Barbara Mikulski

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, last Sunday, I joined hundreds of thousands of Americans in marching in support of common-sense gun safety laws. Today we're trying to show that these marchers made a difference. We can either listen to the mothers and fathers who marched with their feet--or we can listen to the gun lobby--who march with their dollars. The Daschle amendment says that we're listening to the Million Mom marchers. It merely calls on the Congress to do it's job--to convene the Juvenile Justice Conference and pass common-sense gun safety laws. Since I've been in Congress I have fought for gun control and gun safety. We passed the Brady bill--which requires a 5-day waiting period so there can be background checks of gun purchasers. This law has stopped 242,000 felons from buying guns. We fought to ban certain types of semi-automatic assault weapons and cop killer bullets. For ten months, our gun safety proposals have been in legislative limbo. The Senate passed the Juvenile Justice Bill in July 1999. Since then, the Republican leadership has refused to let us move the bill forward. During this time, we've seen 3,600 children die from gun violence. We've seen twelve children die every day from gunfire. In Maryland, we've mourned the death of over 100 children a year. In Maryland we saw a crazed man steal five guns--and murder four people--before holding a family and a community hostage. The Juvenile Justice bill includes common-sense gun safety provisions. It would close the gun show loophole--by requiring background checks for all guns bought at gun shows. It would require gun safety locks to be sold with new guns. It would close the loophole in the law that permits the importation and possession of high-capacity ammunition clips. It would keep guns out of the hands of serious juvenile offenders by banning gun sales to juveniles with violent crime records. Finally, it would ban juvenile possession of semi-automatic assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition clips. The State of Maryland is the national leader in gun safety. I commend Governor Glendenning and the Maryland General Assembly for passing path-breaking gun safety legislation. The new Maryland law will require built-in child safety locks on new hand guns; ballistics testing for new guns--to help law enforcement and safety training for new gun purchasers. This legislation is the first of its kind in the Nation. It will save lives. The United States Congress should follow Maryland's lead--and enact common-sense gun safety legislation. Mr. President: I was so proud to join thousands of Marylanders in the Million Mom March. Let's show that the march mattered. Let's make democracy work--and pass the Daschle amendment.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, will the Senator from Massachusetts withhold? May I have 1 minute?

