Lisa Murkowski

Ms. MURKOWSKI

Ms. MURKOWSKI. The provision in question makes the Alaska Department of Community and Economic Development eligible to receive a water and waste disposal grant under section 306(a) of the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act in an amount that is not less than 75 percent of the total cost of providing water and sewer service to the proposed hospital in the Matanuska-Susitna Borough in Alaska. In addition, this provision allows the funds to be passed through the department to the local governmental entity that will do the water and sewer work on the hospital. This local governmental entity will be chosen by the Regulatory Commission of Alaska.

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I would like to address a provision that Chairman Bennett has added to the manager's amendment to the fiscal year 2004 Agriculture Appropriations bill on my behalf.

Ms. MURKOWSKI

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I would like to announce, for the information of the Senate and the public, that a hearing has been scheduled before the Subcommittee on Water and Power of the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. The hearing will be held on Thursday, November 13, at 2:30 p.m., in Room SD-366 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building. The purpose of the hearing is to receive testimony on S. 1085, a bill to provide for a Bureau of Reclamation program to assist States and local communities in evaluating and developing rural and small community water supply systems, and for other purposes; S. 1732, a bill to direct the Secretary of the Interior to establish a rural water supply program in the Reclamation States to provide a clean, safe, affordable, and reliable water supply to rural residents; S. 1211, a bill to further the purposes of title XVI of the Reclamation Projects Authorization and Adjustment Act of 1992, the ``Reclamation Wastewater and Groundwater Study and Facilities Act'', by directing the Secretary of the Interior to undertake a demonstration program for water reclamation in the Tularosa Basin of New Mexico, and for other purposes; S. 1727, a bill to authorize additional appropriations for the Reclamation Safety of Dams Act of 1978; and S. 1791, a bill to amend the Lease Lot Conveyance Act of 2002 to provide that the amounts received by the United States under that Act shall be deposited in the reclamation fund, and for other purposes. Contact: Shelly Randel 202- 224-7933, Erik Webb 202-224-4756 or Meghan Beal at 202-224-7556. Because of the limited time available for the hearings, witnesses may testify by invitation only. However, those wishing to submit written testimony for the hearing record should send two copies of their testimony to the Subcommittee on Water and Power, Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, United States Senate, Washington, D.C. 20510- 6150.

Ms. MURKOWSKI

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, every 3 minutes, a woman somewhere in the United States is diagnosed with breast cancer. Every 12 minutes, the same disease steals away another person's mother, wife, companion, or friend. According to the National Cancer Institute, breast cancer is the most common form of cancer among women in the United States, and second only to lung cancer as the leading cause of cancer deaths. In my home State of Alaska it was predicted that another 300 women this year would hear their doctor tell them ``you have breast cancer''. I don't personally know the thoughts that run through these women's minds at that moment, but I think the best thing that we can do is to make sure that the next thing that doctor can say is ``you caught it early enough--we can cure it.'' Medical science says that the key to beating this cancer is early detection and early intervention. That's why it's vitally important for women to be aware of this disease. Women need to be vigilant, and need to follow medical recommendations regarding mammograms and self-exams. We have a number of courageous women in Alaska who fought breast cancer and are sharing their experiences with other women, increasing awareness of the condition. Alaskan survivors including Carla Williams and world-class dog musher Dee Dee Jonrowe make time in their schedules to come and advocate on behalf of those whose lives have been touched by breast cancer, and they are doing a great job of raising awareness We must continue this fight to increase awareness not only during October, National Breast Cancer Awareness Month, but year round, and I thank my colleagues for the chance to speak about National Breast Cancer Awareness Month.

Ms. MURKOWSKI

Ms. MURKOWSKI. That is correct.

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Madam President, we have had a great deal of discussion about the fires raging throughout California this week. We talked about fire seasons in the past several years. The years 2000, 2002, and 2003 fire seasons have been some of the worst on record nationally. In 2002, in my State of Alaska alone, we experienced fires that burned over a million acres. Over a million acres in Alaska were burned in 2002. In this year, in 2003--this is from a report that is current as of yesterday, taking into account what is happening in California as we speak--to date, approximately 3.6 million acres have burned nationwide--3.6 million acres, and burning. Forest fires are a huge problem, predominantly in the West, for those of us in the Western States. It is interesting to look around the Chamber this afternoon and see how many of the Western State Senators are paying very close attention to the debate on this legislation. We know, we can see the damage to our forested lands from these catastrophic wildfires, many of which have resulted from forests that have been devastated by insects and by disease. Deteriorating forest and rangeland health now affects more than 190 million acres of public lands throughout the country. Again, as we have seen from the pictures which the Senators from California displayed and from the newspapers, the areas where the fires are ravaging the hillsides and destroying communities are areas that were affected by insects and disease. I want to take us to a picture of Alaska, as the good Senator from New Mexico, Mr. Domenici, mentioned not too long ago. In my State, our forests have been infected and literally torn apart by a beetle known as the spruce bark beetle. The spruce bark beetle, other insects, and other diseases have devastated hundreds of thousands of acres along the Kenai Peninsula and in the Chugach Mountains, and outside of my hometown in Anchorage along the hillsides. You are talking about the wildland/urban interface communities and how it all plays out. I see that very carefully and very closely every time I am home. The picture that I have behind me is a picture from the Kenai Peninsula in the southern part of the State. This is a picture of forests that have been totally wiped out by the spruce bark beetle. There is not a tree that you look at in the forefront or in the background that is alive. Every one of these trees are dead. They were killed by the spruce bark beetle. As the Senator from New Mexico mentioned, it is like a Christmas tree that you have put out on the back porch and it no longer has any water. The leaves are crumbly to the touch and fall when you touch them. These trees that you are looking at are probably 30 to 40 feet high. It is tough to estimate the girth of the trunk. But these are very mature old-growth trees that are standing waiting for an accident to happen--waiting for a fire. This is not tinder sitting on the forest floor. This is standing tinder that is just waiting to be devastated and to devastate potentially property and human life. As we look at this picture and understand the stands we are talking about here, I mentioned that there were hundreds of thousands of acres which have been devastated by insect and disease in Alaska. The spruce bark beetle has literally changed the forests in Alaska. Over 5 million acres of trees in south-central and the interior of Alaska have been lost to the spruce bark beetle over just the past 10 years. This picture shows, I have been told, the result of trees that have been infested for about a 10-year period. These were perfectly healthy, strong, and living trees. The entire forest has been wiped out by the spruce bark beetle. We are told in Alaska that this is one of the worst recorded incidents of beetle kill and infestation in our history. You do not see any homes. You do not see any development. This is out in the wilds of Alaska, if you will. But adjoining the Chugach National Forest, off of the Kenai Peninsula, we have many smaller communities-- certainly not a Los Angeles-type of community but we have homes. We have towns that adjoin these national parklands. We have a little community called Moose Pass which sits right in the middle of dead and dying trees. My home city of Anchorage, the largest population center in the State--about half of the residents of the State of Alaska live in Anchorage--is rimmed by the Chugach National Forest. We are dealing with the infestation of the spruce bark beetle as it is traveling north. The danger is made even worse when you couple it with the fact that we have had low snowfalls in recent years. Again, it is an accident almost waiting to happen. We don't want to happen in Alaska what we are currently seeing in California. Our public land laws and regulations should not make it difficult to cut down the dead or the dying trees that are nothing but potential fuel for these catastrophic wildfires. Our Nation's policy has to allow for responsible forest management that includes the ability to remove, when appropriate, wildfire fuel from our forests. That is why I am supporting the bipartisan amendment to title I of H.R. 1904. In particular, there is a subsection which will authorize treatment under title I on Federal land. This technical change allows for hazardous fuels reduction on Federal lands on which wind throw or blown down ice storm damage or the existence of disease or insect infestation has occurred and poses a significant threat to an ecosystem component on Federal land or adjacent non-Federal land. I suggest to you, looking at this picture and understanding the extent of the insect infestation that we have, that it certainly poses a significant threat to an ecosystem component. The Kenai Peninsula National Forest System land contains approximately 223,000 forested acres of which 119,000 contain spruce trees with a percentage of old growth. These old-growth stands are susceptible to the spruce bark beetle or are already dead. The amendment we are speaking to--the bipartisan amendment under title I--will allow Federal land managers to manage the dead and dying tree stands. The prespruce bark beetle epidemic condition on the Kenai Peninsula had a significant acreage in unmanaged old-growth spruce which was very susceptible to massive mortality and the buildup of the spruce bark beetle population. The key to long-term forest management on the Kenai Peninsula that will prevent a reoccurrence of the type of spruce bark beetle mortality is to manage the forested landscape for a variety of species' compositions, structures, and age classes--not simply unmanaged old-growth stands. To maintain the watershed health--which we certainly need--the Chugach National Forest needs to manage the landscape on the Kenai Peninsula for a variety of species, structures, and age classes. With the technical change that we are seeing in this amendment, it allows for old-growth stands such as those existing on the Kenai Peninsula to be treated without restriction related to the old-growth provisions that are being offered in other sections of the amendment. I believe that with the legislation before us--the Healthy Forest Restoration Act--we have a comprehensive plan focused on giving the Federal land managers and their partners the tools they need to respond to national forest health crises. That is what we have in Alaska. That is what we are seeing in many parts of the West. This legislation directs the timely implementation of scientifically supported management activities to protect the health and vibrancy of Federal forest ecosystems as well as protecting the communities and the private lands that surround them. I support what we are doing with H.R. 1904 and certainly encourage Members' support.

