Bill Nelson

Mr. NELSON of Florida

Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk.

Mr. NELSON of Florida. If the Senator will work with me, I will find an offset. If this is the chairman's pleasure, if we can hold this in abeyance, we will come back to him with an offset. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record a letter from the American Red Cross dated September 9, 2004.

Mr. NELSON of Florida. Will the Senator yield?

Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, this is an amendment to the Homeland Security bill to provide $70 million to the American Red Cross for the purposes of their relief efforts as a result of Tropical Storm Bonnie and Hurricane Charley, which hit us 4 weeks ago, and Hurricane Frances, which hit us this past week. The American Red Cross is out of money. Their coffers have run dry. They have people all over Florida right now. In order to pay expenses, in doing what the American Red Cross does so well, they have had to go out and borrow $10 million. I just got off of the phone with the national president of the American Red Cross. I want to show you what else is lurking out there. I did not have time to blow this illustration up for everybody, but this is the third hurricane, in the last 5 weeks, that is headed to Florida. This hurricane, at 11 o'clock this morning, was down here in relation to the southeast of Jamaica. Its track will take it right over Jamaica and across western Cuba, on a track that is eerily reminiscent of Hurricane Charley which hit us 4 weeks ago, and going right out into the warm waters of the Straits of Florida, across the Keys. On the track that is showing the center line, it would take it right to the southwest coast of Florida. Now, you can imagine a hurricane of this magnitude. It has 160-mile- per-hour sustained winds, with gusts to 190 miles per hour. It came across Grenada, and 90 percent of all the homes in Grenada are destroyed. Let's hope the Good Lord will spare us in our State from having a third hurricane hit in a row, as two have already hit, the last one of which was so massive that it covered up the entire State of Florida with severe winds and just a deluge of rain. This amendment is offered, albeit the majority leader, now talking to the assistant minority leader, has assured me next week we are going to have another emergency supplemental that will take care of FEMA expenses and the Department of Agriculture, the Department of Transportation, the Army Corps of Engineers--all of those. We are going to be looking at a minimum of an additional $2.5 billion--minimum-- because the $2 billion we just passed the night before last is not even going to cover the first hurricane. So instead of taking the chance that next week's emergency supplemental, which will originate in the House, will come to us at the last minute in a take-it-or-leave-it situation--I do not want to take that chance because of all of those Red Cross volunteers who are down there who are so essential to our recovery efforts right now, trying to recover from a second hurricane, and not the least of which we will need them desperately if we get hit with Hurricane Ivan, now scheduled to be in the Florida Keys Monday morning at 8 o'clock. Mr. President, I have stated my case. I yield the floor. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, will the Senator yield?