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I thank the Senator for her leadership and her advocacy on this issue. I was so proud to march with her on The Mall with the mothers and the fathers and the good men who supported the women. We were proud. Why were we proud? Because the people marching believed marching made a difference. They thought if they could go out and march with their feet instead of people marching with their money into these lobbying events that are held here, they could make a difference. I thank the Senator for responding to their marching feet. I stand with her, along with the people who were there from Maryland. I congratulate her because we are making democracy work. If we don't march on this floor and pass this amendment, I really say to the voters of America, march into the voting booth and get a Congress that will respond to marching feet instead of marching to millions of dollars.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, this is an exceptionally difficult decision. But after weighing the pros and cons of this legislation, I rise to support the Trade and Development Act. It is high time that we address economic growth in Africa and the Caribbean. Africa, in particular, has been ignored for far too long. I would like to support this effort to encourage economic growth, investment and trade in the region while recognizing that this effort alone is not enough. It should only be a small piece of our policy in Africa. Much more must be done. I have considered the impact this measure will have on American workers. I am a blue-collar Senator. My heart and soul lies with blue- collar America. I spent most of my life in a blue-collar neighborhood. My career in public service is one of deep commitment to working-class people. I have fought and continue to fight for economic growth, jobs and opportunities in America--in particular--in my own State of Maryland. And in the last decade, working people have faced the loss of jobs, lower wages and a reduced standard of living, and a shrinking manufacturing base--everything that the critics say. But voting against the Trade and Development Act will not save those jobs or bring those jobs back. I also care about working-class people all over the world. I applaud my colleagues for uniting to pass Senator Harkin's amendment to meet and enforce internationally recognized standards that eliminate the worst forms of child labor. Countries can only enjoy the benefits granted under this Act if they take action to eliminate work that harms the health, safety or morals of children. Benefits will not be given to sub-Saharan or Caribbean countries that carry out hazardous child labor practices, such as slavery, debt bondage, forced or compulsory labor, child prostitution or drug trafficking. This effort is especially relevant to this trade legislation because out of the 250 million children between the ages of 5 and 14 who are working in the developing world--one-third are in Africa. This Act could have been further strengthened. I supported other amendments toward that aim, which were not incorporated into this legislation. I see several yellow flashing lights that we cannot ignore and we must address with our trading partners in sub-Saharan Africa and the Caribbean. Even though the worst forms of child labor were addressed in this legislation, additional efforts still need to be undertaken to protect the rights, welfare, health and safety of all workers. I supported amendments offered by my colleagues to ensure the enforcement of internationally recognized core labor standards and to establish a labor side agreement before this legislation could go into effect. Neither amendment was adopted. Furthermore, much more needs to be done to protect our environment. Dangerous or haphazard practices that damage the environment in sub- Saharan African or the Caribbean not only harm territory within these regions--it affects all of us. We cannot continue to ignore the environment in trade agreements. We must find a way to ensure that economic growth does not come at the expense of the environment. In addition, much more must be done to provide debt relief to Africa and to prevent and address the HIV/AIDS crisis plaguing the region. Taking into account these considerations, I still believe that we have a unique opportunity to support legislation that works toward free trade and fair trade. This Act strives to create economic growth, jobs and opportunities in sub-Saharan Africa and the Caribbean. It encourages African nations to compete and to institute market-oriented economic reforms. It also works to strengthen America's economy and to create American jobs by increasing US exports and investment to these regions. I agree that the Trade and Development Act as it stands does not encompass numerous other measures that America needs to undertake with respect to Africa and the Caribbean. But it is a courageous first-step and it merits our support.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I rise to pay tribute to the life of Myra Lenard. She was a daughter of Polonia who played an important role in the life of America. Myra Lenard was born in Poland and immigrated to America as a young girl. Like so many new Americans--she embraced her new country while never forgetting her homeland. Myra had a long career as a successful business woman and community volunteer. I got to know her because of our shared commitment to our proud Polish heritage. As the executive director of the Polish American Congress, she was one of our strongest voices for the people of Poland who were forced behind the Iron Curtain. We worked together to provide humanitarian relief and to support the growing democracy movement. She was one of Solidarity's best friends in America. During the darkest days of martial law in Poland, Myra led the Polish American Congress' ``Solidarity Convoy,'' in which 32 container trucks provided $10 million worth of supplies for the suffering people of Poland. This showed the Polish people that they were not alone. When Poland became free, Myra began her tireless efforts to rebuild Poland and to enable it to take its rightful place among Western democratic nations. This effort didn't begin in 1998--when the issue started to make headlines. It began in 1989, when Congress passed legislation to provide assistance to the new democracies of central Europe. It was a long process of educating Congress and the American people on how Poland's membership in NATO would contribute to America's security. Myra was there every step of the way. She was gentle but extremely persuasive. She was creative in tapping into the energy of the Polish American community who understand the history, and cared so deeply. Myra Lenard's life was a triumph. Her legacy is her family, as well as the deep friendship and alliance between the United States and a free, democratic Poland. I will miss her friendship and her counsel. Her beloved husband Cas and their children are in my thoughts and prayers.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I rise today to support the conference report on satellite reform. As a co-sponsor of the original bill, I believe this bi-partisan legislation will encourage more competition in the satellite communications market. This will benefit American consumers and workers. It will also make America more competitive in the global satellite market. The Open-market Reorganization for the Betterment of International Telecommunications Act (ORBIT bill) will benefit our nation in a number of ways. First, the bill allows Lockheed Martin to acquire 100% of COMSAT Corporation by removing a number of old and outdated regulatory barriers. This is great news for these two outstanding Maryland companies and their employees. The merger will encourage growth and economic competition in one of the most dynamic sectors of our economy--the global satellite market. It means jobs today and jobs tomorrow--both in Maryland and throughout our nation. I look forward to Lockheed Martin and COMSAT completing their merger without any further delay. Second, this legislation encourages the privatization of INTELSAT, an inter-governmental organization, by including the leverage necessary to ensure that INTELSAT's privatization will conclude in a timely and pro- competitive manner. Third, the conference agreement also reaffirms the ability of carriers to obtain Level III direct access. Level III direct access allows customers to enter into contractual agreements with INTELSAT to order, receive and pay for INTELSAT space segment capacity at the same rate that INTELSAT charges its signatories. This means that users of INTELSAT services will be able to purchase services directly from INTELSAT without going through COMSAT. Fourth, the bill does not remove the current prohibition on Level IV direct access until after INTELSAT privatizes. Allowing Level IV access before privatization would have unfairly and unjustly permitted COMSAT's competitors to buy all of COMSAT's investment in INTELSAT below market value which would have weakened the value of this international asset. This would have significantly diminished the value of the Lockheed-COMSAT transaction. I commend my colleagues on both sides of the aisle in the Senate and in the House for passing S. 376 and commend the President for signing this important legislation into law.

Ms. MIKULSKI

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

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, the amendment is very simple. It states it is the sense of the Senate that the Federal budget will provide the framework and the funding necessary to ensure that all Americans cross the digital divide. The goal of the legislation is to ensure that every child is computer literate by the eighth grade, regardless of race, ethnicity, income, gender, geography, or disability. It is the single most empowering tool we could pass this year. This amendment would increase funds for teacher training and school technology, create 1,000 community-based tech centers, strengthen tax incentives for public-private partnerships, create an e-Corps within AmeriCorps, and be able to make wise and prudent use of Federal funds. It will be absolutely crucial to get our children ready to be able to leapfrog into the future and participate in the new economy. Mr. President, I really do hope the Senate will adopt this. If we could come to an agreement on a voice vote to accept it, I would be delighted and not insist on a rollcall vote. I yield the floor.