Ms. MURKOWSKI. That is correct. It is not just a small patch we are talking about. We have over 5 million acres of infested and dead timber standing there just waiting, as the Senator indicated, to crumble and act as fuel for any fire. It is as the Senator described. It is like that Christmas tree. There is absolutely no life to it with the needles just crumbling in your hands. It is that dry.

Ms. MURKOWSKI

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Madam President, I join with those of my colleagues who are pleased to see that the nomination of Governor Michael Leavitt to be Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency will finally be moving forward. Governor Leavitt is one of the founders of a bipartisan and collaborative approach to environmental decisionmaking that is a model for dealing with the difficult issues that face us today. His ``En Libra'' philosophy has been adopted by the National Governors Association and is being used by Federal, State, local and private entities throughout the country. He is the former chair of the National Governors Association, the Western Governors Association, the Republican Governors Association and the Council of State Governments. His experience spans the private sector, academia, and government. Governor Leavitt is without question qualified for the job. In fact, he is superbly qualified for the job. He is the Nation's longest- serving, and arguably most successful Governor, whose tenure has brought unprecedented prosperity to his State, unparalleled efficiency to its management, and unequaled improvements to its environment. Along the way he has strived for and achieved--if not perfect harmony--then a notable reduction in the volume and intensity of debate over the kind of issues that are more often polarizing than they are unifying. There can be no better recommendation for the individual who is to lead the agency charged with stewardship of our country's environment. Unfortunately, Governor Leavitt's nomination was treated shamefully by a small handful of individuals bent on using it as an excuse to accuse the current administration of all kinds of environmental wrongs, to perpetuate outmoded and ineffectual approaches to environmental issues, and to cater to the worst kind of unscientific and unsupportable rhetoric--all that Governor Leavitt stands against and that this Senate should repudiate for the sake of our nation's welfare. My State of Alaska, as many others--especially in the west--has often struggled with environmental restrictions sought by, imposed by, and maintained by interests with very little knowledge of the conditions we live with. Nonetheless, we take our environmental responsibilities very seriously. We care about our environment, and we try very hard to address serious issues with clarity and common sense. All too often, common sense is lacking when one-size-fits-all solutions are imposed from outside, and based more on fanciful gloom-and-doom predictions than on facts. The truth is that we have made mammoth strides in improving our environment, and every day we learn new ways to apply research and technology toward doing an even better job. This administration is providing a breath of fresh air--and I mean that both literally and figuratively--when it comes to environmental issues. While improvements can certainly be forced--at great cost--by the threat of heavy-handed government enforcement, they come far more rapidly when they are to the participants' economic advantage. There is all the difference in the world between making money and not losing money. If we look honestly at what works and what doesn't, we have to conclude that reform of the regulatory process is badly needed. Frankly, I commend the administration for being willing to look at new approaches to building a better environment, rather than continuing to hammer at the same old nails. I am confident that I will not always agree with the positions that Governor Leavitt may take if he becomes the EPA Administrator. Alaska has a number of outstanding issues with the EPA. We have long hoped to establish Alaska as a separate EPA region, because attempting to administer such a vast area with so few people who have even seen the issues first-hand is an impossible task that often leads to unnecessary and damaging misunderstandings. We would like to move forward on a determination that better defines the extent of Clean Water Act authority over Alaska's wetlands. We have over 174 million acres of land classified as wetlands, more than all the other States combined. Much of it is neither use for navigation nor connected in any substantive way with other water bodies, or exists solely because it is underlain by permafrost. We would like to receive active assistance from the EPA in evaluating the long-term health benefits of our reliance on small, diesel-powered utilities. We would like to receive recognition that uncontrollable temperature inversions due to our climate are the primary reason some of our cities have difficulty attaining compliance with carbon monoxide rules. We would like the agency to work with us on developing a mechanism that will more effectively deliver grants to Alaska's many rural Native communities. In fact, the list of issues between us ranges from minuscule to mammoth--from local issues that should be easily resolved to those which require the intervention of the Supreme Court. I by no means believe that confirming Governor Michael Leavitt will lead to a resolution of them all. What I do believe is that Governor Leavitt will offer comprehensive, impartial and thoughtful consideration. That is all I ask, and all that my constituents ask. I strongly support this nomination, and I am very pleased to see that it is moving at this time. I would like to think that this marks a triumph for the American people, who have little patience for diversionary rhetoric and divisionary politics. The American people want their Congress to simply do its job, to the best of its ability, and with the welfare of the entire country in mind. I will vote to confirm Governor Leavitt on behalf of my constituents, on behalf of all Americans, and on behalf of a safe, productive and healthy environment. I urge all my colleagues to do the same.

