give America's steel industry a chance to restructure and recover with some protection from the deluge of below-cost foreign steel, but they are not the only step needed to help American steel. The tariffs help the industry. Now it is time to help the workers and retirees who will lose their healthcare if their companies go under. The Daschle amendment provided a temporary 1-year extension of health benefits to qualified steel retirees. The health care extensions for steel retirees are similar to TAA health care benefits for workers who lose their jobs as a result of trade agreements. Workers could have 2 years of health care benefits. Retirees would only have 1 year of benefits. Just like the temporary tariffs give the companies breathing room to recover, a temporary extension of benefits give workers and retirees breathing room to find a long-term plan. It gives them time to plan-- time that the workers and retirees of LTV didn't have. They lost their benefits overnight. Supporting producers is in the national interest. The policy of our Government is to support producers when it is in the national interest. National interest means national responsibility. It is important to support farmers to make sure we have the producers to be food- independent. I am happy to stand up for our farmers whether they are chicken producers on the Eastern Shore or corn growers in the Midwest. We spend about $19 billion a year on farmers--$656 billion over the past 10 years. This does not include $17 billion in emergency appropriations for our farmers, and it looks like these subsidies are increasing. Congress passed a $100 billion farm bill. The President said he will sign it. It calls for a $73 billion increase in farm subsidies over the next 6 years. This farm bill includes a $3 billion subsidy for peanuts, up to $30,000 per farmer for livestock subsidies, and a $3 billion subsidy for cotton. Since 1996, we have provided over $5 billion for cotton producers-- three-quarters of those funds went to just 18,000 farmers. I love cotton. It is the fabric of our lives. But cotton is not more important than steel. I have supported aid to farmers. So have most of the opponents of steel. I would ask them why. Why do farmers get bail-out after bail- out, yet our steel workers can't get this modest help? Farmers work hard, but no harder than steelworkers. Farmers provide vital commodities. So do steelworkers. Our Nation must never be dependent on foreign food, and it must never be dependent on foreign steel. It is not just farmers. Congress gave the airlines $15 billion after September 11 because of a national emergency. That was the right thing to do. Now, we need to stand up for steel. Make no mistake, this is a national emergency for steel. Standing up for steel is in the national interest just like farmers, just like airlines. I was moved by the stories of Mrs. Misterka and others at the hearing a few weeks ago as was everyone in the hearing room. I feel very close to these workers and retirees. I grew up down the road from the Beth Steel mill in Baltimore. My dad had a grocery store that he opened extra early so the steelworkers on the morning shift could come in and buy their lunch. The workers at Beth Steel weren't units of production, they were our neighbors. They are our neighbors. And what did we know about the Bethlehem Steel Plant? It was a union job with good wages and good benefits so our neighbors could go to work, put in an honest day, and get fair pay back to raise their families and pursue the American dream. We were all proud of our workers at Bethlehem Steel. In World War II and Vietnam they rolled gun barrels, made steel for grenades, provided steel for the shipyards that turned out Liberty ships very 3 weeks. Today, Beth Steel made the steel plates to repair the USS Cole after the terrorist bombing damaged the ship. Most of Beth Steel workers are Beth Steel workers for their entire careers--30, 40, 50 years on the job, every day despite the aches and pains, the bad back, the varicose veins that age steelworkers beyond their years. Their commitment to Beth Steel is a commitment to America doing the work that needs to get done for fair pay and a secure future. The futures that once looked secure are now at risk through no fault of their own. It is time we stand up for steelworkers and help them in their time of need just like they helped America every step of the way. This is not the end of the story. I will continue to fight for America's steel workers.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I think the majority leader stated or clarified what my questions were. As I understand it, there is a compromise but the compromise does not include a bridge to help steel retirees. But part of the conversation was that a steel retiree amendment would be in order. I believe we will have the support and votes. Senator Rockefeller and I intend to offer an amendment at an appropriate time. I also support the majority leader when he said he would not ask for a rollcall vote on the point of order. As of yesterday, I wanted a rollcall vote, to drag it out, and raise the roof. But then it would be parliamentary tactics. I think this topic is so serious that for the good of the Nation, and for the way I feel about my steelworkers and those who have been hurt, I don't want to engage in a time-consuming and dilatory practice. I will not ask for a rollcall vote now that we have an assurance that we will be able to offer our amendment. I thank the leader for his advocacy on that. I wanted to be clear that I will not ask for a rollcall on the point of order, so that we can get to the compromise and get to the amendments, and maybe get to really helping those people who have been injured by trade. I have other comments I want to make about steel. I think I will save those for my statement later on about why they are in this crisis, why this is a national security issue, and why it is an economic security issue. I think we are going to have a framework for proceeding on an amendment. Senator Rockefeller and I will be able to offer that, if not tomorrow, over the next coming days. I yield the floor.