Ms. MIKULSKI. That is absolutely correct.

Ms. MIKULSKI. I thank the Senator.

Ms. MIKULSKI. I move to reconsider the vote.

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I call up amendment No. 2956, a sense- of-the-Senate resolution on the necessary budget funding to cross the digital divide.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Parliamentary inquiry to my Democratic whip: Am I offering my amendment now or only speaking on it?

Ms. MIKULSKI. Thank you, Mr. President. What I was talking about was that if you have access to technology and access to those who can teach you technology, your future as a person, a community, and even our country, is bright. But if you are on the wrong side of the divide and don't have access to technology, and will never know how to learn to use technology, your future is quite dismal and, as a person, you could end up functionally obsolete in the United States of America. The Presiding Officer comes from the State of Washington, which is one of the most robust, high-tech States in the United States of America. He knows from his conversations with those tech tycoons that what we are facing in the United States of America is a workforce shortage of people who know how to use technology. Also, not only in the new ``dot-coms'' or the new ``dot-commers,'' what we also face is a skill shortage, even in the old economy. In my own hometown of Baltimore, where they make steel or build automobiles, we have gone from smokestacks to ``cyberstacks.'' Walk with me along the minivan plant in Baltimore or come with me in the steaming steelmills of Baltimore, and you will see steelworkers and automobile workers are now tech workers. I want to be sure that every person in the United States of America is ready for that new economy. That is why we want to emphasize K through 12. We will practice the basics from K through 12. We are going to ensure that no child is left out or left behind in this new economy. We want to practice in the budget the ABCs. We want to make sure there is universal access to technology in schools, libraries, and community centers. We want to practice the ``B'' which is the ``best'' trained teachers. We also want to practice a ``C'' called ``computer'' literacy for every child by the time they finish the eighth grade. Those are our national goals. That is what I hope we are able to do. But in order to do that, we have to put our resources with our national commitment. First of all, I truly believe that the Government cannot do this alone. That is why an amendment I will be offering later on will put aside $200 million in tax incentives to encourage public-private partnership. Why is this important? Because the Government can't do it alone. The private sector is already doing important, exciting work, and improving access to technology. But technology empowerment can't be limited to a few ZIP Codes, or recycled factories, where great work is being done in my own hometown. We need to encourage private sector donations of high- quality technology, sponsorship of community centers, and the sponsorship of training. I have seen many examples in my own hometown. While we look forward to providing technology, one of the most important things is to make sure our teachers are trained. If our teachers are not trained, our technology could end up in closets and our children could be left not learning what they need to learn. The budget amendment calls for $600 million for teacher training. Everywhere I go, teachers tell me they want to help their students cross the digital divide. But they need the training to do this. Technology without training is a hollow opportunity. In my own home State of Maryland, the superintendent of public education established what we call a ``tech academy'' so that public schoolteachers could come from across the State to learn how to use this. Guess what. Six hundred teachers came and 400 had to be turned away. We now have an incredible waiting list. No teacher should have to stand in line to learn how to use technology so they can teach children how to use technology. This is why we want to make sure that young people coming up in our teacher schools learn technology. Those teachers who are the fourth grade reading specialists should know as much about technology as some computer whiz. In addition to that, our amendment provides access--$400 million--for school technology and school libraries, for hardware and software technology everywhere. We want to make sure our school libraries are high-tech media centers. Why is this important? In my own community, in some schools we have a ratio of one computer per five children. To the Senator from Georgia, I would note that in some of our private schools it will be mandated that every child come with a laptop. But I say to my colleague and others who are listening, if you are a poor child, it is more likely you live in a poor neighborhood. The poor neighborhood has poorer schools. They do not have technology in their classroom or a media center in their library. Please, in the United States of America, with all the money we are going to spend in this budget, let's put $400 million to be sure our schools and our libraries do have the hardware and software where they need it. Our children don't only learn in schools and in libraries, though those are crucial places. Many of them learn out in the community. This is why our amendment will provide $100 million to create 1,000 community technology centers. Community leaders have told me that we need to bring technology to where the children learn. They don't learn only in schools; they learn in communities. I saw for myself what technology meant to a community center at a public housing project. The adults learned technology during the day and the children learned technology through structured afterschool activities sponsored by the Boys and Girls Clubs in the afternoon. In my own town of Baltimore, I spoke to the Urban League to see what they were doing to help get our children ready for the future. They told me they had to forage for funds, and there was not one Federal dollar available to help the Urban League help those children get ready for the future. Certainly, if we can spend $18,000 a year on one person in prison, we can spend the money to create 1,000 community centers to keep our children in school and get ready for the new economy. Mr. President, in addition to that, speaking of the Boys and Girls Clubs, we are including in our amendment Senator Biden's excellent proposal to provide $20 million to place computers and trained personnel in those Boys and Girls Clubs. What a tremendous opportunity. In April we are celebrating Boys and Girls Clubs Month. There are great alumni from the Boys and Girls Club. Michael Jordan is one; President Bill Clinton went to one when his mother worked as a nurse and the Boys and Girls Clubs was one of his afterschool activities. Boys and Girls Clubs have been training and helping young people stay on the right track for a number of years. We not only want to teach them about hoop dreams; we want to team them about technology. This is why this is so crucial. We will also provide $25 million to create an e-Corps within AmeriCorps. This will provide funds for 2,000 volunteers to teach technology in their schools and community centers. In addition, we want to make sure we provide private sector deployment of broadband networks in underserved urban and rural communities. We need these funds to build the super information highway with on and off ramps for all. I have in my State the Mountain Counties, a nice tourism word for Appalachia. With the old economy fading in coal mining and without the railroad jobs and so on, we are trying to create a super information highway there. Guess what. If you are a constituent in Cumberland, your on and off ramp is in Pittsburgh. This makes service slow and unreliable. It slows down e-commerce and prevents new jobs from coming to an area that badly needs them. These funds will be used to help the private sector bring the super information highway to every corner. We need to test new ways to bring technology into the home, with innovative applications. We need to look out for Native Americans. We are living in a very exciting time. The opportunities are tremendous to use technology to improve our lives, to use technology to remove the barriers caused by income, race, ethnicity, or geography. If we can help every one of our children and make sure they cross this digital divide, this will be the most important legislation this United States can pass. It will be as important as the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Technology is the tool, but empowerment is the outcome. It could mean, through the work we do here, the death of distance as a barrier for economic development. But it also could mean the death of discrimination because poor children and children of color would be able to leapfrog into the future. My amendment takes the Federal dollars and makes public investments in our schools, our community-based organizations, our libraries, our teachers, and, most of all, our children. At the right time, I will be offering my amendment. That is, indeed, a brief summary of this amendment. Obviously, this isn't the most compelling thing on Senators' minds, and it is disappointing I have had to speak in an environment where everybody else's conversation was more important than the person speaking. That is OK because deep down I know America is listening. Deep down, I know this is a very important coalition issue. It brings people together of all different geographies, rural and urban, whether poor white or a child from a family of African, Latino, or Native American background. It also means if you are disabled, you will be able to learn the tools needed to ensure, though you might have a physical disability, you will not have barriers. This amendment is about hope. This amendment is about opportunity. This amendment is about one more rung on the opportunity ladder of the United States of America. I think it has broad-based appeal on a bipartisan basis. I hope when the time comes to offer my amendment and when we have a rollcall vote, the men and women of the Senate will vote to ensure that our children can have a future and many children can leapfrog into the future, leaving behind the legacies of poverty. I yield the floor.