Ms. MURKOWSKI

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I announce that on vote No. 406, the Feingold amendment, amendment No. 1904, which occurred earlier today, I was necessarily absent from the Senate on business. Had I been present to vote, I would have voted ``nay'' on the tabling motion for that amendment. (At the request of Mr. Daschle, the following statement was ordered to be printed in the Record.)

Ms. MURKOWSKI

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, today I introduce along with my colleague, Senator Stevens, an important bill that will facilitate Forest Service land management on Prince of Wales Island and help community expansion and development. The City of Craig is the economic center of Prince of Wales Island, the third largest island in the country. The town contains the major retail shopping and service outlets on the island and island residents drive up to a hundred miles round trip to come to town for medical services and shopping. Craig also has the most active and largest commercial fishing harbor and fleet on the island. Due to land selection conflicts between the Forest Service and the State of Alaska in the 1960's, the city of Craig received no municipal entitlement land. This legislation will help alleviate some of the loss to the city from the lack of an entitlement. One of the Forest Service's main administrative facilities, the Craig Ranger District Station is located in Craig. The Craig Ranger has management authority over approximately one million acres on Prince of Wales Island. It is critical that the Forest Service has the tools it needs to provide good management for that part of the island. One of these tools is the presence of some Federal land near the Craig Ranger Station. Right now, there is not any Forest Service land near the Ranger Station. In an unusual situation for Alaska, the Ranger Station is an in holding among private, state, and City owned land. This legislation would provide for a three way conveyance process which would result in three parcels of land now owned by the City being conveyed into the National Forest and an in holding owned by a private entity being acquired by the City. To use the vernacular, this is one of those situations people like to describe as ``win-win.'' Providing a recreational opportunity in the Forest at Craig benefits the public and the city of Craig would obtain land vital to its future community development plan. What our legislation does is authorize the Federal Government to accept conveyance of land from the City of Craig and authorize an appropriation for land acquisition. The funding would be used by the city of Craig to purchase the private land at Craig. In return the city would convey to the Federal Government up to 346 acres of land it now owns to the Tongass National Forest. This land is highly prized for local recreation and would provide the Craig Ranger District with a missing piece of its management scheme by providing a recreation site within short walking distance of the Ranger Station. Right now, visitors to the Forest come to the Craig Ranger Station to orient themselves to the Forest. One of the things they look for is onsite recreation in the Forest from the Ranger Station. But there is none. Because of the land conveyance status directly around Craig, there is no Forest land in that area. However, the city of Craig owns almost 350 acres of prime recreational land including a dedicated trail in the immediate vicinity from the Ranger Station. The Forest should own this land so that it can integrate the parcel into its land management plans. The property to be acquired by the city of Craig is a cannery site dating from the early 1900's which has not been used since the early 1980's. It is prime land for the city to redevelop in order to improve its community management plan and to provide economic stimulus in Craig. The parcel includes both uplands and tidelands and could be used by Craig to develop a good port and harbor and to provide first class land for retail merchants and other community services. Senator Stevens and I strongly support the needs of Craig in developing its local economy. The entire island is in transition. In the early 1980's, the city and Prince of Wales Island were the center of a vibrant timber based economy that provided thousands of direct and indirect jobs to the Island. Much of that is now gone as a result of unfortunate Federal policies which have devastated the timber based economy on Prince of Wales Island and much of Southeastern Alaska. According to unemployment data published by the Alaska Department of Labor, unemployment rates in Craig's census area regularly exceed 20 percent. Their annual rate of unemployment is typically more than twice the national average. We must help Craig in its transition to another economy. The city leaders are dynamic and visionary people who have provided real leadership on the island. They have worked hard to help maintain the remaining timber plant at Klawock to provide year round employment to city and Island residents. They have organized along with their neighbors, the Prince of Wales Community Advisory Council, an association of municipalities and Native and non Native communities to work as a team on island wide projects. Passage of this legislation is critical to the future of the city of Craig. It will provide a great management tool to the Forest Service and increase recreational opportunities for the local and visiting public. I urge my colleagues to join me in moving forward on this legislation. All of the conveyances in the legislation will be subject to appraisals as required by the Federal Government. The Federal Government will receive equal value in land from the city. The passage of this Act is good for the public and for the residents of Craig.

Ms. MURKOWSKI

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, today I introduce along with my colleague, Senator Stevens, an important bill that will facilitate Forest Service land management on Prince of Wales Island and help community expansion and development. The City of Craig is the economic center of Prince of Wales Island, the third largest island in the country. The town contains the major retail shopping and service outlets on the island and island residents drive up to a hundred miles round trip to come to town for medical services and shopping. Craig also has the most active and largest commercial fishing harbor and fleet on the island. Due to land selection conflicts between the Forest Service and the State of Alaska in the 1960's, the city of Craig received no municipal entitlement land. This legislation will help alleviate some of the loss to the city from the lack of an entitlement. One of the Forest Service's main administrative facilities, the Craig Ranger District Station is located in Craig. The Craig Ranger has management authority over approximately one million acres on Prince of Wales Island. It is critical that the Forest Service has the tools it needs to provide good management for that part of the island. One of these tools is the presence of some Federal land near the Craig Ranger Station. Right now, there is not any Forest Service land near the Ranger Station. In an unusual situation for Alaska, the Ranger Station is an in holding among private, state, and City owned land. This legislation would provide for a three way conveyance process which would result in three parcels of land now owned by the City being conveyed into the National Forest and an in holding owned by a private entity being acquired by the City. To use the vernacular, this is one of those situations people like to describe as ``win-win.'' Providing a recreational opportunity in the Forest at Craig benefits the public and the city of Craig would obtain land vital to its future community development plan. What our legislation does is authorize the Federal Government to accept conveyance of land from the City of Craig and authorize an appropriation for land acquisition. The funding would be used by the city of Craig to purchase the private land at Craig. In return the city would convey to the Federal Government up to 346 acres of land it now owns to the Tongass National Forest. This land is highly prized for local recreation and would provide the Craig Ranger District with a missing piece of its management scheme by providing a recreation site within short walking distance of the Ranger Station. Right now, visitors to the Forest come to the Craig Ranger Station to orient themselves to the Forest. One of the things they look for is onsite recreation in the Forest from the Ranger Station. But there is none. Because of the land conveyance status directly around Craig, there is no Forest land in that area. However, the city of Craig owns almost 350 acres of prime recreational land including a dedicated trail in the immediate vicinity from the Ranger Station. The Forest should own this land so that it can integrate the parcel into its land management plans. The property to be acquired by the city of Craig is a cannery site dating from the early 1900's which has not been used since the early 1980's. It is prime land for the city to redevelop in order to improve its community management plan and to provide economic stimulus in Craig. The parcel includes both uplands and tidelands and could be used by Craig to develop a good port and harbor and to provide first class land for retail merchants and other community services. Senator Stevens and I strongly support the needs of Craig in developing its local economy. The entire island is in transition. In the early 1980's, the city and Prince of Wales Island were the center of a vibrant timber based economy that provided thousands of direct and indirect jobs to the Island. Much of that is now gone as a result of unfortunate Federal policies which have devastated the timber based economy on Prince of Wales Island and much of Southeastern Alaska. According to unemployment data published by the Alaska Department of Labor, unemployment rates in Craig's census area regularly exceed 20 percent. Their annual rate of unemployment is typically more than twice the national average. We must help Craig in its transition to another economy. The city leaders are dynamic and visionary people who have provided real leadership on the island. They have worked hard to help maintain the remaining timber plant at Klawock to provide year round employment to city and Island residents. They have organized along with their neighbors, the Prince of Wales Community Advisory Council, an association of municipalities and Native and non Native communities to work as a team on island wide projects. Passage of this legislation is critical to the future of the city of Craig. It will provide a great management tool to the Forest Service and increase recreational opportunities for the local and visiting public. I urge my colleagues to join me in moving forward on this legislation. All of the conveyances in the legislation will be subject to appraisals as required by the Federal Government. The Federal Government will receive equal value in land from the city. The passage of this Act is good for the public and for the residents of Craig.