Mr. NELSON of Florida

Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, we are considering a must-pass piece of legislation, the Homeland Security bill. Because of that, it is an appropriate vehicle to amend to pass other must-pass appropriations. The appropriation I am speaking of is hurricane relief for the battered State of Florida and, in some cases, parts of Georgia, as well, but particularly the State of Florida because of not only one hurricane but two hurricanes. Hopefully, the good Lord is not going to make it three hurricanes. Hurricane Ivan is on a track, as of the latest advisory from 11 this morning from the National Hurricane Center, to come across Jamaica, up over the western side of Cuba and into the Gulf of Mexico, which is almost the identical track Hurricane Charley took 4 weeks ago. Let us hope if it continues on that track that it continues on into the Gulf and does not take a right turn, which is what Hurricane Charley did, hitting the coast of Florida at Ground Zero, which was Punta Gorda, FL, with winds of 145 miles an hour coming straight off of the Gulf of Mexico and right up Charlotte Harbor. We cannot do anything about that because that is the forces of Mother Nature, but what we can do is respond as a Federal Government in times of natural disaster emergency. We started that process last night when we passed a $2 billion supplemental appropriation. That is not nearly enough for the first hurricane, let alone the second hurricane. The $2 billion appropriation was a figure the President requested, which is the ordinary procedure. Senator Graham of Florida and I had first ballparked only the FEMA portion at $2.5 billion and requested that of the President. The President chose a $2 billion figure and it is our normal custom, in times of national emergency, to go with the President's request. So with bipartisan unanimous support, we passed a $2 billion appropriation last night. That was quite timely because FEMA's coffers were running dry today. Four weeks ago, FEMA had only $837 million in its emergency disaster relief fund. As of Monday, when I met with the FEMA director and his regional director who is now in place in a headquarters in Florida, they were down to less than $100 million and they were not able to pay bills and order supplies because they were fast running out of money. Thanks to the majority leader and minority leader and the leadership of the various committees of this body, the Senate passed what had been sent over from the House and $2 billion has now replenished the emergency disaster relief fund. That is going to be used pretty quickly. That was only for FEMA. That does not say anything about the $500 million we are estimating through the Department of Agriculture in crop losses and all of the assistance from the Department of Agriculture not only for crop losses but for damage to equipment and buildings. Of course, that does not say anything about assistance to the Department of Transportation, where there was significant damage to airports in Florida, including the Orlando International Airport that got hit not once but twice. That does not even say anything about a lot of that assistance that comes through the Small Business Administration, which is not only assistance for businesses but assistance to individuals, as well as low-interest loans to help people get back on their feet. That does not say anything about assisting the American Red Cross, which has been down there not once but twice now in helping people who are walking around in a daze with no power, with a home that has been completely destroyed. So in times of natural disaster, the costs begin to mount up. I will give a means of comparison. Twelve years ago in the monster hurricane, Hurricane Andrew, that savaged south Florida, it was a hurricane that went over a relatively unpopulated part of the State, south Miami, south Dade County, the city of Homestead, but then it exited over the Everglades, an unpopulated part of Florida. Yet, 12 years ago, the cost of that hurricane to the Federal Government, just for FEMA, was $2.9 billion. The total cost to the Federal Government, including all of these other agencies, some of which I have mentioned, was over $6 billion, some $6.3 billion. We are now dealing with not one hurricane, which was not as destructive as Hurricane Andrew for comparison, but now we are dealing with the second hurricane. Now I will speak about this second hurricane, Hurricane Frances. By the time it hit the shore at Fort Pierce, its winds were down to 105 miles an hour. There were gusts of up to 120 miles an hour and those gusts were recorded at the Cape, what we refer to as the Cape, Cape Canaveral, the Cape Canaveral Air Force station at the Kennedy Space Center. That center sustained considerable damage. The big vehicle assembly building, which used to be the largest building in volume in the world when it was constructed in the 1960s, used today to stack the space shuttle vertically to all of its component parts, was ravaged to the point of losing 1,000 panels, each panel being 10 feet by 4 feet, a total of over 50,000 square feet that is now open into the building. I do not need to paint the picture of the disaster that could occur if this third hurricane were to come and hit the Kennedy Space Center, with the thousand huge, open windows allowing the forces of Mother Nature to go inside the vehicle assembly building. That could set back the American space program considerably if there were significant damage. I had a little prayer session in the Commerce Committee with the administrator of NASA today about what we are going to do about this and how NASA itself has got to be a part of this emergency appropriation, as the Department of Defense was 12 years ago when Hurricane Andrew did so much damage to Homestead Air Force Base. So, too, we have this problem at the Space Center. By the way, it is not only the vehicle assembly building. There is no excuse for why the building that manufactures the delicate silicon tiles that go on the underbelly of the Space Shuttle Orbiter was ripped apart when these winds came across the Cape. My colleagues should see pictures of it. Our ability to produce the thermal protection system for the space shuttle was savaged by these winds. There is no excuse for not having a building that is constructed to withstand hurricane force winds, and I have asked NASA to answer to that. The fact is, it has happened and it is going to have to be repaired, as is the roof of the building that handles the central computers that has now been ripped off. What I am saying is there are going to be a lot of costs because Mother Nature has dealt us a very savage blow. The gentleman handling this legislation is the distinguished Senator from Mississippi, who is also an expert in agricultural appropriations. I am sure the Senator has already gotten the reports that the first hurricane savaged the citrus crop 100 percent. Even more, because the young trees that snapped, that were loaded down with fruit, by the way, now have to be pruned back. So the loss of the orange crop is not just this year, 100 percent of the crop, but that loss will be sustained over several years as those pruned-back orange trees will take years to grow back. So that is the agricultural loss. If that were not enough--let me call this to the attention of the chairman of the Agricultural Subcommittee of the Appropriations Committee. If that were not enough, here comes the second hurricane, and it ravages another part of the citrus growing region in Florida called the Indian River citrus region, where the delicacy fresh grapefruit is grown. There is no telling, I have not gotten the estimates of what happened, but if it is like the first one, even those grapefruits still on the tree, with the root rot going on with the floods, it is likely it is a 100 percent loss as well. We can see the extraordinary destructive force of nature that has hit us. Lord forbid a third one, Ivan, comes to our State. We don't wish it to go to anybody's State. Floridians are tired; they are stressed; they are hot; their patience is wearing thin. Yet they have been very appreciative of the response. One of the lessons that we learned from Hurricane Andrew was that it was total chaos afterward. One level of government was not talking to another level. That has been changed. There is communication and cooperation efficiently going on between all levels of government. However, when you get hit not once but twice, with the possibility of a third time, then the human endurance and the ability to respond to natural disaster begins to have a finite limit. If there is one reason for the Federal Government to exist, it is to help its people in times of disaster. I will later on be offering some amendments to this bill. Most of what I have proposed here I would prefer that we strip off this bill and we handle it as a freestanding bill so it doesn't get mired in all of this. But I am only going on the instructions that the majority leader has given me, which is that we passed the $2 billion last night and he wanted to--and it was his words, many times over--attach it to the Homeland Security bill. So we can discuss what is the appropriate venue. I yield to the distinguished Senator from Mississippi.

