Bill Nelson

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 President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.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

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 President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.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. Mr. President, I wish to talk about the CARE Act. I rise to speak in favor of the Charity Aid Recovery and Empowerment Act, or the CARE Act. As the Senate is considering this legislation, it is important to remember both Republicans and Democrats have cosponsored the CARE Act. This reflects the bipartisan spirit of this legislation which out of this legislative caldron was created by compromise, and we had last year as the goal of increasing charitable giving and helping the needy. In light of the uncertain economy, charities across the Nation are serving the needs of more people with fewer resources. This particular legislation is an opportunity to encourage Americans to help their neighbors, community, and their country by giving. By extending the charitable contribution deduction for 86 million Americans who do not itemize their tax returns, and allowing people to make charitable contributions from their individual development accounts, IDAs, this legislation creates incentives for giving to charity. This legislation also provides an enhanced charitable deduction for restaurants and businesses that make donations of food to charitable organizations. For some two decades, my wife Grace and I have been working with organizations to distribute food to the hungry. One such organization is back in our State of Florida. It is actually a part of our State Department of Agriculture. Its name is Farm Share. What it operates on is the original concept of gleaning, which was a biblical concept. In biblical times it was their social security system. When the farmers would go in and harvest the field, they would leave the rest of the crop so that then the poor people could come into the field and harvest the remaining crop, called gleaning; that was their way to support those least fortunate in the society of the day. When you take that ancient concept and bring it forward to today, look at all the crops that are wasted. So this concept of Farm Share, a part of our State Department of Agriculture, although not going directly into the field, what we find is enormous amounts of edible food wasted in the distribution process--in the collection, in the actual harvesting, then at the packinghouse and the rest of the distribution process. So what Farm Share does is go to the packinghouse where tomatoes, for example, a winter crop in south Florida, might have a blemish on them. They are completely edible, but they might not be marketable for that particular company buying those tomatoes. Or a company that uses a lot of tomatoes, such as McDonald's Corporation, wants a tomato of a certain size. So the tomatoes that are not that size are discarded. But it is good food that is going to waste. It is a form of gleaning, to save that, to have it packaged, and then ready for distribution. When my wife and I announce a distribution and we reach out to all the soup kitchens and reach out to the churches that are so effective throughout the communities in distributing food to the poor, when we send word out that the next morning there is going to be a distribution of food, and you arrive the next morning, there is a lump in your throat to suddenly see the lines of hundreds of hungry people in America; that they are so grateful, so orderly, so polite, and so thankful for the food that is going to be distributed. It is not unusual I would come as a cosponsor of this act and be very thankful that the Senate is considering it. It looks as if we have our differences worked out, and we are going to be able to pass it. This new legislation is more than just tax provisions. Individual development accounts are also expanded in this legislation. These IDAs are special savings accounts that offer matching contributions from participating banks or community organizations. This innovative program encourages low-income families to build assets and proposes reduced costs for banks and community organizations that offer the IDAs. This legislation also increases the funding for the social services block grant. That supplies States with resources to support a variety of social services. These funds can be used to assist the elderly and disabled so they do not need to enter institutions. Those funds can also be used to prevent child and elder abuse and to prevent things that go on that we read about in the newspaper that we shudder at in regard to the care of our elderly. These funds can be used to provide child care, to promote and support adoption, and many other purposes. By creating tax incentives for charitable contributions we can help support and give incentives to the natural instincts of the American people, which are to be generous, to give. When they do, faith-based and community organizations can pass on the gains to a community. We know that faith-based groups are doing good work all over the country, and their work is already being funded by Federal dollars because they are running programs that work to better people's lives. These faith-based groups operate soup kitchens, they run homeless shelters, and they rehabilitate drug users. Our Nation already funds many of these programs. I have seen these programs all over Florida. I have seen them here in Washington, DC. Anyone would be amazed just a stone's throw from where we are in the U.S. Capitol at the kinds of programs going on in the inner city to feed the poor and minister to the least privileged in society. Lives have been changed. I have seen cities, particularly the inner cities, being transformed from neglect to respect. This legislation is all about grassroots change, change from the ground up, by people who are close to the problems and who care enough to take up the challenge. I have cosponsored this legislation before. I am going to continue to work with our colleagues to try to find ways to help those who help others. This is one way. As we have been considering this emergency funding bill that we just passed and that is now in the conference committee, I thank the Senate for increasing the food aid. Back earlier when we were considering legislation, the task fell to me to increase the appropriation with regard to food aid, particularly destined for Africa, where they are experiencing another enormous drought which has caused a great deal of famine and death. The United States is a generous country. So, too, from our generosity, when we see a problem such as that, we want to try to take care of it. We passed a level of increased food aid here at $500 million. It was watered down in conference to $250 million. A lot of that money was squirreled away from Africa to meet the food needs there will be in Iraq. Because of that, a few nights ago on this floor we agreed to an amendment to the emergency supplemental appropriations bill that would have an additional $600 million to go for emergency food assistance. That will then be able to get to Africa with all of its famine that is ravaging the land. It is my hope, as the Appropriations Committees are meeting in conference right now on the emergency supplemental to determine the final outcome, that they will honor all those images they have seen on television of starving children and they will not reduce that $600 million very much. It is with this spirit of thanks, of humility, and thanksgiving that I come to speak on behalf of this legislation and to thank the Senate and the many participants here who have worked out all the kinks in this legislation so we could pass it in a unanimous fashion. I yield the floor.