Ms. MURKOWSKI

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I rise this morning to speak about a topic of great importance to our Nation; that is, the subject of jobs. I know this subject is on the minds of my colleagues, and certainly on the minds of my constituents back home in Alaska, but really Americans throughout the country. Since 2000, the American economy has been in a slump. In 2000, we were headed toward a recession. The stock market declined and the technology bubble burst. Then came September 11. When terrorists struck the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, our economy suffered. And as we, as a country, mourned the loss of 3,000 innocent Americans, we again watched that stock market tumble and, really, the economy grind to a halt. This administration has been working very hard not only to protect American people from terrorism but to revive, to reinvigorate our economy. The approach that has been taken to cut Federal taxes, as we have done in Congress, the move the Federal Reserve Board has taken in cutting interest rates, those were the right things to do. But we can do so much more. We can and we must take positive steps to create good paying jobs for Americans. On the floor recently many of my colleagues have been talking about the loss of jobs we have sustained over the last few years. The truth is, we have lost a lot of jobs. But I do not want to talk this morning about those jobs that we have lost. I want to look forward. I want to talk about the many jobs we can and should create for Americans who are out of work. Currently, we have a House-Senate conference committee crafting a comprehensive Energy bill. In late July, in a show of great bipartisanship, the Senate passed an Energy bill to conference. There were 83 of my colleagues who supported me in this measure. Fourteen Senators voted against the bill. Attempts have been made by both Republicans and Democrats to enact a national energy policy to reduce our country's dependence on fossil fuels, much of which comes from foreign countries, and to improve the existing energy infrastructure in the U.S. Most people would agree we need a national energy policy to address our concerns, but there is widespread division as to how we go about it. These divisions can be partisan, they can be ideological, or they can be regional. I encourage the conferees working on the Energy bill to put these differences aside and reach an agreement that meets the energy needs of Americans. Of course, as we know, that is easier said than done. Developing a national energy policy is, to say the very least, difficult. It means many things to different people. Therein lies the problem with passage of a national energy policy. My colleagues in the House represent diverse opposing interests. We all have diverse interests. We come to it from a different perspective, as we approach a national energy policy. So while it may be easy to get Members interested in talking about a national energy policy, when it actually comes to putting the pen to paper, it is much more difficult to garner support. As part of a national energy policy, I have been advocating opening the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil and gas exploration, as well as enacting a fiscal package to build a natural gas pipeline from Alaska to the lower 48. My constituents are eager to offer our State's natural resources to the Nation to meet our shared energy needs. I will continue to fight, as I have been, to get these provisions in an Energy bill. I do not apologize or make any excuses for what I have to do for my State. It is my job. But developing Alaska's energy resources not only benefits Alaskans but it benefits Americans. I will explain how developing Alaska's resources will benefit all Americans. Before I do so, I will discuss what a comprehensive energy policy must contain, in my opinion. Some of my colleagues think the only thing I want in an Energy bill is ANWR and a natural gas pipeline. From my perspective, an energy policy that does not utilize the vast domestic energy reserves in Alaska is not comprehensive. We must provide for increased oil and gas production in order to meet the country's demand for energy. In my mind that is very clear. But there is more to an energy policy than that. The policy must address our renewable energy reserves. At the same time we encourage domestic production of energy, we must promote energy efficiency and energy conservation. We cannot have a comprehensive policy by doing just one or the other. We have to have both. I am not going to talk this morning about energy dependence, technically recoverable barrels of oil, known cubic feet of gas, or the minimal impact that energy development in Alaska would have on the environment. My colleagues have heard those arguments time and time again. This morning I want to talk about jobs. I want to talk about how we can create good paying jobs for all Americans. I don't want a single man or woman in America who is willing to work and looking for work to be locked out of finding a job. Americans can't enjoy the American dream without a job. It is as simple as that. We have passed legislation to stimulate the economy. We have passed legislation to cut taxes. But our work is not done until Americans have work. In my State, traditionally we have had the highest unemployment among the States. According to the September 2003 seasonally adjusted unemployment rates, Alaska's unemployment rate overall is 7.8 percent. In many parts of my State, it is in the double digits, something that is hard for many of my colleagues to imagine. In our neighboring State of Washington, the unemployment rate is 7.6 percent. When Americans can't find work, our job in Congress is not done. We have to get to work to get people to work. I don't know how much more clear I can be on this point. I want the men and women of this country who are searching for a job to be able to find them--good paying jobs, jobs with benefits such as retirement and health care, and jobs that can sustain a family. How do we create these jobs? It is through the Energy bill. We ought to call this legislation the national jobs bill because that is what the Energy bill can be. If we do it right, this Energy bill can be the jobs bill. I have said before that developing the energy resources in Alaska will create jobs. No one can deny that. If we open ANWR, if we build a natural gas pipeline, we create jobs. They are good paying jobs for Alaskans. I have heard the reasons from Democrats and Republicans in both the House and the Senate of why we should not open ANWR or why we cannot produce a fiscal package that would ensure construction of a natural gas pipeline. But I have to ask: Are they saying we can't create jobs or we should not create jobs? Are they saying we should not create good paying jobs for Americans? I don't think there is a Member of this body or the other body who would state that they oppose job creation. So I say to my colleagues: Let's do the right thing. Let's protect our energy security, our economic security. Let's create good paying jobs for Americans. I direct my colleagues' attention to a report recently completed by the National Defense Council Foundation. This report is current. It is scheduled to go to print on October 30. The NDCF is a nonprofit think tank that studies defense and foreign affairs issues facing the United States. The experts at NDCF specialize in the study of low-intensity conflict, the drug war, and energy concerns. It is not affiliated with DOD or any part of the Federal Government. This report is entitled ``Eliminating America's Achilles Heel, Our Addiction to Foreign Oil and How To Overcome It.'' This report estimates the direct and indirect jobs that would be created by the development of the oil in ANWR and Alaska's natural gas reserves. The NDCF estimates that opening ANWR would create 1,074,640 jobs throughout America. It is important to repeat that number: 1,074,640 jobs throughout America. That is opening ANWR. The NDCF also looked at how many jobs would be created by the construction of an Alaska natural gas pipeline. They estimate that it would create 1,135,778 direct and indirect jobs throughout the Nation. Again, 1,135,778 direct and indirect jobs would be created through the construction of an Alaskan natural gas pipeline. So if we do both, that is 2.2 million jobs--good paying jobs-- throughout the country. The estimate, according to the NDCF, is 2,210,418. If you were to ask anybody, certainly in this body, if you could pass a bill to create 2.2 million jobs, would you do it? Of course you would. The Energy bill is not just an answer to our energy problem; it is an answer to our economic problems. It is a jobs bill. I need to talk numbers a little bit more because I am sure you are thinking, well, of course, Senator Murkowski is advocating this because it means good jobs for her constituents in the State of Alaska. That is absolutely true; there are going to be good jobs in my State of Alaska. In Alaska, according to the NDCF, Alaska resource development would generate 202,464 direct jobs and 131,917 indirect jobs. That is about 330,000 out of 2.2 million jobs. So where are the rest of these jobs? They are spread literally throughout the country, all throughout the lower 48 States, and Hawaii and the District of Columbia. So Alaska is not the only State that benefits. There will be 315,435 direct and indirect jobs generated in California. Let's look at what we might have in South Carolina for the Presiding Officer's edification. If both ANWR and the gas line were opened, there would be 12,115 direct and indirect jobs in the State of South Carolina. New York would see 93,356 jobs. Washington State would see 139,089 jobs. Now, I am sure somebody is going to ask me--or perhaps target this study in an attempt to poke holes in the methodology--but the interesting news here is that many of the people who approve of the methodology for this study represent some of the largest environmental groups in the country. So this means that the environmental groups have signed off on the methodology used for this study that shows that more than 2.2 million new jobs would be created from ANWR and the natural gas pipeline. I conclude that by adding that through the opening of Alaska's natural resources, we not only provide the energy that this country needs but again we provide jobs throughout the country--good paying jobs. I ask my colleagues, as we move forward with the Energy bill, to keep this in mind for the good of the country.