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I rise to congratulate Dr. Elias Zerhouni on his confirmation by the U.S. Senate as the new Director of the National Institutes of Health. I am pleased that his nomination was approved by the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee this morning and that the Senate has approved his nomination today. I am proud that Maryland is home to the National Institutes of Health, and some of the best and brightest researchers in the world. Now Maryland is the home of the National Institutes of Health's new Director, Dr. Zerhouni. Dr. Zerhouni has spent his impressive career turning medical research into tools and treatments that improve patients' lives. He is an innovative thinker and a successful entrepreneur who has turned his scientific discoveries into successful businesses. He is also a talented administrator who will bring his leadership skills to bear on this challenging new role. His administrative skills will be especially important as Congress completes the bipartisan commitment to double NIH's budget this year. I am pleased that the U.S. Senate has given Dr. Zerhouni this resounding show of support as he prepares to take the helm of the world's finest research institution. I look forward to working with Dr. Zerhouni in his new role as Director of the National Institutes of Health. The National Institutes of Health and the American people will be well served by Dr. Elias Zerhouni.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I rise today to pay tribute to Michael J. Jacobs as he leaves the National Security Agency. Mr. Jacobs has served our nation for more than 38 years. He has distinguished himself and the National Security Agency in positions of increasing responsibility. Mr. Jacobs capped his illustrious career as the Information Assurance Director of the National Security Agency. Mr. Jacobs is an outstanding example of the many dedicated public servants who fulfill critical needs, often without public recognition. When Mr. Jacobs joined the NSA, the agency's existence was a secret. While the American people now know and appreciate more about the NSA, most of the attention goes to signals intelligence. Mr. Jacobs made his mark fulfilling the NSA's other core mission: information assurance. He has led and shaped the essential effort to develop secure information systems. Our Presidents, our Armed Forces, our diplomats, our intelligence agencies, and other Government leaders depend on secure communications every day. During his tenure, Mr. Jacobs has shaped every part of how our government addresses the Information Assurance needs. Mr. Jacobs demonstrated a real commitment to the long-range needs of America. His initiatives in research and education are key examples. He worked to sustain the Information Assurance Awareness and Training and Education Research Program. He also broke new ground in establishing NSA Centers of Excellence in Information Assurance Education at institutions of higher learning in Maryland and across the country. Mr. Jacobs was stayed ahead of the curve in protecting America's critical information infrastructure. The White House recognized the Information Assurance System Security Education and Training Program (NIEPT) he developed as a model in Government. Mr. Jacobs' embodies the best traditions of our civil service. That's why he has been recognized with the NSA Exceptional Civilian Service Award and the National Intelligence Medal of Achievement. As the Senator from Maryland and a member of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, I want to thank Mr. Jacobs for his dedication to the United States of America. He has served our nation with honor. I wish Mike well as he enters a new phase of his life.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. I am proud to join Majority Leader Daschle, Senator Rockefeller and the other cosponsors today in introducing the Steel Industry Consolidation and Retiree Benefits Protection Act, a bill that seeks to maintain the viability of a critical domestic industry, and maintain a safety net for its workers and retirees who today live in fear of losing their healthcare coverage. I am on the side of steel and steelworkers. I will stand up for steelworkers and make sure that their voices are heard in the Senate. On March 20th, President Bush announced that he would impose tariffs on steel imports, the tariffs weren't as high as we believe necessary to give America's steel industry the opportunity to consolidate and get back on its feet. The tariffs imposed under section 201 were a first step, but we can not afford half-measures. Congress now needs to take the next step and address retiree health care benefits. I recently held a hearing to listen to the people behind ``legacy costs''--the workers; the retirees; the widows; the executives; and worker representatives whose voices are not being heard. I heard from retirees and widows from the Bethlehem Steel plant at Sparrow's Point in Baltimore. I will never forget hearing Gertrude Misterka tell me that she would have to spend nearly $7,000 on her prescriptions if she lost her husband's health care benefits. She would be in tough shape if she lost those health benefits that her husband, a proud Korean War veteran, Charlie, worked