Mr. NELSON of Florida

Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, I wish to call the attention of the Senate to the important events happening right now in the island nation of Cuba. Over the past several weeks, Fidel Castro has been rounding up democracy activists, independent journalists, librarians, and signers of the Varela Project and throwing them in jail. Fidel Castro has used the world's focus on the war in Iraq to divert attention in order for him to brutally crack down and further oppress Cubans who yearn for freedom. It has been difficult to get the exact number, but we think it is approximately 80 Cubans who have been arrested. Yesterday, a number of those activists who had been arrested were sentenced to terms of 15 to 25 years--if you can believe that--on charges of ``undermining the socialist state.'' It is reported that at least 11 of those could get life sentences, and at least one could get the death penalty. I take the floor of the Senate to call to its attention that last night the Senate passed S. Res. 97, a resolution introduced by this Senator from Florida and cosponsored by the junior Senator from Virginia, Mr. Allen. The resolution passed the Senate unanimously. It condemns these actions, and it calls for the release of the prisoners of conscience in Cuba. Why did the Senate want to take a stand, and why do we want to bring further attention to this other than has already been in the Nation's newspapers, pointing out that under the cloak of the world's attention being diverted to Iraq, Fidel Castro has started this crackdown and these arrests and these sentences, even possibly a death sentence? Well, it goes back to the fact that the Cuban Government does not like the world's attention that has been brought to the courageous 11,000 people who signed the petition under the Cuban law--the Cuban Constitution--which said that if at least 10,000 people sign a petition, the issues in that petition are then brought to the national assembly for action. Not only did 10,000 brave, courageous Cuban souls sign that petition, but over 11,000 did. It called for actions that you and I take for granted. It called for freedom of speech, freedom of the press, release of political prisoners, and a free enterprise economy. It called for them to be brought before the Cuban National Assembly. The Varela Project embodies the principles upon which all the world agrees: the right of the Cuban people to petition their government for civil and human rights, including free and fair elections. The leader of this project, Oswaldo Paya, has continued to advance this important project at great risk to himself, his family, and his associates. In May of 2002, Oswaldo Paya led a group of Cuban citizens who delivered exactly 11,020 verified signatures to the Cuban National Assembly supporting that referendum on civil liberties and all of the issues I have mentioned. These are basic rights to which anyone is entitled. Recent reports indicate that the Varela network has been especially targeted in this crackdown by Fidel Castro. I take us back to last year, realizing the courageous effort by Senor Paya and the signers of that petition. I sponsored and this Senate adopted the resolution 87 to 0, with the help of other supporters of the resolution, Senator Dodd and Senator Helms. That resolution commended the Varela Project and Oswaldo Paya. It was an early step to providing international attention and support to Mr. Paya and those who signed on to the Varela Project. The resolution that was adopted last year 87 to 0 was obviously bipartisan, and the resolution that was just adopted last night is similarly bipartisan and builds on that previous consensus and highlights that upon which we can all agree. What is that? The resolution that was adopted last night condemns the recent arrest and other intimidation tactics against democracy activists by the Castro regime, and it calls on the Cuban Government to immediately release those imprisoned during the most recent crackdown for the acts that the Government of Cuba wrongly deems ``subversive, counter revolutionary, and provocative.'' The resolution adopted last night also reaffirms S. Res. 272, the Varela Project resolution, that the Senate unanimously agreed upon last year, which calls for, among other things, amnesty for all political prisoners. The resolution we adopted last night praises the bravery of those Cubans who, because they had simply practiced free speech and signed the Varela Project petition, have now been targeted in this most recent government crackdown. The resolution we adopted last night urges the President to demand the immediate release of all the prisoners and to take all appropriate steps to secure their immediate release. I wish to say this to those with whom we have contact from time to time representing the Cuban Government: We in the Senate are watching. We are not going to let Fidel Castro get away with these kinds of actions. And we are going to keep the glare of the public spotlight and the glare of world view in the international community on this kind of thuggery. We are going to call him to account in the name of human dignity and freedom because even in Cuba people are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, among these life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. I specifically thank our Foreign Relations Committee which absolutely whizzed this resolution through the committee, our committee chairman, Senator Lugar, and our ranking member, Senator Biden. I thank the subcommittee chairman, Senator Coleman. I thank my cosponsor, Senator Allen. I thank our ranking member of the Western Hemisphere Subcommittee, Senator Dodd. All of them gave the green light and speeded this process. I am going to continue to seek common ground with my colleagues as we seek to support the Cuban people in their struggle for freedom. I hope with this resolution having just been adopted that the administration will pursue a similar resolution of condemnation in the United Nations, and that the administration will seek immediate international support to secure the release of these and all freedom-loving Cubans who have been wrongly jailed because it is only through the constant and sustained recognition of this issue that our chances will be improved of creating forces of change on that long-suffering island. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. NELSON of Florida. Will the Senator yield?