Mr. NELSON of Florida. I thank the Senator for his comments. It would be this Senator's preference that we have an emergency supplemental just for the hurricane damage, including all of these agencies as well as--I didn't even mention the Army Corps of Engineers. We had severe beach erosion; in some cases, beaches disappearing. I just mentioned, for example, citrus, but we are talking about huge losses in nurseries, in vegetables, in cattle, hogs, the oyster/clam industry, timber--just to mention a few. It would be this Senator's preference clearly to have a stand alone supplemental. However it was Senator Frist, the majority leader, who called me saying he wanted to use this vehicle, the Department of Homeland Security, to which to attach those additional emergency supplemental requests. If there is a change in that, and I get assurance that in fact this other legislation will move because of the necessity of it--I remind you the $2 billion last night was just FEMA for the first hurricane, Charlie. That doesn't address all these other agencies and it doesn't address FEMA for the second hurricane, Hurricane Frances. I will certainly work with the Senator. But I am one way or another going to make sure we have this appropriations request before the Senate under the emergency conditions that we find ourselves facing. I yield the floor.

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

Mr. NELSON of Florida

Mr. NELSON of Florida. I thank the majority leader and the minority leader for their cooperation because clearly the State of Florida is reeling under this one-two punch to which we have been subjected. As a result, we have to act and act quickly. I had a number of people in the press down in Florida asking me where the money was going to come from. If there is a reason for the Federal Government, it is to respond in times of emergency, whether that be a national emergency such as a war or a national emergency in times of natural disaster. We have always done it. I remember when I came to Congress in 1979, one of the first votes I cast was in relation to the eruption of Mount St. Helens in the State of Washington. That place needed a great deal of Federal assistance to overcome all of the deficiencies that had happened to that society in the midst of that natural disaster. Now we have not only the disaster of one hurricane but having the State crisscrossed with a big X over the center of the State almost like a bull's eye by the second hurricane. And thank the Good Lord it was not a category 4, which a day out it was a category 4. In this particular case, it had winds up to 145 miles an hour. Well, by the time it hit, it had subsided to a category 2, with winds up to 105 miles an hour. There is a huge difference in the destructive force of the winds going from 105 to 145 miles an hour. The destructive potential of that wind goes up exponentially as you raise the wind speed. But what happened with Frances, even though it subsided to having winds up to 105 miles an hour when it hit the coast, with gusts up to 120 miles per hour, it lingered, it slowed, it stalled, it wobbled, and it was so massive it covered up the entire State of Florida so that parts that were thought to be immune from this hurricane because of the track of the hurricane, suddenly were engulfed in fierce winds and driving rain which has caused enormous flooding problems. So it will be my intention, once we pass this emergency supplemental of $2 billion--which is not going to anywhere cover just the costs for FEMA for the first hurricane--to come back for appropriate additional funds for the first hurricane as well as the second hurricane. For example, besides FEMA, there are the expenses of the Department of Agriculture. We are going to have huge crop losses from Charley and now also from Frances. There is also the Small Business Administration, which has a number of relief programs in addition to low-interest loans; the Economic Development Administration in the Department of Commerce; and the millions of dollars to assist the Department of Transportation, as well as the American Red Cross. I mentioned some damage done to the Department of Defense, and NASA, for that matter. As a matter of fact, from the first hurricane, NASA incurred costs of $750,000, and the hurricane only just scraped the edge of the space center. This one did significant damage, taking out 1,000 very large panels on the vehicle assembly building, which is the largest building in volume where the space shuttle is stacked vertically. When we come together as the Federal Government, it is time to respond. I thank my colleagues for their favorable consideration of this request. I remind them that we are not through yet. We have some major additional emergency supplemental appropriations. When we compare this to another major natural disaster such as Andrew, we can see the Federal Government spent over $6 billion on the cost of recovery from Andrew. It won't be that much for these two storms, but it will be substantial. I am very grateful to the Senate for listening to the pleas of the two Senators from Florida as we ask for its help in this time of need. I yield the floor.