so hard for. I will not forget Jeff Mikula who has a job at Sparrow's Point but if that plant closed, he lose the benefits he has worked so hard for over the last 26 years. I will not forget McCall White, a retired steelworker, a proud veteran, who worked at Sparrow's point for nearly 40 years. It is for them and hundreds of thousands in similar situations that I will fight. I will fight to make sure legacy costs are addressed in a very serious way. How would the Rockefeller bill help steelworkers and retirees? This bill would help protect the U.S. steel industry and would provide health care and life insurance to steel retirees of those companies directly effected by unfair trade practices. This bill helps companies consolidate by addressing the liability costs that have served as barrier to the restructuring that many argue that is needed by this industry in order to be able to compete. At my hearing on the steel industry, I heard how restructuring would help to maintain a competitive U.S. steel industry, which is in the national interest and would preserve American jobs today and tomorrow good paying, American jobs. This bill would mean that promises made are promises kept. Steel retirees, their families and dependents would have the retirement security earned through decades of hard work and sacrifice. This bill would establish a health benefits program for retirees modeled on the most popular health care for Federal employees the Blue Cross/Blue Shield standard plan. This is not the Cadillac, gold-plated health plan that some claim these retirees have. These are the benefits that our steel workers worked hard for. Under this bill, any steelworker with at least 15 years of work in our nation's steel mills would have a basic health benefit package that they can count on. This bill would also provide a very modest death benefit of $5,000 to the widows of steel retirees. Who would this bill help? Now, there are now about 142,000 active steelworkers, but there are about 600,000 retirees counting on these benefits. By helping those with more than 15 years of hard work in our mills, this bill would help many of our Nation's active and retired steelworkers. In my own State of Maryland, 3,700 people work at the Bethlehem Steel Sparrows Point facility, but there are 23,000 retired steelworkers, widows and dependents. These workers and retirees deserve a basic health benefit package that they can rely on. I agree with President Bush when he said, ``Steel is an important job issue. It is also an important national security issue.'' We need to see the President join us on this issue in fighting for American jobs and for national security. A sound domestic steel industry is critical as we fight the war on terrorism. Steel builds our tanks, our planes and our ships. Bethlehem Steel produced the armor to repair the USS Cole. The policy of our government is to support producers when it is in the national interest. National interest means national responsibility. Congress voted for nearly $80 billion in farm support over the next 10 years. It is important to support farmers to make sure we have the producers to be food-independent. I voted for the bill that is now in conference, and I am happy to stand up for American farmers. Congress gave the airlines $15 billion after September 11 because of a national emergency. It was the right thing to do. Now, we need to stand up for steel. We need to have producers here in America to be steel-independent and be ready for national emergencies. Make no mistake: This is a national emergency for steel. Standing up for steel is in the national interest just like farmers, just like airlines. There is much to do to ensure that there is a viable U.S. steel industry. We need to make sure that the Section 201 tariffs are being implemented properly. Steel legacy costs are also a vital, necessary, crucial part of ensuring a viable U.S. steel industry. This is part of the comprehensive solution. We can not afford half-measures, not with a critical industry at the brink of collapse, not with the retirement security of hundreds of thousands at risk. I urge my colleagues to join us to protect American steel.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Madam President, I rise to pay tribute to the nation's premier men's college basketball team, the University of Maryland Terrapins. I am so proud that our Terps are our national champions. Their victory shows the hard work, perseverance and experience of an amazing team--and the support of an outstanding university. This resolution seeks to celebrate the Terps' victory. Our Terps have worked so hard to reach these heights, shaping college basketball history as they got here. They are led by a Terrapin who learned about much more than basketball as a student and graduate- assistant in five years at College Park. Coach Gary Williams is that Terrapin--a true leader, a true teacher, and a true Marylander at heart. As ACC Coach of the Year, Coach Williams led the Terps to the regular season ACC title, and their first national championship. But even more important, he has continue to shape the lives of the young men he coaches. He cares about his players on and off the court. That meant encouraging them in their studies as well as in their sport. He helped them understand the importance of getting their degrees. His success is shown in the fact that four of his players are serious--more than any of their competitors. These men include this year's dynamic senior class of Earl Badu, Byron Mouton, Lonny Baxter, and Juan Dixon. I am so proud of them because they will all graduate this year, proving that Coach Williams' philosophy of hard work on and off the court works here in Maryland. Their experience was a key factor in their victory. When Coach Williams recruits and teaches players, he doesn't always look for the flashiest prospects. He works with men he can make into champions. Our Terrapins show that championship spirit on and off the court. And that is what a Maryland education is all about. The Terrapins' court successes have mirrored the University of Maryland's rise to the pinnacle of the academic world. Our university is a national leader in science, engineering and business. The Terps had a perfect season during their last year at Cole Field House. The University of Maryland and the entire State is grateful for everything this basketball team has given us. I ask my colleagues to join me in commending the University of Maryland's Terrapins for being such great winners--both on and off the court.