Mr. NELSON of FLORIDA

Mr. NELSON of FLORIDA. Mr. President, I am pleased to join with my colleague, Senator Durbin of Illinois, and others, in introducing a Corporate Average Fuel Efficiency bill that requires passenger vehicles to have an average fuel efficiency of 40 miles per gallon and nonpassenger vehicles to have an average fuel efficiency 27.5 miles per gallon by 2015. This proposal should be an important part of the upcoming debate on the energy needs of our country. I was very disappointed last year during the energy debate when several meaningful CAFE proposals were defeated. Now, as we again embark on the important task of determining how our country's energy needs will be met in the coming decades, CAFE increases should be a part of the plan. It has been said many times, but is worth repeating: the purpose of increasing CAFE is to reduce fuel consumption. The U.S. consumes 25 percent of the world's oil, but only has 3 percent of the world's reserves--so we have to use less of it and find alternatives. Our national security depends on it. If we don't have to rely on other countries, many of whom do not support our policies and may be in fact be working against us, for our energy, we as a nation are more secure. And increasing CAFE protects the environment. Toxic air emissions and carbon dioxide emissions are reduced--thereby slowing global warming. The automobile manufacturers won't embrace this proposal, but they should. The 2001 National Academy of Sciences' report said 40 mph is possible and feasible. The technology exists to raise CAFE significantly with no net consumer costs. And, developing technologies, including hybrid vehicle designs, could improve vehicle fuel economy by 20-40 percent. We're perfectly willing to give auto manufacturers the lead time necessary to make these strides, but the benchmark has to be there to spur them into action. The pay off to our national security, environment, level of technological expertise and market share will be worth the effort. I have faith in the ingenuity of our automakers and the adaptability of the American consumer to make an increased CAFE standard profitable. For these reasons, I lend my support to Senator Durbin's measure and look forward to working with my colleagues on this issue during the upcoming energy debate.

Mr. NELSON of FLORIDA

Mr. NELSON of FLORIDA. Mr. President, I am pleased to join with my colleague, Senator Durbin of Illinois, and others, in introducing a Corporate Average Fuel Efficiency bill that requires passenger vehicles to have an average fuel efficiency of 40 miles per gallon and nonpassenger vehicles to have an average fuel efficiency 27.5 miles per gallon by 2015. This proposal should be an important part of the upcoming debate on the energy needs of our country. I was very disappointed last year during the energy debate when several meaningful CAFE proposals were defeated. Now, as we again embark on the important task of determining how our country's energy needs will be met in the coming decades, CAFE increases should be a part of the plan. It has been said many times, but is worth repeating: the purpose of increasing CAFE is to reduce fuel consumption. The U.S. consumes 25 percent of the world's oil, but only has 3 percent of the world's reserves--so we have to use less of it and find alternatives. Our national security depends on it. If we don't have to rely on other countries, many of whom do not support our policies and may be in fact be working against us, for our energy, we as a nation are more secure. And increasing CAFE protects the environment. Toxic air emissions and carbon dioxide emissions are reduced--thereby slowing global warming. The automobile manufacturers won't embrace this proposal, but they should. The 2001 National Academy of Sciences' report said 40 mph is possible and feasible. The technology exists to raise CAFE significantly with no net consumer costs. And, developing technologies, including hybrid vehicle designs, could improve vehicle fuel economy by 20-40 percent. We're perfectly willing to give auto manufacturers the lead time necessary to make these strides, but the benchmark has to be there to spur them into action. The pay off to our national security, environment, level of technological expertise and market share will be worth the effort. I have faith in the ingenuity of our automakers and the adaptability of the American consumer to make an increased CAFE standard profitable. For these reasons, I lend my support to Senator Durbin's measure and look forward to working with my colleagues on this issue during the upcoming energy debate.

Mr. NELSON of Florida

Mr. NELSON of Florida. Will the Senator yield?

Mr. NELSON of Florida. I join my colleague from Florida in supporting his amendment. The Senator clearly has examples all over the country but we, especially, have examples in our State of Florida of backlogs of 6 months before a veteran can get an appointment. One of the clinics has enrollment backlogs of up to 2 years just to get in the system. There are 44,000 veterans in Florida who are backlogged, waiting 6 months for appointments. Nationwide, there are 230,000 veterans waiting to get an appointment and have to wait 6 months. That is unconscionable. Then, the administration, in trying to deal with the shortage of money, has denied enrollment of what is called category 8 veterans which are not service connected and have an income of over $24,000 a year. They cannot even get into the system. Nationwide, that is 360,000 veterans. I think my colleague from Florida has made the case most pointedly and I certainly will support the distinguished senior Senator from Florida.