Mr. NELSON of Florida. As the Senator and I discussed last night, I was told by the Director of FEMA they are basically running out of money. By the end of the week, they are not going to have any cash to expend. So I think that ups the urgency of this appropriations. I also appreciate the statement by the majority leader that this is just a first step. When we look at the needs, just for FEMA, from the first hurricane, Charley, it is going to exceed the $2 billion request by the President. And that does not include all of the other agencies, such as the Department of Agriculture, the Small Business Administration, the Economic Development Administration, the Defense costs. NASA has costs. You can go on down the list. For example, compared to Hurricane Andrew 12 years ago, the FEMA cost then was $2.9 billion. But the overall cost to the Federal Government, including all of the other agencies, was over $6 billion. And that was just one hurricane, a magnitude greater than Charley, but now we have two. And Lord help us if we have three. But we are dealing in a range of probably $4.5 billion out of these two. So is it my understanding from the majority leader that it would be his intention, as he had discussed last night in our telephone conversation, that we would take up additional emergency appropriations next week?

Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, I thank the majority leader for the comforting statement that we will take up the emergency appropriations for FEMA to meet the first of two crisis we have had in the State of Florida over the course of the last few weeks. If I might inquire of the majority leader, is it still the understanding of the majority leader that the House bill may come tonight, or are we looking at tomorrow in which we could pass this emergency supplemental appropriations?

Mr. NELSON of Florida

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

Mr. NELSON of Florida. I thank my colleague, my esteemed chairman. I am a devoted member of his committee, under his leadership. I thank the Senator from Virginia for all the personal encouragement he has given to me as we have relentlessly kept after this, trying to find some evidence. I do want to say, since my colleague mentioned General Dayton, I think he performed magnificently. He, of course, had many other responsibilities other than just the search for CAPT Speicher. He had all the responsibilities of the search for weapons of mass destruction. But he had a special team that was led by Major Eames, who has now been promoted to lieutenant colonel. That young officer was as devoted as any that I could ever imagine in the search, when I visited with him in his headquarters in Baghdad. At the time we had actually gone to one of the cells where we thought maybe it was Scott Speicher's initials on the wall, having been scratched into the stucco: MSS. All those leads did not pan out. But there are other leads they need to follow. It is my hope the U.S. military will continue to do that, even though General Dayton is not in Iraq anymore, and he deserves to be home. Even though Colonel Eames is not in Iraq. If those leads would be continued, Colonel Eames would, in fact, be back in Iraq in a heartbeat, following up that new information. I want to take the occasion of reminding the Senate that this Senator will continue to speak out on this issue, to remind the U.S. military of its obligation to continue to search for evidence so the case of Scott Speicher can be brought to closure. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, I ask to speak as in morning business.

Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, I rise to comment about the 9/ 11 Commission report. I think it is an excellent report. Its recommendations ought to be implemented and they ought to be implemented soon by the Congress. Given the fact that we are near gridlock in an election season and it is very unlikely in September when we come back from the August recess we will get anything done, I think we ought to consider coming back after the election and implementing the recommendations of the report. Why? Because the only way we protect ourselves from the enemies whom we call terrorists is to have accurate and timely information. The terrorist uses surprise and stealth, and the only way to defeat that is by having accurate and timely intelligence. So whatever we need to do to avoid the colossal intelligence failure we had on September 11 and the colossal intelligence failure we had again prior to going into Iraq, we best get about the job of correcting that information gathering, information flow, and information analysis so we can try to continue to thwart the attempts at doing damage to us. Is it not interesting what the 9/11 Commission report said? It specifically defined the terrorist as someone who is usually an Islamist fundamentalist who has warped the teachings of Islam so that it becomes a passion of hatred, and out of that wanting to do damage to the free world. Of course, we being the superpower are the target of that. It was also noteworthy in the Commission's report, as they are suggesting how to restructure the intelligence apparatus, they have suggested having a national intelligence director and that the counterterrorism center would be a compendium that would report to him. It is also interesting that they still wanted to keep the administration of intelligence gathering and analysis from direct political involvement. So the Commission did not recommend the new intelligence chief be a member of the President's Cabinet but rather be what they have defined as the National Intelligence Director. Then in all of these subdepartments that have a myriad of filling out a flow chart, an organizational chart, it is interesting how all of the different components of intelligence, the CIA, the DIA, the FBI, would then fit together into this new apparatus. We only have to remember that about a month ago we had another major information failure, and this was at the time of President Reagan's funeral. We had the Governor of Kentucky on his State airplane, having been given clearance by the FAA to come in and land at Washington National Airport, and his transponder was not working. He had been given clearance by the FAA, but the FAA was not communicating with the military. So the military, seeing a blip on the radar moving to the center of Washington, without a transponder, sent out the alert and, of course, everybody in this U.S. Capitol building and in all of those office buildings off to the side of this building got the emergency evacuate order, so much so that the Capitol Police, bless their hearts, were shouting at the top of their lungs, get out of the building, run, there is an inbound aircraft. So how many more of these do we need to have before we come to the commonsense reality that we are not collating and coordinating all of this information like we ought to? So, we best get on the process of reforming the system. Now we have a good blueprint with which to do it. We have an opportunity to make America safer--and, with our allies, quite a bit. That leads me to the next subject I want to talk about, our allies. The 9/11 Commission report also says something that many of us in this Chamber have been saying for some period of time: You can't go out and be successful in the war on terror until you can bring in a lot of colleagues, a lot of allies, in a coordinated and planned effort so you internationalize the effort. We did that brilliantly 13 years ago in the gulf war. We did that again brilliantly in Afghanistan when we started going after bin Laden. But we didn't do that in Iraq. Especially, we didn't do it in Iraq after a brilliant military victory. We didn't do it in the occupation. What the 9/11 Commission is pointing out is that if you want to improve the intelligence-gathering mechanism and analysis, then you have to internationalize the effort. That stands to reason. Fortunately, through Interpol and direct one-to-one relationships with other countries' intelligence services, we get a lot of that information. But as the 9/11 Commission said, we have to do a lot more. The 9/11 Commission also told us something that we didn't know. It said the country of Iran may have facilitated al-Qaida. It did not suggest that Iran's Government knew anything about the planning for the September 11 attack, but it suggested that some of those operatives passed through Iran. There have been a number of us in this body who have been talking about Iran; that after September 11, and the importance of going after al-Qaida, that the next imminent threat to the interest of the United States were the countries of Iran and North Korea. Why? Because they are trying to acquire or already are building nuclear capability. Therefore, I think it is very important that we get our act together and implement this Commission report for many reasons. That is just one additional reason. I see the esteemed chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee has come into the Chamber. I want to say in his presence, as he knows, as one of the members of his committee, on a completely different subject, I have spoken out time and time again about the plight and the determination to find some evidence about CAPT Scott Speicher, the Navy pilot who was shot down on the first night of the gulf war in 1991. There is a report in the Washington Times--and I will make reference directly only to what is reported in today's Washington Times--and what the Washington Times says is that a Speicher team has left and has given up the search. I hope that is not true. The family who lives in my State, in Jacksonville, FL, deserves to have closure. The family has been through a trauma like hardly any of us could believe. The Washington Times gives a great deal of detail. I don't know if it is true or not, but if it is, then what this country owes to that family is to keep searching. If a team has been returned, as the Washington Times has stated, then it is important that whatever the size of that team, that we have a presence. As long as the U.S. military is located there, a fallen flier in the future will always have the confidence to know we are not going to leave him or her there alone, and we are coming to get you. We didn't do that with Scott Speicher.

Mr. NELSON of Florida. I am delighted to yield.

Mr. NELSON of Florida

Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, I rise today to recognize a great patriot, sailor and fellow Floridian, VADM Gordon S. Holder. Vice Admiral Holder is retiring after a distinguished 36-year career in the United States Navy. Gordon Holder entered naval service in 1968 after graduating from Florida State, University in Tallahassee and completion of the Officer Candidate School in Newport RI. Since then he as served with distinction in peace and war in a variety of command and staff positions on shore and at sea. Vice Admiral Holder's illustrious career includes sea duty on the USS William C. Lawe (DD 763) as First Lieutenant and Combat Information Center Officer, USS Brumby (DE 1044) as Operations Officer, USS Boulder (LST 1190) as Chief Engineer, and USS Hermitage (LSD 34) as Executive Officer. His first command at sea was USS Inflict (MSO 456), with subsequent commanding officer afloat tours in USS Whidbey Island (LSD 41) and USS Austin (LPD 4). He has also served staff tours with Commander Seventh Fleet and Commander Naval Forces, U.S. Central Command as Fleet Exercises and Amphibious Warfare Officer, and with Amphibious Group Two as Assistant Chief of Staff for Operations and Plans. Shore tours include Aide to the Commandant Sixth Naval District and Commander Naval Base Charleston, Company Officer and Special Assistant to the Commandant, U.S. Naval Academy, and Assistant Surface Commander Assignments Officer, Naval Military Personnel Command. In 1980, Vice Admiral Holder graduated with distinction from the Air Command and Staff College at Air University, Montgomery, AL. Vice Admiral Holder was selected for promotion to flag rank in December 1993 and has served as Commander Naval Surface Group Middle Pacific and Commander Naval Base Pearl Harbor, Commander Naval Doctrine Command, Commander Amphibious Group Two, and Commander, Military Sealift Command. Vice Admiral Holder assumed his current duties as Director for Logistics on the Joint Staff on September 4, 2001 just one week prior to the fateful attacks on U.S. soil. In this capacity he has worked tirelessly and with great success to plan, organize and direct the massive logistics effort of the nation in support of our Armed Forces in the global war on terrorism, including successful combat operations in Afghanistan and Iraq. At the same time, he has been instrumental in guiding the transformation of military logistics to a true 21st century structure that links industry, supply, transportation, maintenance and management systems capable of supporting our forces around the globe. Vice Admiral Holder has had direct and far-reaching influence on numerous policies, programs and operations that support our soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines, including, most notably the rotation of forces in Operation Iraqi Freedom, the largest movement of American forces since World War II. I ask my colleagues to join me in thanking Vice Admiral Holder for the leadership he has provided, for the care and concern he has demonstrated for our service members and their families and for his dedicated and honorable service to our Nation and Navy. As he turns to retired life, we wish him, his wife Pat and family Godspeed and all the best in the future.