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I rise to introduce the Alzheimer's Disease Research, Prevention, and Care Act of 2002. I am pleased that Senator Kennedy and Senator Hutchinson are joining me as original cosponsors of this legislation. This bill expands and directs Alzheimer's disease research at the National Institutes of Health (NIH), and expands and reauthorizes the Alzheimer's Demonstration Grant Program. This important legislation gets behind our Nation's families, both in the lab and in the community. Alzheimer's disease is a devastating illness. Four million Americans including one in 10 people over age 65 and nearly half of those over 85, have Alzheimer's disease. The total annual Cost of Alzheimer's care in the United States today is at least $100 billion. As our population ages and baby-boomers become seniors, Alzheimer's disease will take an even greater toll. Unless science finds a way to prevent or cure Alzheimer's disease, 14 million people in the United States will have Alzheimer's disease by the year 2050. The race to find a cure is more urgent than ever. But these statistics do not begin to tell the story of what Alzheimer's means to families. My dear father suffered from Alzheimer's disease. My family and I watched him die one brain cell at a time. I know the pain that patients and families go through when Alzheimer's disease strikes. I believe that honor thy mother and father is not only a good commandment to live by, it is also a good policy to govern by. That's why I have introduced this legislation that meets the day-to-day needs of seniors and the long-range needs of our Nation. The Alzheimer's Disease Research, Prevention, and Care meets seniors' day-to-day needs by reauthorizing the Alzheimer's Demonstration Grant Program. The purpose of the program is to develop and replicate innovative ways to provide care to Alzheimer's patients that are traditionally hard to reach or undeserved. These grants enable States to provide support services like home care, respite care, and day care to Alzheimer's patients and their families. This legislation expands the Alzheimer's Demonstration Program by authorizing the funding needed to support these outstanding programs in every State. In my own State of Maryland, Alzheimer's Demonstration grants have been used to train workers at nursing homes and assisted living facilities to care for people with dementia. This training means that Alzheimer's patients will get high quality care when they leave their homes and enter a nursing home. And it means that families can rest assured that their mom or dad is safe and in good hands. This legislation also meets the long term needs of our aging Nation by expanding and directing Alzheimer's disease research at the National Institute on Aging. Our best shot at curbing the number of families who suffer from Alzheimer's disease is to find ways to prevent it before it starts. This bill authorizes the Alzheimer's Disease Prevention Initiative. The National Institute on Aging is currently conducting seven prevention trials. The Alzheimer's Disease Research, Prevention, and Care Act supports the National Institute on Aging's Prevention Initiative and directs the Institute to focus its efforts on identifying possible ways to prevent Alzheimer's and conducting clinical trials to test their effectiveness. Clinical trials can involve millions of dollars, tens of thousands of participants, and years or even decades. This bill establishes an Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative Study Group to improve and enhance the National Institute on Aging's ability to conduct several large scale, complex clinical trials simultaneously. Promising therapies should not have to wait to be tested until current trials are complete and resources are made available. This legislation authorizes a national consortium for cooperative clinical research at the National Institute on Aging to improve the existing clinical trial infrastructure, develop novel approaches to design these clinical trials, and make it easier to enroll patients. This bill directs the National Institute on Aging, in consultation with other relevant institutes, to conduct research on the early diagnosis and detection of Alzheimer's disease. As promising therapies become available that can delay the progression of Alzheimer's, new technologies are needed to detect and diagnose the disease before its symptoms strike. There is still much that is not known about the causes of Alzheimer's disease. In the last few years, for example, scientists have found that in stroke patients who later develop Alzheimer's disease, their dementia will worsen much more quickly than in Alzheimer's patients who have never had a stroke. This bill directs the National Institute on Aging to study this connection between vascular disease and Alzheimer's disease. Finding answers to questions