Mr. NELSON of Florida

Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, as U.S. and allied forces steadfastly close on Baghdad, they come closer to liberating the people of Iraq, and closer to ridding the world of a menace to global peace. Our troops are performing magnificently. The young men and women of our armed forces have served bravely and honorably, and have made me proud. When the bombing stops and the war is over, the world will be a safer place. But make no mistake, the American commitment in Iraq must endure for a long haul. It is incumbent upon the United States to ensure Iraq's transition to a freedom. One element critical to post-conflict reconstruction has already begun, and must continue throughout the fighting. That element is the supply of food and humanitarian relief to the people of Iraq. The supplemental does provide some funds for humanitarian relief, but it is not enough. The Senator from Wisconsin has offered an amendment to this legislation which would provide $600 million in funding in emergency food relief for P.L. 480, Title Two and the Emerson Humanitarian Trust. This $600 million the amendment provides is based on close consultation with organizations who know the situation well from their humanitarian work. The Kohl amendment is vitally important to ongoing operations in Iraq. It: restores funds diverted from other emergency food assistance provided in P.L. 480 activities--including those in Africa--that have been redirected for assistance to Iraq; restores 800,000 metric tons of Emerson Trust, another humanitarian food relief program, because of previous releases this year; and allows for at least one third of food aid needs for Iraq, as identified by the World Food Program. Historically, the U.S. provides one half of emergency food aid needs. At the time hostilities commenced in Iraq, the U.N. Oil for Food Program provided food to over 60 percent of the Iraqi people via over 40,000 feeding stations. These feeding stations were run by the regime of Saddam Hussein. Hopefully, U.S. and coalition forces can restore the program quickly. But hope alone will not feed Iraqi families left starving by a disruption in this program. The world Food Program has just announced an overall appeal of $1.3 billion for food aid for Iraq for the next 6 months. We must make adequate preparations right now to provide the food assistance required of us. The Kohl amendment delivers on this moral imperative by providing funds needed for the remainder of this fiscal year in the event significant Oil for Food Program revenues are not available, or is otherwise unable to function. In another part of the globe desperately needing food assistance, the droughts in sub-Saharan Africa have caused a massive food shortage over the last several months. The toll of this famine threatens millions of Africans and could be far worse than anything we have seen previously. The terrible epidemic of HIV/AIDS, which is currently ravaging the continent, destroys the immune systems of its victims. When further weakened by malnutrition, they are unable to fight off even the most mild illnesses thereby exacerbating the impact of the food shortage. In addition, we know there is still about $250-$350 million shortfall in food assistance to Africa for this fiscal year, which the Congress was unable to provide during consideration of the omnibus appropriations legislation for 2003. It is vitally important that food assistance to this region not be shortchanged, forcing us to choose which mouths to feed, on which continents. Similarly, there have been droughts in regions of Haiti. The United States currently provides food assistance to Haiti from P.L. 480, Title Two, to the tune of about $22 million, or about 40 percent of our bilateral assistance. This assistance is so important because it is one of the few ways in which we can help the Haitian people, without providing assistance to a corrupt government. We do not provide Haiti with other forms of assistance commonly provided to other countries, like economic support funds or development assistance. This is due to the political stalemate, almost 3 years old, and the inability of President Aristide to take any meaningful and demonstrable steps to resolve the crisis and improve conditions. Therefore, the integrity of the food assistance to Haiti must be protected and preserved in its entirety. The Kohl Amendment does so. This provision also provides initial resources that will be needed to win the peace in Iraq. It does not specifically designate the funds for Iraq, to be consistent with the way we have traditionally appropriated food assistance governed by P.L. 480 Title II funds, but I trust that these funds will be used for the purpose for which they are intended-- feeding the Iraqi people without raiding important food assistance accounts for other regions, such as sub-Saharan Africa, and Haiti. We must act now. I urge support of the Kohl Amendment.

Mr. NELSON of Florida

Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, it is a central element of our national character to pay solemn tribute to the service of those who have worn the uniform of our Armed Forces and placed themselves in harm's way to defend our freedom and way of life. We raise monuments to the deeds of our great wartime leaders as well as the countless, often nameless heroes of those battles fought throughout our history. We also set aside special days to remember the sacrifice of generations of Americans who have stepped forward in America's defense. This Nation also sets aside special places, hallowed ground, where we lay to rest those who have served us in our hour of greatest need. Our National Cemetery system is not only hallowed ground, National Cemeteries are monuments to military service, the places where we go on those special days to pay tribute to the sacrifice of so many in our history. National Cemeteries remind us of where we have been as a Nation, and inspires future generations to uphold the legacy of our veterans' devotion and sacrifice. Today I offer legislation to establish a National Cemetery near Jacksonville, Florida to meet the needs of thousands of veterans who have chosen to live out their lives in Northeast Florida and Southeast Georgia. Florida's veteran population is the second largest in the Nation. Right now in Northern Florida and Southern Georgia, there are nearly half-a-million veterans. Florida has the Nation's oldest veteran population and one of the largest remaining populations of World War II veterans. We are all aware that this greatest of generations is passing away at higher and higher rates. Unfortunately for these hundreds of thousands of veterans in Florida and Georgia, the nearest National Cemetery is located in Bushnell, FL, which is a three-hour drive from Jacksonville. The National Cemetery in St. Augustine is full and closed. The nearest National Cemetery in Georgia is in Marietta just north of Atlanta. Our veterans have defended our country in her days of peril, and certainly deserve to rest in honored respect in a National Cemetery. To meet our obligations to the veterans of Northeast Florida and Southeast Georgia, we must act now, in order to have this facility established by 2006 when our World War II veterans' deaths are expected to reach their peak. I am proud to sponsor this important bill, and look forward to the support of my colleagues as we provide for our veterans who have given so much for our country. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. NELSON of Florida

Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, it is a central element of our national character to pay solemn tribute to the service of those who have worn the uniform of our Armed Forces and placed themselves in harm's way to defend our freedom and way of life. We raise monuments to the deeds of our great wartime leaders as well as the countless, often nameless heroes of those battles fought throughout our history. We also set aside special days to remember the sacrifice of generations of Americans who have stepped forward in America's defense. This Nation also sets aside special places, hallowed ground, where we lay to rest those who have served us in our hour of greatest need. Our National Cemetery system is not only hallowed ground, National Cemeteries are monuments to military service, the places where we go on those special days to pay tribute to the sacrifice of so many in our history. National Cemeteries remind us of where we have been as a Nation, and inspires future generations to uphold the legacy of our veterans' devotion and sacrifice. Today I offer legislation to establish a National Cemetery near Jacksonville, Florida to meet the needs of thousands of veterans who have chosen to live out their lives in Northeast Florida and Southeast Georgia. Florida's veteran population is the second largest in the Nation. Right now in Northern Florida and Southern Georgia, there are nearly half-a-million veterans. Florida has the Nation's oldest veteran population and one of the largest remaining populations of World War II veterans. We are all aware that this greatest of generations is passing away at higher and higher rates. Unfortunately for these hundreds of thousands of veterans in Florida and Georgia, the nearest National Cemetery is located in Bushnell, FL, which is a three-hour drive from Jacksonville. The National Cemetery in St. Augustine is full and closed. The nearest National Cemetery in Georgia is in Marietta just north of Atlanta. Our veterans have defended our country in her days of peril, and certainly deserve to rest in honored respect in a National Cemetery. To meet our obligations to the veterans of Northeast Florida and Southeast Georgia, we must act now, in order to have this facility established by 2006 when our World War II veterans' deaths are expected to reach their peak. I am proud to sponsor this important bill, and look forward to the support of my colleagues as we provide for our veterans who have given so much for our country. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. NELSON of Florida

Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, I have gone around to the National Guard units that have been activated in my State of Florida, and I have gone to the Reserve units, merely representing our grateful Nation. These people have gone off to war, seeing tearful spouses, with the uncertainty of their economic future. And that economic uncertainty is not only from their standpoint as a guard or reservist, but it is also from their employer's standpoint. And yet we see a unity and a coming together that is part of the strength of the character of us as a people. It is with profound gratitude and humility that I express my support for this resolution for a fighting force of men and women who are not only in the military all over the world but who are civilian as well. In fact, some of our civilian agencies today were in Iraq, prior to the military units arriving there, along with other clandestine military units performing enormous intelligence functions for us. It is a profound gratefulness that this Nation expresses to our military and civilians. I particularly wish to call to the attention of the Senate paragraph (5). Paragraph (5) of the resolution states that Congress: Joins all Americans in remembering those who lost their lives during Operation Desert Shield and Operation Desert Storm in 1991, still those missing from that conflict, including Captain Scott Speicher, United States Navy, and the thousands of Americans who have lost their lives in terrorist attacks over the years, and in the Global War on terrorism. . . . I take the time to call paragraph (5) to the attention of the Senate because of CPT Scott Speicher, the first American pilot shot down on the first night of the gulf war. Through a series of mistakes, we said he was dead. He was listed as ``killed in action.'' Years later, the Department of Defense changed his status to ``missing in action.'' And years later, the Department of Defense changed his status to ``missing, captured,'' which is ``POW.'' I have seen the early evidence, which has been made public, that a defector, who was corroborated--indeed, he passed a lie detector test, as well as being corroborated on other evidence--actually drove Speicher from near the crash site to a place near a hospital, and picked him out of a lineup of photographs. I have seen more recent information from a variety of sources that leads me to believe that Scott Speicher is alive. That opinion, by the way, is shared by my colleague, Senator Pat Roberts of Kansas, now the chairman of the Intelligence Committee, who has been, along with former Senator Bob Smith, unrelenting--all of us--in the pursuit of a clarification on the status of Scott Speicher. It is my opinion he is alive. So we have gone to our commanders, and they have assured us, we have gone to the civilian agencies, and they have assured us: Scott Speicher is at the top of their list of priorities as we are now going into Iraq, to go and find him. And, oh, what a day that would be, if he is alive, and if America can correct the mistake that our DOD made and bring that American pilot home.