Mr. NELSON of Florida

Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, I rise today in support of a bill I introduced today to set up a national program to reduce the loss of life and property due to windstorms. This bill recently passed the House of Representatives and it will be addressed and hopefully passed during the Senate Commerce Committee markup tomorrow. We all know the catastrophic damage that windstorms can cause. In fact, the highest level of material damage and loss of life in this country has been attributed to hurricanes, tropical storms, tornadoes and thunderstorms. My State of Florida, as a coastal State, has been especially affected. In 1992, Hurricane Andrew caused losses in excess of $26.5 billion. And annually the average financial loss due to tornadoes, thunderstorms and hurricanes is $6.3 billion. So increasing our understanding of windstorms, assessing the performance of our buildings, structures and infrastructures during windstorms, reducing the impact of wind hazards through retrofitting buildings and changing construction practices and transferring this knowledge to the pubic and building professionals is desperately needed. And this bill accomplishes all of those things. It is a coordinated plan to reduce material losses and human suffering. An interagency working group consisting of representatives of the National Science Foundation, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the National Institute of Standards and Technology and the Federal Emergency Management Agency will be responsible for planning and managing this program. The program will have three goals: Improved understanding of windstorms, windstorm impact assessment, and windstorm impact reduction. How do we achieve this? Data collection and analysis, outreach, technology transfer, and research and development. As a result of this program, we will translate existing and future information and research findings into cost-effective and affordable practices for design and construction professionals, and State and local officials. And this interagency group will provide biennial updates of their progress to Congress so we know what progress has been made and what more needs to be done. We'll also get a broad cross-section of interests involved through an advisory committee--so that real-life issues are addressed and onsite expertise is utilized. And my hope is that the devastation of Hurricane Andrew will never be experienced again in my State of Florda or in any other State. This bill and help us achieve that and I urge my collegues' support.

Mr. NELSON of Florida

Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, I rise today in support of a bill I introduced today to set up a national program to reduce the loss of life and property due to windstorms. This bill recently passed the House of Representatives and it will be addressed and hopefully passed during the Senate Commerce Committee markup tomorrow. We all know the catastrophic damage that windstorms can cause. In fact, the highest level of material damage and loss of life in this country has been attributed to hurricanes, tropical storms, tornadoes and thunderstorms. My State of Florida, as a coastal State, has been especially affected. In 1992, Hurricane Andrew caused losses in excess of $26.5 billion. And annually the average financial loss due to tornadoes, thunderstorms and hurricanes is $6.3 billion. So increasing our understanding of windstorms, assessing the performance of our buildings, structures and infrastructures during windstorms, reducing the impact of wind hazards through retrofitting buildings and changing construction practices and transferring this knowledge to the pubic and building professionals is desperately needed. And this bill accomplishes all of those things. It is a coordinated plan to reduce material losses and human suffering. An interagency working group consisting of representatives of the National Science Foundation, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the National Institute of Standards and Technology and the Federal Emergency Management Agency will be responsible for planning and managing this program. The program will have three goals: Improved understanding of windstorms, windstorm impact assessment, and windstorm impact reduction. How do we achieve this? Data collection and analysis, outreach, technology transfer, and research and development. As a result of this program, we will translate existing and future information and research findings into cost-effective and affordable practices for design and construction professionals, and State and local officials. And this interagency group will provide biennial updates of their progress to Congress so we know what progress has been made and what more needs to be done. We'll also get a broad cross-section of interests involved through an advisory committee--so that real-life issues are addressed and onsite expertise is utilized. And my hope is that the devastation of Hurricane Andrew will never be experienced again in my State of Florda or in any other State. This bill and help us achieve that and I urge my collegues' support.