Ms. MIKULSKI. I am ready to do it anyway. Thanks to you and the Democratic leadership, President Bill Clinton, and Al Gore, we are talking about a plan to cross the digital divide. A few minutes earlier, Senator Chuck Robb of Virginia spoke eloquently and persuasively about how we needed to deal with the problem of wiring schools in the United States. I absolutely support that Robb amendment because we have schools that are deteriorating, and they are in such bad shape we can't wire them for the Internet. While we are creating a new physical infrastructure for our schools, we also need to look to the future. We want to help our children by making sure that public education gets them ready for the new future and a new economy. This is why I believe very strongly that no child in the United States of America should ever face the digital divide. What is the digital divide? The divide is between those who have access to technology and who have access to learning and how to use the technology. If you are on the right side and have access to technology, and access to those who will teach you how to use it, both as a person and a community, you will feel very empowered and have a bright future. But if you are on the wrong side of the divide, where you don't have access to technology--Mr. President, the Senate is not in order.

Ms. MIKULSKI. I understand there was confusion. I was yielded 30 minutes, and I have consumed 16 minutes. I yield my 14 minutes back to the Democratic whip to use such time as he deems appropriate.

Ms. MIKULSKI. If people want to argue about who has the floor, they can go off the floor and continue those arguments. Mr. President, I would like, if we are going to have exchanges----

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I have the floor. I in no way mean to have sharp elbows with the Senator from Alaska. I was only trying to get order to continue my presentation.