Mr. NELSON of Florida

Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. NELSON of Florida

Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. NELSON of Florida

Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, I rise today to acknowledge the accomplishments of Mr. Henri Landwirth, a great philanthropist from my home State of Florida. Mr. Landwirth, a Holocaust survivor born in Belgium in 1927, has beaten the odds to live the true American dream. In addition to his success in the hotel industry, Mr. Landwirth has founded several charitable organizations. His countless acts of charity continue to affect tens of thousands of lives. Mr. Landwirth has received numerous honors for his contributions to society, and today I rise to show my appreciation for all that he has done for the state of Florida and for people in need. Henri Landwirth spend most of his teenage years during World War II in death camps and labor camps in Nazi Germany. He narrowly escaped with his life after a Nazi firing squad marched him into the woods to be shot and decided at the last minute to spare his life. After the war, Mr. Landwirth immigrated to the United States in 1950 with only $20 to his name. He was drafted into the United States Army within three years. After serving in the military and learning English, he enrolled in a course in hotel management and found entry-level employment in a New York hotel, quickly mastering his job and learning every job in the hotel. Mr. Landwirth moved to Florida in 1954, and became Manager of the 100-room Starlite Motel in Cocoa Beach near Cape Canaveral, home of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, NASA, Kennedy Space Center. The original seven astronauts, referred to as the ``Mercury Seven''--M. Scott Carpenter, L. Gordon Cooper, Jr., John Glenn, Jr.; Virgil ``Gus'' Grissom; Walter Schirra, Jr.; Alan Shepard, Jr.; and Donald ``Deke'' Slayton--chose the Starlite Motel as their temporary residence. During this period, Mr. Landwirth developed strong friendships with these astronauts, which still bind them together. Mr. Landwirth is now a partner in a successful Central Florida hotel company, with John Glenn and others, and he has spearheaded several initiatives to help those in need. He and the Mercury Seven astronauts founded the Mercury Seven Foundation, now known as the Astronaut Scholarship Foundation, which provides scholarships to young science students. In the 1970's, Mr. Landwirth founded an organization in honor of his mother, the Fanny Landwirth Foundation, through which he built a school and a center for senior citizens in Orlando, Florida. He also created a scholarship program, which allowed underprivileged Israeli students to come to the United States as visiting scholars. In 1986, Mr. Landwirth founded Give Kids the World, a non-profit resort in Kissimmee, Florida, that provides terminally ill children and their families an all-expenses paid week-long vacation to central Florida and its popular attractions. Give Kids the World has served over 55,000 children throughout the United States and worldwide. The organization has grown from serving 329 children in its first year to a 51-acre resort that can accommodate 7,000 families a year. In 1999, Mr. Landwirth founded Dignity U Wear, a Jacksonville-based foundation that provides new clothing to children and families who are homeless, abused, abandoned, or neglected. The operation donates new clothing, shoes and personal hygiene items to 98 shelters in 16 states, and is currently working to expand into 30 states across the nation. In 2001, Mr. Landwirth founded Building for Life based in Jacksonville, which works in collaboration with other organizations, Operation Hope and FreshMinisters, an interfaith organization, of which Mr. Landwirth serves on the Board of Trustees. This most recent charitable organization aims to refurbish neglected homes while providing an opportunity for the homeless to learn new job skills. I am proud to have Henri Landwirth as a citizen of the great state of Florida. On behalf of all Floridians, I offer him thanks and appreciation for all that he has done to help those in need.