about this connection will open new doors for researchers to explore promising ways to prevent and treat Alzheimer's disease. This legislation establishes a research program at the National Institute on Aging on ways to help caregivers of patients with Alzheimer's disease. Family caregiving comes at enormous physical, emotional, and financial sacrifice, which puts the whole system at risk. Three of four caregivers are women. One in eight Alzheimer caregivers becomes ill or injured as a direct result of caregiving, and older caregivers are three times more likely to become clinically depressed than others in their age group. Research is needed to find better ways to help caregivers bear this tremendous, at times overwhelming responsibility. Finally, this legislation increases the funding authorized for the National Institute on Aging to $1.5 billion in fiscal year 2003. Investments we make now in Alzheimer's Disease and aging research mean longer, healthier lives for all of us. If science can help us delay the onset of Alzheimer's by even 5 years, it would save this country billions of dollars--and would improve the lives of millions of families. I look forward to working with my colleagues to pass this important legislation that gets behind our nation's families. I ask unanimous consent that a letter of support from the Alzheimer's Association be printed in the Record.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I rise to introduce the Alzheimer's Disease Research, Prevention, and Care Act of 2002. I am pleased that Senator Kennedy and Senator Hutchinson are joining me as original cosponsors of this legislation. This bill expands and directs Alzheimer's disease research at the National Institutes of Health (NIH), and expands and reauthorizes the Alzheimer's Demonstration Grant Program. This important legislation gets behind our Nation's families, both in the lab and in the community. Alzheimer's disease is a devastating illness. Four million Americans including one in 10 people over age 65 and nearly half of those over 85, have Alzheimer's disease. The total annual Cost of Alzheimer's care in the United States today is at least $100 billion. As our population ages and baby-boomers become seniors, Alzheimer's disease will take an even greater toll. Unless science finds a way to prevent or cure Alzheimer's disease, 14 million people in the United States will have Alzheimer's disease by the year 2050. The race to find a cure is more urgent than ever. But these statistics do not begin to tell the story of what Alzheimer's means to families. My dear father suffered from Alzheimer's disease. My family and I watched him die one brain cell at a time. I know the pain that patients and families go through when Alzheimer's disease strikes. I believe that honor thy mother and father is not only a good commandment to live by, it is also a good policy to govern by. That's why I have introduced this legislation that meets the day-to-day needs of seniors and the long-range needs of our Nation. The Alzheimer's Disease Research, Prevention, and Care meets seniors' day-to-day needs by reauthorizing the Alzheimer's Demonstration Grant Program. The purpose of the program is to develop and replicate innovative ways to provide care to Alzheimer's patients that are traditionally hard to reach or undeserved. These grants enable States to provide support services like home care, respite care, and day care to Alzheimer's patients and their families. This legislation expands the Alzheimer's Demonstration Program by authorizing the funding needed to support these outstanding programs in every State. In my own State of Maryland, Alzheimer's Demonstration grants have been used to train workers at nursing homes and assisted living facilities to care for people with dementia. This training means that Alzheimer's patients will get high quality care when they leave their homes and enter a nursing home. And it means that families can rest assured that their mom or dad is safe and in good hands. This legislation also meets the long term needs of our aging Nation by expanding and directing Alzheimer's disease research at the National Institute on Aging. Our best shot at curbing the number of families who suffer from Alzheimer's disease is to find ways to prevent it before it starts. This bill authorizes the Alzheimer's Disease Prevention Initiative. The National Institute on Aging is currently conducting seven prevention trials. The Alzheimer's Disease Research, Prevention, and Care Act supports the National Institute on Aging's Prevention Initiative and directs the Institute to focus its efforts on identifying possible ways to prevent Alzheimer's and conducting clinical trials to test their effectiveness. Clinical trials can involve millions of dollars, tens of thousands of participants, and years or even decades. This bill establishes an Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative Study Group to improve and enhance the National Institute on Aging's ability to conduct several large scale, complex clinical trials simultaneously. Promising therapies should not have to wait to be tested until current trials are complete and resources are made available. This legislation authorizes a national consortium for cooperative clinical research at the National Institute on Aging to improve the existing clinical trial infrastructure, develop novel approaches to design these clinical trials, and make it easier to enroll patients. This bill directs the National Institute on Aging, in consultation with other relevant institutes, to conduct research on the early diagnosis and detection of Alzheimer's disease. As promising therapies become available that can delay the progression of