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I have the floor.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I rise on an issue of critical importance to seniors in Maryland and across the United States. That issue is the need for Medicare coverage of prescription drugs. ``Honor your father and mother'' is not only a good commandment to live by, it is a good public policy to govern by. It should be a priority not only in the federal law books, but in the federal checkbook. And I believe that providing a Medicare drug benefit is a perfect way of honoring our fathers and mothers. That is why I'm proud to stand in support of Senator Robb's amendment, which says that a Medicare drug benefit is more important than tax cuts. The Medicare Program has been a tremendous success story. It has reduced poverty among the elderly by almost two-thirds since it was created in 1965. But the world has changed in the last 35 years. In 1965, people feared the costs of hospitalization. One major illness, which years ago often resulted in a hospital stay of several weeks or even months, could bankrupt many families. Today, people fear the costs of chronic care. They need help with the costs of prescription drugs that control chronic conditions and keep people out of the hospital. Many of these life-saving medicines are the result of American medical science and breakthroughs made in this country. I feel very strongly that all Americans should have access to those breakthroughs. We must act now to ensure that they do. In my home state of Maryland, almost 560,000 seniors rely on Medicare. That number is likely to increase to more than 1 million people by the year 2025. Unfortunately, 3 in every 4 of those seniors does not have decent, dependable private sector drug coverage today. At least one-third don't have any drug coverage at all, and their options for getting coverage are limited. Joining a Medicare HMO is an option for some, but not for seniors in the 17 rural counties of my state. And the other alternative, which is buying a Medigap policy, is expensive. The monthly premium for a policy with drug benefits averages about $136 nationwide, which means that Medigap policies are out of reach for many. One of the most important things I do as a United States Senator is listen to the people and the stories of their lives. And the problems people are having getting the drugs they need is something I've heard a lot about lately. In the last 6 months, I've gotten more than 200 letters and literally thousands of telephone calls from seniors and their families about the hardships that the high cost of prescription drugs and lack of insurance coverage are causing them. For example, an 84 year old woman from the Eastern Shore who is blind and has diabetes told me that she takes 11 medicines every day and is spending $275 of her $800 monthly income on prescription drugs. The son of a 91 year old woman wrote me to say that his mother spends one-third of her income on her medications, and often takes her daily medicine every other day to make it last longer. This is simply unacceptable. Prescription medicines are now an essential part of modern medicine, and are an essential thread that must be woven into the safety net for seniors. Thanks to the leadership of Senator Daschle, Senate Democrats have come together to agree on basic principles that should serve as a blueprint for action. We have agreed that a Medicare drug benefit should be: 1. Voluntary: Medicare beneficiaries who now have dependable, affordable prescription drug coverage should be able to stick with what they've got. 2. Accessible: A hallmark of Medicare is that all beneficiaries have access to dependable health care. The same should hold true of a prescription drug benefit. 3. Meaningful: A Medicare drug benefit should make a difference in the lives of seniors by helping protect them from excessive out-of- pocket costs. 4. Affordable: The benefit should be affordable both for beneficiaries and for the Medicare program. Medicare should contribute enough toward the prescription drug premium to make it affordable and attractive for all beneficiaries and to ensure the viability of the benefit. Low-income beneficiaries should receive extra help with prescription drug premiums and cost sharing. This amendment simply says that we must provide a Medicare prescription drug benefit before we provide tax cuts. And I think that shows that we've got our priorities in the right order. The constituents who have written and called me to ask why they or their parents can't get the medicines they need don't want to hear about a tax cut. They want to hear that Medicare covers prescription drugs. That's why I will continue to fight to make access to prescription medicines a reality for seniors in Maryland and across the nation, and why I urge my colleagues to join me in support of Senator Robb's amendment. Thank you.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I rise as a proud cosponsor of this important amendment for women who are diagnosed with breast and cervical cancer through the National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program (NBCCEDP) at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). I am pleased to join Senators Chafee, Snowe, Grassley, Harkin, and others in support of this amendment. This amendment says that we Senators believe that we should pass legislation to provide Medicaid coverage for certain women screened and found to have breast or cervical cancer under the CDC screening program. Through March 31, 1999, the CDC screening program has provided more than one million mammograms and almost 1.2 million Pap tests. Among the women screened, over 6,200 cases of breast cancer and over 550 cases of cervical cancer have been diagnosed. Right now, the CDC screening program does not pay for breast and cervical cancer treatment services, but it does require participating states to provide treatment services. The late Senator John Chafee, Senator Snowe, Senator Moynihan, and I along with others introduced the Breast and Cervical Cancer Treatment Act of 1999 (S. 662) which currently has 57 cosponsors. This bill gives states the option to provide Medicaid coverage for breast and cervical cancer treatment to eligible women who were screened and diagnosed with these cancers through the CDC screening program. It is not a mandate for states. It is the Federal Government saying to the States ``we will help you provide treatment services to these women, if you decide to do so.'' I am pleased to be working with the bipartisan team of Senators Lincoln Chafee, Snowe, Grassley, and