Mr. NELSON of Florida

Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, I would like the record to reflect that I was necessarily absent for the vote on the DeWine- Kennedy Amendment offered to the FSC/ETI bill on Thursday, July 15, 2004. Had I been present, I would have voted in favor of the amendment.

Mr. NELSON of Florida

Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, I would like to speak briefly about the Australia FTA. On balance, this agreement will benefit the United States and benefit Florida, and I will vote in favor of it. This is consistent with my record of supporting fair trade, opening overseas markets to Florida exports, creating jobs and economic growth in this country. This agreement eliminates Australia's manufacturing tariffs, giving companies access to Australian markets. Florida exports a significant amount of goods and services, such as fertilizers, high technology computer simulators and aircraft parts. Florida companies and businesses support this agreement, because exports to Australia will create jobs in across many sectors. Now, this agreement has important provisions relating to Florida's citrus industry that merit attention and oversight. The citrus industry is Florida's second largest--90,000 jobs depend on it, and the industry has a $9 billion economic impact on the State. First, I would like to take a moment to reiterate the importance of preserving the tariff on imported frozen concentrated orange juice in the FTAA and WTO negotiations. I have spoken often in the past about this issue and I am going to continue to fight to preserve the tariff. Senator Kerry has already acknowledged how important the tariff is to Florida. I would also like to again urge the President to state publicly, in clear language, that we will not negotiate any reduction of the tariff. In fact, I am pleased to see that the administration worked with Australia in this agreement to address another sensitive commodity, sugar. Sugar was excluded from the agreement, because of the unique circumstance surrounding the trade of sugar. We must reform international sugar trade not on a regional, or bilateral basis, but with the WTO. I would hope that the unique circumstances surrounding Brazil's manipulation of the citrus trade will lend it similar treatment in an FTAA. With respect to the Australia FTA, this agreement presents an opportunity to resolve an outstanding issue between the U.S. and Australia that could pave the way for increased exports of Florida citrus. For the past 13 years, Florida's Department of Agriculture has worked with Australia to develop a protocol for the export of citrus to that country. Unfortunately, we have achieved only limited progress because Australia has effectively stonewalled the process at every step. Florida's citrus industry has worked hard to meet the import protocol requirements set by Australia, only to have Australia change them. This administration must work with Australia to resolve issues inhibiting exports of Florida grapefruit in a timely fashion. This is important to the implementation of this agreement. Most recently, after Florida's industry addressed the concern raised by the Australians on canker, they raised the issue of ``post-bloom fruit drop,'' PFD. This is more a weather condition anomaly, not a major disease concern that exists in a great deal of citrus production around the world, and it very difficult to transmit. And although PFD transmission to Australia is not 100 percent impossible, it is as close to impossible as anything the industry has seen. Australia must not put excessive protocols on Florida's producers because it could be a disastrous precedent for Florida's grapefruit industry, as other foreign markets could adopt this same non-tariff trade barrier. The Australia FTA calls for the development of protocols to address many standing trade issues that have existed over the last several years--including Florida citrus. The agreement calls for negotiators to complete this process within a six month timeframe. This administration should seize this opportunity to resolve this issue in order to pave the way for increased Florida citrus exports to Australia. The U.S. Government should remain committed to producing a reasonable, scientifically-based protocol that will not jeopardize other export markets or opportunities. Moreover, it is important that this process be completed on a timely basis to enable Florida's industry to enter the Australian market next season, which opens this November. While I am a supporting the Australia trade agreement, I would like to take this opportunity to express my concern over other provisions included in it that could hamper congressional efforts to allow the importation of cheaper drugs from other nations. I am a strong supporter of importation simply because I can no longer defend the exorbitant drug prices paid for by our Nation's citizens. The language in the agreement does not expressly prohibit the importation of drugs from other nations. However, because it is based on current law, any changes allowing importation would be in conflict with the terms of the agreement. I am confident that the overall benefits of this agreement warrant my support and that should similar provisions dealing with importation be attempted in future trade agreements, enough opposition would rise to ensure that Americans do not continue to subsidize the cost of drugs for the rest of the world.