Alzheimer's, new technologies are needed to detect and diagnose the disease before its symptoms strike. There is still much that is not known about the causes of Alzheimer's disease. In the last few years, for example, scientists have found that in stroke patients who later develop Alzheimer's disease, their dementia will worsen much more quickly than in Alzheimer's patients who have never had a stroke. This bill directs the National Institute on Aging to study this connection between vascular disease and Alzheimer's disease. Finding answers to questions about this connection will open new doors for researchers to explore promising ways to prevent and treat Alzheimer's disease. This legislation establishes a research program at the National Institute on Aging on ways to help caregivers of patients with Alzheimer's disease. Family caregiving comes at enormous physical, emotional, and financial sacrifice, which puts the whole system at risk. Three of four caregivers are women. One in eight Alzheimer caregivers becomes ill or injured as a direct result of caregiving, and older caregivers are three times more likely to become clinically depressed than others in their age group. Research is needed to find better ways to help caregivers bear this tremendous, at times overwhelming responsibility. Finally, this legislation increases the funding authorized for the National Institute on Aging to $1.5 billion in fiscal year 2003. Investments we make now in Alzheimer's Disease and aging research mean longer, healthier lives for all of us. If science can help us delay the onset of Alzheimer's by even 5 years, it would save this country billions of dollars--and would improve the lives of millions of families. I look forward to working with my colleagues to pass this important legislation that gets behind our nation's families. I ask unanimous consent that a letter of support from the Alzheimer's Association be printed in the Record.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I rise today to pay tribute to Maj. Gen. John S. Parker of the U.S. Army Medical Corps. Major General Parker has served our Nation for more than 39 years. He has distinguished himself and the Army Medical Command while serving in several positions of increasing responsibility. Major General Parker capped his illustrious career as Commander of the United States Army Medical Research and Material Command at Fort Detrick, MD. During his extraordinary military service, General Parker has shaped every part of the Army Medical Department, from direct patient care, training, personnel management, and installation management, to doctrine development, policymaking, research and medical product development. His mark on military medicine extends far beyond the Department of Defense and into the international community. We in the Senate saw the important work of Ft. Detrick in researching defenses against biological attacks when Senator Daschle received an anthrax-laden letter last October. Major General Parker's command responded by swiftly and accurately identifying the anthrax here on Capital Hill. Major General Parker's service embodies the best traditions our military services have to offer. This soldier, statesman, scientist, and commander has displayed the highest level of commitment to our most precious resource, America's armed forces. I thank John and his wife Julie for their tireless dedication to serving the United States and the Army. They have served our Nation with honor. I wish John and Julie well as they enter a new phase of their lives.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I rise as an enthusiastic cosponsor of the Levin-Bond amendment on these CAFE standards. Our amendment, I believe, provides a strategy for energy conservation while safeguarding American jobs. I believe in energy conservation. I believe it is an absolute national necessity. But I also believe in job conservation--American job conservation. I believe we can improve the fuel efficiency of our cars without sticking a knife through the hearts of our Nation's auto workers. I believe we can do it by applying four criteria. These are criteria I know the Presiding Officer has helped develop. We need to achieve real savings in oil consumption. We need to preserve U.S. jobs. And whatever we do must be realizable and achievable. That means giving companies a reasonable lead time to adjust their production, to develop, test, road test--not laboratory test--and implement new technologies. What works well in the lab doesn't always work so great on the beltway. We also have to create incentives to enable companies to achieve these goals. Incentives are a favorable tax policy. I don't believe the Kerry-McCain proposal meets those criteria, but I do believe the Levin- Bond amendment really does. In terms of the Kerry-McCain language, as I understand it, it will require a 50-percent increase in CAFE standards to reach 36 miles a gallon by the year 2015, enabling the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration to combine car and truck fleets into one category. You have to listen to that. It would combine car and truck fleets into one category--that means we take apples and oranges and say that fruit salad is the same--creating a single standard for both cars and trucks that would help foreign car manufacturers and penalize U.S. automobile workers for selling vehicles that we Americans are absolutely buying. Why would this help foreign car makers? When you look at the fuel mileage or the achievement in mileage, European and Japanese automobile companies in various categories roughly achieve the same fuel consumption standards, but foreign manufacturers sell many more small cars. They not only sell small