Moynihan to pass this important legislation. Women screened and diagnosed through the CDC screening program depend on staff and volunteer time to find free or more affordable treatment; they depend on the generosity of doctors, nurses, hospitals, and clinics who provide them with free or reduced-cost treatment. The demands of managed care can also make it more difficult for physicians to provide free or reduced-fee services. In the end, thousands of people who run local screening programs are spending countless hours finding treatment services for women diagnosed with breast and cervical cancer. I salute the individuals who spend their time and resources to help these women. But we must not force these women to rely on the goodwill of others. Right now, the CDC is only screening 12-15 percent of the women who are eligible. As more women are screened, treatment efforts will become even more difficult. The lack of coverage for treatment services has hurt the program's ability to recruit providers, further restricting the number of women screened. In short, it is clear that the short-term, ad-hoc strategies of providing treatment have broken down. Because there is no coverage for treatment, state programs are having a hard time recruiting providers; volunteers are spending a disproportionate amount of time finding treatment for women; and fewer women are receiving treatment. We can't expand the program to serve the other 85 percent of eligible women if we can't promise treatment to those we already screen. The CDC screening program is celebrating its 10th anniversary in 2000. I am proud to be the Senate architect of the legislation that created the breast and cervical cancer screening program at the CDC. Over ten years ago we saw a need--low-income women were not receiving basic well-woman care--they were not getting their mammograms and Pap smears to detect breast and cervical cancer. At that time, I and others wanted to ensure that we not only diagnosed these low-income women with breast and cervical cancer, but that we also provided treatment for those cancers. But 10 years ago, we had great deficits and we simply did not have the money for a treatment component of the CDC screening program. So we made a down payment. We took the first step with the belief that it would not be the only step. Well, now the time has come to take the next step and include Federal resources for treatment for women who are diagnosed with breast and cervical cancer through the CDC screening program. There are three reasons why we should act now to pass this important legislation. First, times have changed since the creation of the CDC screening program ten years ago. We are now running annual surpluses, instead of annual deficits. We have the resources to provide treatment to these women. I think we ought to put our money into ensuring that we save lives. Second, prevention, screening, and early detection are very important, but alone they do not stop deaths. Screening must be coupled with treatment to reduce cancer mortality. Finally, it is only right to provide Federal resources to treat breast and cervical cancer for those screened and diagnosed with these cancers through a Federal screening program. I am proud that my own state of Maryland realized the importance of providing treatment services to women who were screened through the CDC screening program. Maryland appropriates over $6 million in state funds annually for the Breast and Cervical Cancer Diagnostic and Treatment Program for eligible low income Maryland women. The program has provided services to over 15,650 women in Maryland, including eligible women screened through the CDC screening program and eligible women screened outside the CDC program. The breast cancer mortality rate in Maryland has started to decline, in part because of programs like the CDC's. But not all states have the resources to do what Maryland has done. That's why this bill is needed. This bill is the best long-term solution. It is strongly supported by the National Breast Cancer Coalition; the American Cancer Society; the National Association of Public Hospitals and Health Systems; the National Partnership for Women and Families; YWCA; National Women's Health Network; the American Medical Women's Association, and many more. I urge the Senate Finance Committee to take up this legislation before Mother's Day and I urge the Senate leadership to promptly bring it to the full Senate for consideration. The Breast and Cervical Cancer Treatment Act (S. 662) has 57 bipartisan cosponsors. President Clinton has included funding in his 2001 budget to give states the option of providing Medicaid coverage to women who have been diagnosed with breast or cervical cancer through the CDC screening program. The Commerce Committee of the House of Representatives has already unanimously approved this legislation (H. R. 1070). We must act now to provide a treatment opportunity to all women who are diagnosed with breast or cervical cancer through the CDC screening program. Breast and cervical cancer treatment is not a partisan issue. It's a family issue. It affects mothers, sisters, and daughters, and their fathers, husbands, and children. I can't think of any better way to celebrate the 10th anniversary of the National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program than by passing the Breast and Cervical Cancer Treatment Act. I urge my colleagues to join me in support of this important amendment.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President. I oppose the burning of our Nation's flag. I oppose it today as I always have. I am deeply concerned about the desecration of the United States flag because of what it says about our culture, our values and our patriotism. Our flag is the lasting symbol of America. To me, every thread in every American flag represents individuals who have laid down their lives in the name of freedom and democracy. Yet I cannot support an Amendment to the United States Constitution which would, for the first time in our nation's history, narrow the reach of the First Amendment guarantee of freedom of speech. Instead of expanding the rights of Americans, this Amendment would constrict the freedoms which we fought so hard to win. Instead, we should enact legislation that accomplishes the same goal--without trampling on our fundamental American rights. I have voted several times for legislation that would have provided protection of the flag through a statute, rather than a Constitutional amendment. Senator McConnell offered an alternative that sought to create a statutory solution that could have passed the muster of the Supreme Court. The McConnell amendment would have provided for fines or imprisonment for anyone who destroys a flag with the intent to incite violence or breach of peace. This amendment would have protected both our flag and our Constitution. I'm disappointed that it did not pass. Our flag is a symbol of the principles that have kept our country strong and free. When we think of our flag, we think of everything that is good about this country--patriotism, courage, loyalty, duty and honor. Our responsibility is to live up to these standards--and to foster a new sense of citizenship and a new sense of duty. We should honor our flag by rekindling these principles--not by amending our Constitution.