Ms. MURKOWSKI

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I would like to share some of my thoughts on the administration's request for additional funding for Iraq and Afghanistan. The majority of our attention has been focused on the situation in Iraq. Certainly this topic merits the attention it has received not only this morning but every morning it has received during morning business. In all of this, however, I would like to ensure that we do not overlook another very important aspect of this bill, which is increased assistance for Afghanistan. The supplemental includes $11 billion for Operation Enduring Freedom: over $1 billion for training of the Afghan National Army and the construction of roads, schools, and health clinics. Too often, as we focus on what is transpiring around the world-- whether it is events in Iraq, the happenings in North Korea, the situation in Liberia--the news coming out of Afghanistan goes unnoticed: the cooperation between U.S. and Afghan forces in tracking down elements of the Taliban and al-Qaida; the progress USAID is making in strengthening the government; vaccinating Afghan children for measles; expanding educational opportunities for women and girls; and we must also remember the rehabilitation of numerous roads, bridges, tunnels, and related infrastructure. There is also bad news as to what is happening in Afghanistan: reports of the resurgence of the Taliban and al-Qaida, increased poppy cultivation for opium production, and a yet uncertain relationship between the central and the provincial governments. Our support for the progress in Afghanistan must continue. Many talk of the need to succeed in Iraq. The high price associated with that, if we fail, will be incredible. And I agree. The same holds true with Afghanistan. So I am pleased this supplemental is not just about Iraq but includes Afghanistan as well. This past May, during his commencement address at the University of South Carolina, the President spoke to what the biggest accomplishment our presence in these two nations--Iraq and Afghanistan--can be, and that is the opportunity to replace old hatreds with new hope. As the President said, when citizens have hope--when they feel as if they are invested in the future--then the extreme ideologies of terrorists hold no sway. But if there is no hope, if individuals think the future holds nothing for them or their families, the appeal of extremism is great. That is the fight the United States faces today. What does the future of Iraq and Afghanistan hold for their citizens? We have all heard of the recent Gallup poll taken in Iraq, which showed that 67 percent of Iraqis surveyed thought their lives would be better off in 5 years as a result of the U.S.-led invasion. Only 8 percent said their lives would be worse off. The hope for the future is there. The Iraqi people are not willing to give in to the evil of terrorism, but if the United States fails in its task, if we do not deliver on our promises to get the job done, we have perhaps opened the door to even further terrorism. Make no mistake about it, if we go about our task in a halfhearted manner and do not provide the resources that are needed, then we are only sentencing our troops to continued danger and longer deployments. The fact is, the sooner we complete the job, the sooner our troops come home. Despite what may be portrayed in the media, progress is being made. We see that on a daily basis. Towns and municipal councils have been set up. Fifty-six thousand Iraqis have been trained and armed for the security of their nation. More Iraqis are being trained to serve in the Iraqi Army and the police force. Electricity has been restored to prewar levels. A new Iraqi currency was introduced just this week. On the education side, on October 1, just a couple weeks ago, the children of Iraq returned to school. And with the assistance of the Coalition Provincial Authority and USAID, nearly 1,600 schools in Iraq have been renovated. Over 5.6 million math and science books, free of Saddam's propaganda, are being printed and will soon be delivered. U.S. universities are partnering with Iraqi universities. This is significant because over 40 percent of Iraq's population is under the age of 15. These are kids who have known nothing but life under Saddam Hussein. These children are Iraq's future. Ensuring access to educational opportunities for both boys and girls is key. This will give the Iraqis the chance to develop the skills they need for their own personal advancement, to diversify Iraq's economic development, and to provide for the future of their nation and a future with hope, which is what we are all working toward. I see the good Senator from Missouri is here. I yield the floor.