cars, they sell microcars, those really little cars that look as if they are golf carts on wheels. Then when you include their SUVs and light trucks, their average fuel efficiency standard is lower--not because their SUV fuel efficiency standards are lower or that their light trucks are lower, it is because they sell more of these microcars. That is why they are able to comply with higher CAFE standards. I believe we do need conservation. There is no doubt we need to reduce our dependence on foreign oil. We all acknowledge that half of our oil is imported. A quarter of our oil is imported from the Persian Gulf. We know we need to reduce our dependence. But we could do it through the kinds of recommendations made in the Bond-Levin amendment. Before I go on to talk about Bond-Levin, let me talk a little bit about the Kerry-Hollings proposal. I know my colleagues have worked very hard on this, and we all share the same national goals. But how we get there I am not so sure is in the national interest. First, it is unfair to American workers because it gives foreign manufacturers a leg up in the middle of a recession. It is arbitrary, and it is also unattainable, setting very aggressive standards on too short of a time line. And it would limit consumer choice by effectively capping the sales of light trucks. There are other ways to achieve fuel conservation. I want to come back to the whole idea about foreign car companies producing smaller cars and that is what their customers buy. There is no doubt that Americans are buying these microcars. There is no doubt about it. They are usually younger or older or often a second car in the family. For middle-class families, though, they are not the core car. The core car is an SUV or a minivan. I will talk about that in a minute. When we talk about, again, achieving those standards, putting everybody and everything in the same category, quite frankly, it is like putting a bagel in with strawberries, and the strawberries are lower in calories and the bagel is not, and saying, we are going to have the average of calorie consumption. Do you follow that? Or raspberries. I think a lot about this amendment--some of it is raspberries. We need to recognize that over the past decade the U.S. car manufacturers have struggled to meet CAFE requirements across a full line of vehicles in both cars and trucks. American consumers are really obsessed with safety. This is why many of them are turning to a larger car. The Kerry-McCain amendment does effectively cap the sale of light trucks, since the default level for light trucks is not achieved by any light truck on the road today. Some people are talking about exempting the light trucks. I am for that. If there is a pickup truck waiver, I am going to vote for it. But very often that is a guy thing, though many women do drive light trucks. But most women are driving minivans and SUVs. A couple years ago, all we who hold elective office were very busy chasing the soccer mom. We wanted the soccer moms' vote. But while we were chasing the soccer moms, the soccer moms were chasing after car companies that made SUVs and minivans. And why do American women love SUVs and minivans? Because they need increased passenger capacity and they want increased safety. When you are a soccer mom and you are picking up the kids or you are carpooling or have kids with gear, such as the soccer kids, or the lacrosse kids or the ice-skating kids, they come with their own gear. Some children have backpacks as large as a marine going off to Afghanistan. Those mothers need large capacity. Do you know what else they need? They need passenger safety. They want to have a bulkier car in order to be able to protect their children on these highways and byways that we are now constructing. Anyone who rides the 495 beltway in Washington or 695 in Baltimore knows we face big trucks; we face road rage. Mothers want to be in the functional civilian equivalent of a Humvee. Why? Because they are scared. They are scared for their children and for their safety. So they go big and they go bulk. Do we approve of it? Would we like better fuel efficiency? The answer is, absolutely, yes. I know a lot about these minivans because General Motors makes two of them, the Chevy Astro and the GMC Safari, right in my hometown of Baltimore. Right this minute at Broening Highway in Baltimore, there are 1,600 employees working to produce these Astro and Safari vans. In 1 year they make 80,000 vehicles. That keeps 1,600 workers happy and 80,000 consumers happy. That 1,600 sounds like a lot of jobs. In 1978, we had 7,000 jobs. We have downsized. We have modernized. We have strategized. But we are down close to 6,000 jobs. I feel very close to these workers. I grew up 4 miles from this plant. My dad had a grocery store. People who worked at General Motors and Bethlehem Steel were not units of production or those who have to give way to displacements in the info age. They were our neighbors; they are our neighbors. What did we know about the General Motors plant? It was a union job. We knew it offered a good job at good wages and good benefits. We knew they were good neighbors because they sponsored the little leagues and were one of the largest contributors to the United Fund to be able to help others who didn't quite have the good jobs and the good wages that they did. For our working men, they could actually go to work and not only put in an honest day but get a fair pay back to be able to raise their families and pursue the American dream. In my hometown of Baltimore among African-American men, when I grew up, Baltimore was a segregated town. But down there at the steel mill in the UAW line, it is where African-American men went to get a