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Today, I introduce the Digital Empowerment Act. The goal of this legislation is to ensure that every child is computer literate by the eighth grade regardless of race, ethnicity, income, gender, geography, or disability. Yesterday, the Senate's Education Committee voted for my amendment to establish this as our national goal. This vote was taken on a bipartisan basis and was unanimous. Today, I am introducing this legislation to make this goal a reality. This bill has been a team effort. I reached out to the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, the Congressional Black Caucus, to my colleagues, the people throughout Maryland, ministers in Baltimore, business leaders, educators, and political leadership. Why? It is because a digital divide exists in America. Those who have access to technology and know how to use it will be ready for the new digital economy. Those who don't will be left out and left behind. Low-income urban and rural families are less likely to have access to the Internet and computers. Black and Hispanic families are only two- fifths as likely to have Internet access as their white counterparts. Some schools have 10 computers in every classroom. In other schools, there are 200 students who share one computer. The private sector is doing important and exciting work, such as Power Up from AOL, but technology empowerment can't be limited to a few zip codes. What we need is a national policy and national programs. Mr. President, I believe the best antipoverty program is an education. If we practice the ABCs, we will ensure that our children have a good education and will cross this digital divide. Crossing the digital divide is about technology and about children having access to technology. It is about teachers knowing how to teach children the tools of technology so they can cross this digital divide. The ABCs are simply this: Access--each child must have universal access to computers, whether it is in a school, a library, or a community center. Many families cannot afford to buy computers for their homes, but children in America should have access to them through public institutions. We also need to practice the B--best-trained teachers and, I might add, better-paid teachers. But C would be computer literacy for all students by the time they finish eighth grade. My Digital Empowerment Act will, first of all, create a one-stop shop for Federal education technology programs at the Department of Education. Why do we need this? Well, right now, our programs are scattered throughout the Department. School superintendents have to forage to be able to find that information, and when they do, they find the funding is absolutely spartan or skimpy. That is why my legislation also improves our schools in terms of access to technology and teacher training. Teachers want to help their students cross the digital divide, but they are facing three major problems. One, they need technology. They need hardware and software. They need training to use the technology because without training of the teachers or librarians, it is a hollow opportunity. In my own home State of Maryland, over 600 teachers from across the State volunteered to participate in a tech-prep academy so they could be ready. But hundreds were turned away. For every one teacher who can sign up for tech-prep training, four or five are standing in line to do so. My bill addresses these concerns. We are going to double funding for school technology and for teacher training. We now spend less than half a billion dollars on training and technology for our schools. We would double that to $850 million. But we also have to make sure we go where children learn, and that is in the community. Right now, what we find is that the only reliable source of revenue for wiring schools and libraries is the E-rate. But, the E-rate does not go to community centers. Whether it is an African-American church or a community center in an Appalachian region or rural parts of the South or the upper regions of Alaska, what my legislation would do is help community centers. My legislation would create an E-corps within the AmeriCorps national service program. It would bring AmeriCorps volunteers with special technology training into our schools and into our communities. I recently had a town hall meeting in an elementary school in Riverdale, MD. The teachers and students told me they need extra pairs of hands to help out in the computer lab to be able to teach the children. Also, we want to create 1,000 community tech centers. Community leaders have told me we need to bring technology to where kids learn, not just where we want them to learn. Our legislation would create 1,000 community-based centers that would be run by community organizations such as the YMCA and YWCA, Urban League, or a faith-based organization, where children could be there for structured afterschool activities, and also adults could be there earlier in the day to develop their job skills. Government cannot do this alone. We want public-private partnerships. I want to use our Tax Code to encourage public-private partnerships. This bill uses our Tax Code to encourage the donations of technology, technology training, and technology maintenance for schools, libraries and community centers. Mr. President, that is the core of our program. We are living in exciting times. The opportunities are tremendous to use technology to improve our lives, to use technology to remove the barriers caused by income, race, or ethnicity. Technology could mean the death of distance as a barrier for bringing jobs into the rural areas of our country. We want technology to be the death of discrimination where children have been left out or left aside. Bringing this technology into schools and libraries would enable children to leapfrog into the future. Technology is the