Mr. NELSON of Florida

Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, today, it is my honor and my privilege to recognize one of the finest officers in the U.S. Navy, and a good friend of mine, ADM James O. Ellis, Jr. For the past 3 years, ADM Jim Ellis has demonstrated his leadership as commander of United States Strategic Command. During his time at Offutt AFB, in Nebraska, Jim Ellis personified the Navy's core values of integrity, selfless service, and excellence in all things. I join the many Members and staff who enjoyed the opportunity to meet with him on a variety of strategic issues and came to appreciate his ability to integrate his many talents at Offutt. Admiral Ellis is retiring from his post tomorrow. There will be a ceremony in Omaha to honor him that I will attend. Today, it is my privilege to recognize with admiration and thanks some of Admiral Ellis' many accomplishments since he entered the military 35 years ago, and to commend the superb service he provided the Navy, the Congress and the Nation. Admiral Ellis is a 1969 graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy. He was designated a Naval aviator in 1971 and has held a variety of sea and shore assignments since 1972. His sea duty billets as a Navy fighter pilot included tours with Fighter Squadron 92 aboard USS Constellation, CV 64, and Fighter Squadron 1 aboard USS Ranger, CV 61. From early in his career, Jim Ellis' exceptional leadership skills were evident as he repeatedly proved himself in select command positions. Admiral Ellis was the first Commanding Officer of Strike/ Fighter Squadron 131, deploying in 1985 with new F/A-18 Hornets aboard USS Coral Sea, CV 43. He served as executive officer of the nuclear- powered aircraft carrier USS Carl Vinson, CVN 70, and as commanding officer of USS LaSalle, AGF 3, the Arabian Gulf flagship of the Commander, Joint Task Force, Middle East. In 1991, Admiral Ellis assumed command of the USS Abraham Lincoln, CVN 72, and participated in Operation Desert Storm while deployed during her maiden voyage in the western Pacific and Arabian Gulf. In June 1995, Admiral Ellis assumed command of Carrier Group FIVE/Battle Force SEVENTH Fleet, breaking his flag aboard USS Independence, CV 62, forward deployed to the Western Pacific and homeported in Yokosuka, Japan. As carrier battle group commander he led contingency response operations to both the Arabian Gulf and Taiwan Straits. Admiral Ellis also excelled in a variety of key shore and staff assignments that included tours as an experimental/operational test pilot, service in the Navy Office of Legislative Affairs, and duty as F/A-18 program coordinator, deputy chief of Naval Operations, Air Warfare. He also served as deputy commander and chief of Staff, Joint Task Force FIVE, the counternarcotics force for U.S. Commander in Chief Pacific. In November 1993 he reported as inspector general, U.S. Atlantic Fleet, and subsequently served as director for Operations, Plans and Policy, N3/N5, on the staff of the commander in chief, U.S. Atlantic Fleet. He assumed duties as deputy chief of Naval Operations-- Plans, Policy and Operations--in November 1996. Admiral Ellis became commander in chief, U.S. Naval Forces, Europe headquartered in London, England, and commander in chief, Allied Forces, Southern Europe headquartered in Naples, Italy, in October 1998. During his time serving in Europe, Admiral Ellis provided support to NATO forces as they waged war over Kosovo. I was especially pleased when he was nominated to continue service to the Nation as commander, U.S. Strategic Command in 2001. As such, Admiral Ellis is responsible for the global command and control of U.S. strategic forces and provides a sweeping range of strategic capabilities and options for the President and Secretary of Defense. While combatant commander in 2002, Admiral Ellis oversaw the merger of U.S. Space Command with U.S. Strategic Command, demonstrating exemplary leadership during a critical period of transition. Over the years, Admiral Ellis's leadership, professionalism and expertise enabled him to foster exceptional rapport with many Members of both the Senate and the House. I am personally grateful for his friendship. I offer congratulations to him and his wife, Polly, on his exceptionally well-deserved retirement. The Congress and country applaud the selfless commitment his entire family has made to the Nation in supporting his military career. I know I speak for all my colleagues in expressing my heartfelt appreciation to Admiral Ellis. We wish our friend the best of luck. He is truly a credit to both the Navy and the Nation.

Mr. NELSON of Florida

Mr. NELSON of Florida. Will the Senator yield?

Mr. NELSON of Florida. It is also the cost of prescription drugs, I add to my colleague from Illinois. I will tell you of the riveting experience I had last week as I was doing townhall meetings in my State of Florida, where a senior citizen, a lady, broke down crying in the middle of a jam-packed townhall meeting as we were talking about the issues of the day such as Iraq. She said: I cannot afford a roof over my head and the cost of prescription drugs. She said: I don't have any choice; I have to provide a home. That means I cannot buy prescription drugs. Yet what did we do in this Senate? The Senator from Illinois and I did not vote for the prescription drug bill because it said Medicare could not negotiate by using bulk purchases, negotiating the price of drugs down as does the Veterans' Administration. It is inexcusable. It is unexplainable, except that it rewards special interest politics to the neglect of senior citizens and allows those prescription drug prices to stay as high as they are so seniors cannot afford them. Would the Senator reflect on that experience I had in my townhall meeting?