decent job. If you were an African-American male in Baltimore, you had two choices where you could have a decent job, decent benefits, and a chance to be able to move up. It was either a civil servant job, such as at the post office, or it was a union job, such as at General Motors. As more and more women came into the workplace, again, for many women, General Motors was the place to go. We employed the ``Norma Raes'' of automobile manufacturing. We are talking about honest Americans who get up and work hard every day. They wanted the American dream, and they had opportunities. People with European ethnic heritage and people with African-American heritage had a chance to work hard and move up. Many of them had a chance to go on to higher education, and their children did also. But we now have these 1,600, and when this goes, it goes. When this goes, it really goes. There is nothing else there. We can talk about digital harbor or smokestacks and cyberstacks, and we can be cute and clever; but when this goes, it goes forever. Now, I am on this floor fighting for those people. Do you know why? Their sons are actually the ones who went to Vietnam, the ones who were in Desert Storm, and the ones who are in Afghanistan. During the Vietnam war, there was no draft counseling in that line. Every time America calls, these kinds of workers step forward. Often, their brothers are our firefighters and our police. These are the ordinary Americans who, every day, are willing to step up. So while we are talking about hybrids, and while we can nibble at our sushi and talk about the future that is going to be ozone-ready, we have to think about who is going to work in this country and where they are going to work. Do we want to give up on our manufacturing base? I don't think so, and I hope not. Whether it is in Detroit, or Maryland, or whether it is other States that employ them--and we are happy to have the Hondas. I have a UAW plant up in western Maryland that is now part-owned by Volvo. We are happy to have them because they honor their contracts. But I think we ought to start honoring our contract. We ought to have a contract with the American workers. There is something about America we need to remember: That as we defend America from foreign foes, we need to defend America from the loss of jobs to foreign imports, or to something called CAFE, or let's put everybody in the same pot and measure the standards in the same way. Mr. President, 1,000 workers were recently laid off at General Motors on a temporary shutdown because of a lot of this. I could go on about those workers, but I think I have made my point. Just remember, when these jobs go, they go, and they will never come back. While we are so busy putting everything on a fast track to Mexico, I will tell you that they go to Mexico first, and then they find Mexico too expensive and they go to Central America, and then they go on to China. So we have to start making some tough choices. We could go on to talk about the other issues, but I know we also need to look at the other alternative. I believe the Levin-Bond amendment is a very sensible alternative. It really works to reduce our dependence on foreign oil, but it also insists that we look at the effect on U.S. employment; that we look at motor vehicle safety; that we look at the cost and lead time for the introduction of new technology. I believe new technologies will help us lead the way. I think it also gives us an open-ended dodge ball kind of situation because it gives two dates and time lines to the Department of Transportation. It says we have to increase standards for light trucks in 15 months. It says for passenger cars we have to have a rule within 6 months. It also separates out standards for cars and light-duty trucks. Remember, this is one of the crucial aspects of this amendment. It separates out the standards for cars and light-duty trucks. We can compete with anybody in the world. But where you have a disproportionate thing going on in the market, it renders us almost helpless. The automakers such as DaimlerChrysler have a fleet that is roughly 70 percent light trucks, while manufacturers such as Honda have a fleet that is less than 30 percent light trucks. I believe the Levin-Bond amendment does it very well. We need tax incentives on electric vehicles, fuel cell vehicles, and hybrid electric vehicles. Everybody likes them. I will see if they work over time. I have seen a lot of these kinds of cars come and go. Some work very well, some sputter and end up in a junkyard clutter. I don't know where they will go, but I will give them the benefit of the doubt. I want to see the technologies road tested more before they are introduced. I know others want to speak. I believe we can have energy conservation and job conservation, innovative solutions, improved technology, and the setting of realistic goals. That is what Levin-Bond does. When you look at Levin-Bond, you see that it saves energy, jobs, and it saves lives. For those now who are speaking in the Chamber so passionately about energy independence and why it is in our national security interest, I hope we talk about trade adjustment and start standing up for steel and what we need to do to make sure we are steel- independent. I hope we have the same passion in standing up for our steelworkers. I am going to stand up for those hardhats every day any way I can, whether it is in the automobile industry, or whether it is in the steel industry, and so on. For all of those men and women who, every day, at plant gates shook my hand--and their hands were calloused, and they would go home with bad backs and varicose veins--Barbara Mikulski is on their side, and I hope the rest of the Senate is also.