Ms. MURKOWSKI

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I would like to announce for the information of the Senate and the public that a hearing has been scheduled before the Subcommittee on Water and Power of the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. The hearing will be held on Wednesday, October 15, at 2:30 p.m. in Room SD-366 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building. The purpose of the hearing is to receive testimony on S. 943, a bill to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to enter into one or more contracts with the city of Cheyenne, WY, for the storage of water in the Kendrick Project; S. 1027 and H.R. 2040, bills to amend the Irrigation Project Contract Extension Act of 1998 to extend certain contracts between the Bureau of Reclamation and certain irrigation water contractors in the States of Wyoming and Nebraska; S. 1058, a bill to provide a cost-sharing requirement for the construction of the Arkansas Valley Conduit in the State of Colorado; S. 1071, a bill to authorize the Secretary of the Interior, through the Bureau of Reclamation, to conduct a feasibility study on a water conservation project within the Arch Hurley Conservancy District in the State of New Mexico, and for other purposes; S. 1307, a bill to authorize the Secretary of the Interior, acting through the Bureau of Reclamation, to assist in the implementation of fish passage and screening facilities at non-Federal water projects, and for other purposes; S. 1308, a bill to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to pursue and complete actions related to the implementation of a U.S. District of a U.S. District Court consent Decree; S. 1355, a bill to authorize the Bureau of Reclamation to participate in the rehabilitation of the Wallowa Lake Dam in Oregon, and for other purposes; S. 1577, a bill to extend the deadline for commencement of construction of a hydroelectric project in the State of Wyoming; H.R. 1284, a bill to amend the Reclamation Projects Authorization and Adjustment Act of 1992 to increase the Federal share of the costs of the San Gabriel Basin demonstration project; and S. Res. 183, a resolution commemorating 50 years of adjudication under the McCarran Amendment of rights to the use of water. Contact: Shelly Randel 202-224-7933, Kellie Donnely, 202-224- 9360, Erik Webb 202-224-4756 or Meghan Beal at 202-224-7556. Because of the limited time available for the hearings, witnesses may testify by invitation only. However, those wishing to submit written testimony for the hearing record should send two copies of their testimony to the Subcommittee on Water and Power, Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, United States Senate, Washington, D.C. 20510- 6150. committee on indian affairs

Ms. MURKOWSKI

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I come to the floor today to address yet another misguided judicial action that is threatening again to prevent the ``Do-Not-Call Registry'' from going into effect on Wednesday, October 1. This body just last week addressed the misguided application of the law from a Federal Court in Oklahoma. Not 48 hours had passed before the lawyers for the telemarketers found another judge to halt the implementation of that program--this time on constitutional grounds. The U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado in Mainstream Marketing Services, Inc., et. al. v. Federal Trade Commission, last Friday held that the FTC ``Do-Not-Call Registry violated the Right of Free Speech provisions of the United States Constitution. How many times must this body speak before the courts will listen? Americans are outraged that their right to privacy can be invaded every night while they try to eat dinner with their families. Our lives are busy enough throughout the day with work and school, after school activities and preparing for the next day. To have a little quiet time at dinner is not too much to ask, yet these telemarketing companies now feel it is their right to disturb our few moments of family solitude. In the first case they brought against the regulations they argued lack of authority. Now they argue lack of constitutional support. What is next, lack of ability to abide by what the Administration, Congress and the American people are clamoring for? Those who seek to stop the implementation of this program assert they are protected by a right of free speech. Therein lies the problem. The commercial speech that the telemarketers seek to preserve is not held to the same standard under the First Amendment as individual right of speech. Further, the FTC regulations are not arbitrary and capricious because the FTC considered the comments of thousands of people and clearly made findings justifying their regulations. Now, Congress has subsequently acted to establish in law the authority for the FTC to say that telemarketers do not enjoy a free rein into our homes by using the telephone. I say it is the people who have the right to decide they do not want to be hounded by telemarketers and those who would interrupt the sanctity of their homes. The U.S. Supreme Court has found that one aspect of residential privacy is the right to avoid unwanted communications. The Supreme Court also has repeatedly held that individuals are not required to welcome unwanted speech into their homes and that the government may protect this freedom. The entire purpose of the FTC's ``Do No Call Registry'' program is to allow Americans to opt-out of receiving these annoying phone calls. In my judgment the court's decision to stop this program tilts our privacy rights out of balance in favor of these telemarketing companies. As we heard repeatedly on the Senate floor last week, in just the few short months since the FTC adopted these rules nearly 50 million people have registered to stop these harassing phone calls. Alaskans were looking forward to the implementation of this FTC rule to give them the peace and quiet they have sought for so long. We need this FTC rule to protect our citizens and their privacy. Americans and Congress have spoken. People do not like to be disturbed by unwanted and harassing phone calls from people selling products over the phone. The Administration listened to the cries of Americans. Congress listened to the cries of Americans. Now the courts must respect the choice of the people by allowing this rule to go into effect. Unfortunately, the most recent court opinion on this issue shows yet again that the justice system in America is broken and badly in need of repair. The resolution that I submit today is different from what the Senate voted on last week. This resolution states that it is the sense of the United States Senate that the court's judgment in this most recent case was in error. The Resolution further authorizes the Senate Legal Counsel to intervene in this most recent case to assert the constitutionality of the ``Do-Not-Call Registry,'' or if it is unable to intervene, to file an amicus curiae brief in support of the constitutionality of the do- not-call registry. Once again I ask this body: How many times must we speak before the courts will let this rule go into effect? Hopefully the courts will pay attention today. I am proud to submit this resolution and I hope this body will act quickly on this measure to send yet another message to our courts that the privacy of our homes cannot be invaded.