tool, but empowerment is the outcome. We want to be sure each child in the United States of America, by being computer literate by the time they are in the eighth grade, will be ready for the new economy. We hope that by setting that as a national goal we will get children to stay in school and know that the future lies in working in this new economy. I thank everybody who worked on this bill with me. I thank everyone on my staff who helped me, including Julia Frifield, Jill Shapiro, and Andrea Vernot. This has truly been a team effort. I am pleased that I have 25 cosponsors from the U.S. Senate on this legislation. I hope that kind of bipartisan support will move this legislation forward. I will conclude by saying this is a tremendous opportunity. This is not about a laundry list of new Government programs. We are here to make the highest and best use of the programs that exist, a wise and prudent use of taxpayer funds, and also to say to each child in America if you want to learn and get ready for the new economy, your Federal Government is on your side. I give all praise and thanks to the Dear Lord who has inspired me to do this and gives me the opportunity to serve in the Senate. I truly believe one person can make a difference. I am trying to do that with this legislation. If we can work together, I know we will be able to bring about change--change for our children and change for the better.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak for 5 minutes as in morning business, ensuring that it doesn't take time from either side on this debate. This has been cleared with the leadership on the other side.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I rise today as a proud cosponsor of the ``Federal Employees and Uniformed Services Group Long-Term Care Insurance Act of 2000.'' This important piece of legislation represents a carefully considered compromise between several bills currently pending in the Senate. I would like to thank Senator Cleland and Senator Grassley for all of their hard work in coming to a consensus on how best to provide federal and military employees, retirees, and their families with the opportunity to purchase long-term care insurance. Since my first days in Congress, I have been fighting to help people afford the burdens of long-term care. Ten years ago, I introduced legislation to change the cruel rules that forced elderly couples to go bankrupt before they could get any help in paying for nursing home care. Because of my legislation, AARP tells me that we've kept over six hundred thousand people out of poverty and stopped liens on family farms. I also fought for higher quality standards for nursing homes. Through the Older Americans Act, seniors have easier access to information and referrals they need to make good choices about long-term care. I am also working hard to create a National Family Caregivers Program, so that families can access comprehensive information when faced with the dizzying array of choices in addressing the long-term care needs of a family member. These are important steps. But unfortunately, we haven't made much progress in the last few years. We've been stymied by partisan bickering, shutdowns, and inaction. The long-term care crisis needs a long-term care solution. I am pleased to say that this new bipartisan legislation puts an important down payment on this solution. Despite past disagreements on approaches to financing long-term care, everyone agrees that the crisis is growing. Nursing home costs are projected to increase from $40,000 today to $97,000 by 2030. This will only get worse since the number of senior citizens will double over the next thirty years. Families are being forced to choose between sending a child to college or paying for a nursing home for a parent, or a parent-in-law. I think that is wrong. Consider these sobering statistics: At least 5.8 million Americans aged 65 or older currently need long-term care As many as six out of 10 Americans have experienced a long- term care need 41 percent of women in caregiver roles quit their jobs or take family medical leave to care for a frail older parent or parent-in-law 80 percent of all long-term care services are provided by family and friends Families desperately need the tools to help themselves and meet their family responsibilities. This bill is the first step in helping all Americans do just that. Let me tell you what our new legislation will do: It will enable federal and military workers, retirees and their families to purchase long-term care insurance It will provide help to those who practice self-help by offering employees the option to better prepare for their retirement and the potential need for long-term care It will enable federal employees to buy long-term care insurance at group rates--they are projected to be 10%-20% below open market rates. Participants will pay the entire premium but because of the lower premium this is a good deal for federal workers--and for taxpayers I'm starting with federal employees for two reasons. First, as our nation's largest employer, the federal government can be a model for employers around the country. By offering long-term care insurance to its employees, the federal government can set the example for other employers whose workforce will be facing the same long-term care needs. Starting with the nation's largest employer also raises awareness and education about long-term care options. I have a second reason for starting with our federal employees. I am a strong supporter of our federal employees. I am proud that so many of them live, work, and retire in Maryland. They work hard in the service of our country. And I work hard for them. Whether it's fighting for fair COLAs, lower health care premiums, or to prevent unwise schemes to privatize important services our federal workforce provide, they can count on me. One of my principles is ``promises made should be promises kept.'' Federal retirees made a commitment to devote their careers to public service. In return, our government made certain promises to them. One important promise made was the promise of health insurance. The lack of long-term care for federal workers has been a big gap in this important promise to our federal workers. This legislation will close that gap and provide our federal workers and retirees with comprehensive health insurance. Mr. President, I reiterate my commitment to finding long-term solutions to the long-term care problem. I am proud that this bipartisan bill takes an important step forward in helping all Americans to prepare for the challenges facing our aging population.