Ms. MURKOWSKI

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

Ms. MURKOWSKI

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I stand before you today to speak of a young man who has touched many of the lives here in the Senate Chamber. It is with great sadness that I rise today to talk about a young man from Alaska. Alaska and the country lost this young man last week. On Friday, just 1 week ago, one of my former Senate pages, Joshua Alexander Boycott, was killed in a car accident in his hometown of Fairbanks. It was one of those mornings. He was driving his younger brother to school. In Fairbanks at this time of year, winter is starting to happen. It was the first snowfall, with slippery, icy roads. Apparently Josh lost control of the vehicle and was killed. Josh was one of those young Americans, those young Alaskans whom we look at and we can identify instantly as a young man going places. I look at the beautiful faces of the young pages who serve in this Chamber. I look at each one of them and I see the potential and the greatness in each and every one of these beautiful young men and women. Josh had that. Josh came to the Senate during the 2002 fall semester. He was one of those who so thoroughly enjoyed what he did in the Senate as a page. For those who are not familiar with the routines and rituals of the pages on the Senate floor, it may seem that oftentimes what pages do is a bit mundane--filling glasses of water, standing guard at the door during the votes, getting lecterns for Senators so they may speak, running errands all over. It is not exactly intellectually challenging, high-powered stuff. But Josh enjoyed every bit of it. He would stand there and open the door with a big smile and a ``Good morning.'' It was not just to me, his Senator from Alaska, it was to every Senator who came through. He was so thoroughly enjoying being part of the process. He was well liked by the other pages with whom he worked. He did exceptionally well in the page school. Again, the pages certainly know the routine they have to deal with on a daily basis: Very early morning hours, attending page school, full, long days, attending to their duties here in the Senate Chamber. And then in the evening, it is not as though you have the night off and can go do what you want; it is time to study and do all that is required of you. It is an extremely rigorous schedule, but there were no complaints from Josh. He was thriving on it because he was doing exactly what he wanted to do. The last time I saw Josh was in late July. He was one of two Alaskans selected to attend the American Legion Boys Nation, a conference at Marymount University just outside of Washington, DC. After the conference ended, he came up to my office to say hi to everybody because he made great friends here. I was fortunate enough to be having a party for my summer interns at my home that night. We were having a barbecue at the house, so I invited Josh over to join us. He fell right in with this group of new Alaskans he hadn't met, but by the end of the evening it was obvious everybody enjoyed him as much as I had. It was a wonderful conversation. We were talking about what it is he wanted to do when he grew up, where he wanted to go next. He actually had aspirations of attending my alma mater in Washington, DC, which is Georgetown. Josh was in the process of applying to the university. What he really wanted to do was return to Washington, DC, to continue his passion for politics. He had seen so much, he had observed so much, and was so stimulated by what he saw around him that he wanted to come back and make a difference. I have no doubt that were he able to, he would have done just that. In addition to being a great young man everybody liked, he was a great student. He was at the top of his class, ranking 15 out of 262 seniors. He scored over 1500--actually, 1510--out of a possible 1600 on his SAT exam. He was an incredible singer. I had the privilege of being serenaded, if you will, by his singing choral group in Fairbanks. I looked over and said, wait a minute, don't I know that boy from somewhere? It was during the summer months. He left DC as a page and he was then back in Fairbanks. I looked over and I thought, wait a minute, that is Josh. What is he doing singing like a bird. It was beautiful, just gorgeous. Josh was a dynamic young man, a gifted young man who had a future that I think we can look to and say he was making a difference. It is a tragedy Josh's life was cut short. He was truly an extraordinary young man who brought so much joy and so much pleasure to everybody who was around him. I personally feel blessed to have known him, to have been able to share some of his short time with him. I ask that we remember his friends, and particularly his family, who are grieving for this loss at this particular time. But as we reflect on the life and contributions of a young man such as Josh Boycott, I suggest all those who are able to serve us here as pages in the Senate look at this as a gift, an opportunity to be in a place of service, to be in a place where you can learn, and you can give back so much at a later point in your life. So, again, I am blessed to have known Josh. I know many in this Chamber feel the same way. I mentioned yesterday in the cloakroom that I was going to be speaking about Josh, and everyone in the cloakroom remembered him. He has been gone from the Senate Chamber now for over 6 months. All the Senate pages look alike--in terms of their dress, that is--yet Josh had distinguished himself. So it is with great love and respect that we pay tribute to this fine young man and to his family during this time of mourning. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Ms. MURKOWSKI

Ms. MURKOWSKI. I yield back all time on our side.

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I come to the floor today to address the judicial action that would temporarily prevent the National Do Not Call Registry from going into effect. This privacy-oriented program was recently implemented by the Federal Trade Commission and was supposed to go into effect by October 1. That is just about a week away. I am proud to join my colleague from Nevada, the ranking member of the Commerce Committee, Senator Ensign, in cosponsoring this bill. This bill ratifies the authority of the FTC to establish the National Do Not Call Registry and allows the program to go into effect as drafted by the FTC. As you may or may not know, Alaska is about a 4-hour time difference from Washington, DC. It seems like just about my dinner hour in Alaska when telemarketers throughout the country get kicked into full gear. I know when my family and I are interrupted at the dinner table by these calls, we feel invaded. I can only imagine that my other friends and neighbors are equally upset. Sometimes we are outraged that our right to privacy is invaded every night when we are sitting down to have dinner with our families. Our lives are busy enough throughout the day with work, school, homework, and just catching up with one another and preparing for the next day. The last thing in the world we want when we sit down for the quiet time is to be interrupted by the telemarketing company that believes it is their right to disturb us during our few minutes of family time. Those who seek to stop the implementation of this program assert that they are protected by the right to free speech. I say it is the people who have the right to decide that they do not want to be hounded by telemarketers and those who would interrupt the sanctity of their homes. The entire purpose of the FTC's National Do Not Call Registry program is to allow Americans to opt out of receiving these annoying phone calls. In my judgment, the court's decision to stop this program tilts the privacy rights out of balance in favor of those telemarketing companies. In June, the Anchorage Daily News--which is my hometown newspaper-- published an editorial supporting the National Do Not Call Registry. They wrote about an Alaskan by the name of Ron Hammett who says he sometimes gets two or three calls a day. Mr. Hammett is a 76-year-old retiree who spent more than 2 hours waiting to get through the registration process once the FTC rule came out. Now he is going to wake up today--or he woke up this morning--to find out that his time and the time of many other Alaskans was wasted. In just a few short months since the FTC adopted these rules, nearly 50 million people have registered to stop these phone calls. My State of Alaska has its own do not call program that was created in 1996--it is called the Black Dot Program--which allows telephone subscribers to elect to have a black dot placed next to their name in the Alaska phone books. A computerized version of the list is made available to the telemarketers, but the problem is they are not required to use it. If they call any telephone customer with a black dot next to his or her name, they are subject to a fine of up to $5,000, whether the telemarketer uses the list or not. The problem with Alaska's statute is that there has been only one complaint filed since it was implemented. Most of the telemarketers are located outside the State of Alaska, and the State law doesn't have the teeth that the FTC rule contains to go after these outside groups. Alaskans, quite honestly, are looking forward to the implementation of this FTC rule to give them the peace and the quiet they have sought for so long. We need this FTC rule to protect our citizens and their privacy. Americans have spoken. They don't like to be disturbed by unwanted and harassing phone calls from people selling products over the phone. Through this legislation we can have that peace and privacy within our own homes. I am proud to cosponsor this legislation. I hope the body will act quickly on this measure. I am very pleased to see us moving so rapidly at this point. Thank you, Mr. President.

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, as in executive session, I ask unanimous consent that following the next vote on passage of the Do Not Call legislation, the Senate immediately proceed to executive session and two consecutive votes on the following nominations on today's Executive Calendar: Calendar Nos. 359 and 360. I further ask unanimous consent that there be 4 minutes equally divided between the two leaders or their designees prior to the second and third vote; further, that following the votes, the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table, the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action, and the Senate then return to legislative session.

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.

Ms. MURKOWSKI

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I would like to announce for the information of the Senate and the public that a hearing has been scheduled before the Subcommittee on Water and Power of the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. The hearing will be held on Thursday, October 30 at 2:30 p.m. in room SD-366 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building. The purpose of the hearing is to examine S. 1097, a bill to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to implement the Calfed Bay-Delta Program. Because of the limited time available for the hearing, witnesses may testify by invitation only. However, those wishing to submit written testimony for the hearing record should send two copies of their testimony to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, United States Senate, Washington, DC 20510-6150. For further information, please contact Kellie Donnelly or Meghan Beal at 202-224-7556.

Ms. MURKOWSKI

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I would like to announce for the information on the Senate and the public that the Subcommittee on Water and Power of the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources and the Committee on Indian Affairs will hold a joint-hearing on September 30, 2003 at 10 a.m. in SD-366. The purpose of this hearing is to examine of S. 437, the Arizona Water Settlements Acts, which is a bill to provide for adjustments to the Central Arizona Project in Arizona, to authorize the Gila River Indian Community water rights settlement, to reauthorize and amend the Southern Arizona Water Rights Settlement Act of 1982, and for other purposes. Because of the limited time available for the hearing, witnesses may testify by invitation only. However, those wishing to submit written testimony for the hearing record should send two copies of their testimony to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, United States Senate, SD-364, Washington, D.C. 20510-6150 prior to the hearing date.

Ms. MURKOWSKI

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, the Senator from California, Ms. Boxer, has offered an amendment seeking to strike expedited judicial review of timber sales from U.S. Forest Service Regional X, covering the Tongass National Forest in Alaska. While some use flowery terms to characterized the Tongass National Forest as the ``last intact temperate rain forest'' or the ``crown jewel of our national forest system,'' they merely gloss over the realities of our forest. The Sierra Club, the National Wildlife Federation, and others use overstated hyperbole meant to shift the focus of the debate from what we truly ought to be looking; that is, creating more jobs in America. For months now Senators from the other party have come to floor to decry job losses in the United States--lost jobs that they somehow blame on President Bush. Yet they need only look at the pursuit of their own policies that have led to our increased reliance on foreign natural resources and lost economic opportunity. Alaska has the highest unemployment rate in the country, and every time I go back home to see my constituents--which is quite frequently-- they ask me how we can create more jobs. In Alaska we used to have thousands of timber and timber-related jobs. Now we have less than one thousand. That is criminal in a State that boasts the largest single national forest in the country. The Tongass Forest is large enough to set aside land for future generations while also providing valuable timber for American manufacturing and U.S. jobs. Allow me to put it in perspective. In 2002 there were 110,000 people employed by the timber industry in California. In Alaska just 650 people were employed in the timber industry in 2002--again, in a State with the largest national forest. These are statistics from the American Forest and Paper Association. In 2002, California produced 2.63 billion board feet of timber. During the same time in Alaska just 30 million board feet were produced. That figure makes California the fourth largest wood producer in the U.S. That means during FY 2002 Region X (the largest region in the Forest Service system) produced the least amount of timber-- (Source: U.S. Forest Service). While the Senator is offering an amendment that she thinks is the right thing to do to protect the environment, she must realize that this issue has been debated for literally decades, going back to when Alaska was a territory. Just as timber harvests take place in other national forests the Government saw fit to allow some limited, but sustainable, timber harvests to take place in the Tongass. Unfortunately some misguided and illegal policy changes under the Clinton administration set back timber jobs in Alaska during the 1990s. Fortunately the courts and the current administration have seen fit to reverse those rulings to follow the law. Unfortunately there are those who want to continue filing lawsuit after lawsuit, clogging up an already overpacked docket to keep Alaskans out of work. I would say to those who continue to criticize job losses in the United States that one way to overcome them is to allow people to get back to work. The problem is we can't get people back to work with the continued threat of frivolous litigation. The Senator's amendment seeks to allow people to further burden our courts under false pretenses of saving Alaska from Alaskans. It is an insult to me and my constituents to hear people attack our State. We have a right to good jobs--just like those in California. We have a right to send our kids to good schools, just like in California. We have a right to have parks and hospitals and all the other infrastructure that is in the towns and cities in California, but our towns in Alaska needs jobs and industry to make them a reality. As a State in this Union we entered to become an equal among equals. But that does not mean that we don't know what is in our best interest as a State and as individuals. The amendment my colleague offers seeks to provide more opportunities for litigation after we have already undergone lawsuit after lawsuit and lengthy administrative processes. The language in the current bill does not cut off access to the courts. It merely requires that any application for judicial review be filed within 30 days after exhaustion of the Forest Service appeals process. Currently I am told the time limit is 6 years. The language applies for Record of Decisions for any timber sales in Region X of the Forest Service that had a Notice of Intent prepared on or before January 1, 2003. The language does not restrict the right of the public to litigate timber sales; it simply speeds up the process by encouraging the court to render a decision within 180 days of the application. Since 1990, at least nine timber sales on the Tongass have been litigated. Individual sales have been held up sometimes for years during the litigation process. What the families and the people who depend on the timber industry seek is simply some finality and a reasonable time for decisions. According the Alaska Forest Association, my State has lost over 1,400 jobs in the recent years and the timber industry has ground down to a virtual standstill. Only 650 people remain employed in an industry that was once year round and spread throughout the region. Whole communities have vanished. These people are not threatening the last remaining temperate rain forest in the United States, but their ability to provide for their families and for their families to have a future is threatened by lawyers and protracted litigation. The protracted litigation and the time to resolve that litigation could cost them their livelihoods and their family owned businesses. The ripple effect extends way beyond the individuals and the employees--it rips into the fabric of the communities in southeast Alaska. These are the things that the language of the appropriations bill seeks to address. I support that language in the bill because I have seen firsthand what the endless litigation has done to my communities. I oppose the Boxer amendment because it seeks to empower more frivolous law suits and more delays. I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment and to support more jobs in Alaska and America.

Ms. MURKOWSKI

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I would like to announce for the information of the Senate and the public that the hearing before the Subcommittee on Water and Power of the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources on September 18, at 2:30 p.m. has been rescheduled. The hearing will now be held on Tuesday, September 23, at 2:30 p.m. in Room SD-366 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building. The purpose of the hearing is to receive testimony on S. 213, a bill to clear title to certain real property in New Mexico associated with the Middle Rio Grande Project, and for other purposes; S. 1236, a bill directing the Secretary of the Interior to establish a program to control or eradicate Tamarisk in the Western United States, and for other purposes; S. 1516, a bill to further the purposes of the Reclamation Projects Authorization and Adjustment Act of 1992 by directing the Secretary of the Interior, acting through the Commissioner of Reclamation, to carry out an assessment and demonstration program to assess potential increases in water availability for Bureau of Reclamation projects and other uses through control of salt cedar and Russian olive; H.R. 856, a bill authorizing the Secretary of the Interior to revise a repayment contract with the Tom Green County Water Control and Improvement District No. 1, San Angelo project, Texas, and for other purposes; and H.R. 961, a bill to promote Department of the Interior efforts to provide a scientific basis for the management of sediment and nutrient loss in the Upper Mississippi River Basin, and for other purposes. (Contact: Shelly Randel 202-224-7933, Erik Webb 202-224-4756 or Meghan Beal at 202-224- 7556). Because of the limited time available for the hearings, witnesses may testify by invitation only. However, those wishing to submit written testimony for the hearing record should send two copies of their testimony to the Subcommittee on Water and Power, Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, United States Senate, Washington, D.C. 20510- 6150. committee on indian affairs