Mr. NELSON of Florida

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

Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, I rise today to address the Senate on the treaty being considered for ratification, the Moscow Treaty. I want to praise the hard work of our chairman, Senator Lugar, and the ranking member, Senator Biden, and their staffs, for the diligent efforts on this treaty. Their hard work on this treaty will ultimately enhance U.S. security. This treaty describes what both the United States and Russia hope to do in a new era, and that is to reduce our respective strategic offensive nuclear weapons stockpile and to reduce it quite dramatically. Considering how strategic nuclear weapons policy has changed since the time I first came to Capitol Hill, to the House of Representatives, way back in 1978, this new Moscow Treaty is a significant accomplishment but one that failed to maximize the opportunity to provide the world with the real destruction of weapons. It is clearly a major step in the right direction, but I do not think it has gone far enough. During this debate today, we have heard about the weaknesses of this treaty, and there are some. I regret, for example, that the treaty merely de-alerts nuclear weapons. It does not require their destruction. The treaty also is weak in its timetable for reaching the lowering of the target inventories, the inventories of warheads on top of the ICBMs. The treaty brings the target down from multiples of thousands to a range between 1,700 and 2,200 weapons. But it does not offer a specific timetable for how that will occur over these next several years. I believe we can remove these weapons more rapidly, and I hope the administration will do so. I also regret the treaty does not address tactical nuclear weapons, nor does it include verification procedures beyond those of the START I treaty. I remember when I was in the House of Representatives at the time President Reagan was President, he kept saying over and over: ``Trust but verify.'' I think we could have some more of that in this treaty. Despite all of those weaknesses, reductions in our strategic offensive weapons are appropriate, and are a major step in the right direction. Our relationship with Russia has evolved into an important partnership, and we hope that partnership is going to be strengthened. As we continue to move in this century to develop a relationship under the premise that Russia is not an enemy, then that is a step in the right direction. The Presiding Officer is from the South. I am from the South. We are accustomed to seeing two strange dogs approach each other. They are very leery of each other. And pretty soon they are sniffing around each other, and pretty soon those dogs decide it is OK, they can be friends. So as we start sniffing around with this former adversary, one that we hope will be a future solid partner, we must work to build mutual trust so our nations can cooperate on other important issues of common concern to our collective security, such as fighting terrorism, and such as economic reform and development. Clearly, one of the areas we have had a very cooperative relationship in is our respective space programs. I will never forget in the midst of the cold war there was a little bit of thought when an American astronaut crew rendezvoused and docked with a Soviet crew of cosmonauts. They lived together in space for 9 days in the Apollo-Soyuz historic mission of 1975. That started the contacts between our two space programs. That ultimately led to the joint venture we have now where the Russians are a partner of ours and they are helping us. They are our partner as we build the International Space Station. By virtue of this recent tragedy with the Space Shuttle Columbia, the way we can save those three humans on board should we not be able to get another space shuttle to the space station is the fact that there is a former Soviet--now Russian--spacecraft, Soyuz, that is docked to the International Space Station that can bring that crew of two Americans and one Russian home if they need to. This relationship with Russia has extended to NATO. We look forward to cooperating with Russia on issues affecting the security of Europe and our allies. But there is one area in which the United States can provide assistance to Russia while enhancing U.S. security. In this context of the Moscow Treaty, this is critically important. Earlier today Senator Biden said we must continue to move forward and provide adequate funding to the Nunn-Lugar Cooperative Threat Reduction program and related nonproliferation programs in the Departments of Energy and State. These programs collectively facilitate the destruction of nuclear weapons. They bolster the security of the facilities containing weapons-usable and fissile material. And these programs provide for retraining of scientists. These programs are very valuable. Yet they have not been adequately funded. This administration has not come forward with the adequate request for funding for the Nunn-Lugar cooperative threat reduction program. I will tell you, there is no one I have a greater respect for than my chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, Senator Dick Lugar. I think he will tell you the same thing. The spread of nuclear weapons and associated materials is a real threat. It is one particularly evident as we weigh the options available to us to deal with so many of the threats around the globe. Look at North Korea. It is one of those threats. We must provide resources to these programs to try to stop the spread and the proliferation of nuclear materials because they enhance our security by ensuring the adequate disposal of these weapons and their fissile material. Certainly now when we are engaged in this war against terrorists, when we are trying to prevent al-Qaida sympathizers and other terrorists from acquiring such deadly weapons, we should not lack in any resources. I again make a pitch to my colleagues in the Senate to adequately fund the Nunn-Lugar cooperative threat reduction program. These programs were evaluated in a report released in January 2001 by our former colleague and now the Ambassador to Japan--Howard Baker from the State of the Presiding Officer--and his partner in that report, Lloyd Cutler. Their report clearly said these threat reduction programs are being underfunded. They call the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and weapons-usable material to be ``the most urgent unmet national security threat to the United States today.'' That is what Howard Baker and Lloyd Cutler said in their report to the Congress in 2001. That report was before an agreement was reached on the Moscow Treaty for reducing our nuclear arsenals. Now with so many new nuclear weapons coming out of service, we must consider significant action to reduce proliferation to ensure that the American people and our friends and allies around the world will be safe. The most obvious way is to bolster the Nunn-Lugar programs. I want to also speak on the subject of nuclear weapons, and I want to mention North Korea. I was very troubled to see the report that the Bush administration is slowly accepting North Korea's status as a nuclear power. This is an unconscionable abdication of leadership by this administration. North Korea has taken provocative steps. I don't know why we weren't raising Cain--I mean shaking the rafters--when those fighter aircraft buzzed our observation aircraft--our surveillance aircraft--just 2 days ago. North Korea has taken some very provocative steps hostile to the United States. It is likely they already have, according to our estimates, between one and three nuclear weapons because North Korea cheated on several international and bilateral agreements over the past decade. Since that time, they have renounced the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. They have renounced the International Atomic Energy Agency and their monitors who were there present by international agreements. They have renounced the 1994 Agreed Framework with the United States. They have been moving spent fuel rods to a reprocessing plant. Then, of course, this inexcusable incident with fighter jets to harass a U.S. reconnaissance flight in international airspace. Now, lo and behold, the President of North Korea is overtly threatening a nuclear war if the United States leads any effort to isolate them. With all of this belligerence, we have to have a plan. I would suggest that the Bush administration start working to diplomatically sit down with North Korea to start reducing tensions. We cannot and must not allow the North Koreans to develop an effective nuclear weapons arsenal. A year ago, the President, in his State of the Union Address, referred to North Korea as an ``Axis of Evil.'' Does he think that they are evil? I think he does. Do I think that they are evil? I certainly do. But is this the best way, diplomatically, to approach someone that we are trying to contain from becoming a nuclear power? We want them to stop their brutal actions against their own population, and we want to stop their proliferating technologies relating to weapons of mass destruction. So in that regard, the President was correct. But we have started to see what the consequences of that speech are. Instead of, as Theodore Roosevelt would say, ``speaking softly and carrying a big stick,'' the President made a judgment to speak harshly. And I want to know, where is the policy to back it up? This pronouncement did not cause the North Koreans to begin bad behavior and cheat on their agreements with the U.S. and the international community, but it did embolden them to harden their position and to spurn the international community and begin in earnest to openly pursue more nuclear weapons. This is now the situation in which we find ourselves. And we have to get out of it. I want this administration to have success because I think North Korea, with, a short way behind them, the country of Iran, poses the next major threat behind the threat that we are engaged in, which is, the war against terrorists. I think the United States needs some clear action. U.S. leadership is needed to get the world's declared nuclear powers to work together through the United Nations Security Council on a common response to the danger, not only in North Korea, but in Iran as well. If we fail to do so, the nightmare scenario of North Korea selling its nuclear weapons to terrorist groups and other rogue states, even their enriched uranium that they are trying to produce, all of that could become a reality. That is not good for anybody on planet Earth. I believe we ought to approach a policy where we must make North Korea understand that building an arsenal of nuclear weapons will not be tolerated and that all options to combat this threat, including the military options, have to be on the table. At the same time, we must work to form a viable regional solution with China and Russia and Japan and South Korea, but not to the exclusion of bilateral dialog with North Korea. I think all of us here are disappointed that China did not respond favorably to Secretary of State Colin Powell's recent appeals for assistance and involvement during his recent trip there. China, and other members of the Security Council, have a lot at stake. They must live up to their commitments of trying to prevent nuclear proliferation. No policy that we pursue can possibly work unless it is carried out in concert with key countries. But we are getting to the point that we cannot wait. We are going to have to devise workable policy options that the United States and North Korea may take to de-escalate this situation. So I call upon our colleagues here and our friends in the administration to begin a dialog with North Korea immediately. Each day that passes is a day that the danger notches up one more level. Again, I thank Senators Lugar and Biden for their strong leadership on these critical security issues facing our Nation. I thank them for their sponsorship of this Moscow Treaty. I will support the Moscow Treaty on the final result at the end of the day when we pass it. It is clearly in the interests of the United States. Indeed, it is in the interests of planet Earth. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. NELSON of Florida

Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, I rise today to commemorate and honor the achievements of African-Americans as the celebration of Black History Month draws to a close. I know my colleagues join me in remembering the sacrifices and contributions African-Americans have made to our country. From laying the foundation of the United States Capitol, to creating the design of the Nation's capital, a feat accomplished by noted scientist Benjamin Banneker, composing great music and writing classic literature, African- Americans' influence on our society and culture is immeasurable. So many of our modern conveniences are due to the innovation and imagination of great African-American inventors like Garrett A. Morgan, creator of the modern stop light and the gas mask, which our Nation's forces may be utilizing in combat in Iraq. The great scientist, George Washington Carver, took tiny peanuts and engineered myriad uses for them. Pioneering astronauts like Guion Bluford, and most recently, Lieutenant Colonel Michael Anderson, whom we lost in the Columbia tragedy, undertook experiments in space that will advance our technological and scientific knowledge, expanding our horizons to space and beyond. It is only fitting that we take time to remember these and other numerous accomplishments. Our Nation, and indeed the world, have benefited from the selfless sacrifices African-Americans have made in service to our country. We must continue to work to ensure that all African-Americans are afforded the opportunity to participate in, and realize, the American Dream. In the words, of Reverend Doctor Martin Luther King, Jr.: ``We are not makers of history. We are made by history.'' Indeed, the history and experiences of African-Americans have helped shape America and will continue to do so for generations to come.

Mr. NELSON of Florida

Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, the courts provide the foundation upon which the institutions of government in our free society are built. Their strength and legitimacy are derived from a long tradition of Federal judges whose knowledge, integrity and impartiality are beyond reproach. The Senate is obligated by the Constitution--and the public interest--to protect this legacy and to ensure that the public's confidence in the court system is justified and continues for many years to come. As guardians of this trust we must carefully scrutinize the credentials and qualifications of every man and woman nominated by the President to serve on the Federal bench. The men and women we approve for these lifetime appointments make important decisions each and every day, which impact the American people. Once on the bench they may be called upon to consider the extent of our right to personal privacy, our right to free speech, or even a criminal defendant's right to counsel. The importance of these positions and their influence must not be dismissed. We all have benefitted from listening to the debate about Miguel Estrada's qualifications to serve on the D.C. Circuit. I very much respect those Senators who desire to have additional information about Mr. Estrada's personal beliefs. Their efforts reflect a sound commitment to the Senate's constitutional obligation to advise and consent. At the same time, I am troubled by those who have suggested that some Senators are anti-Hispanic because they seek additional information about this nominee. Poisoning the debate with baseless accusations demeans the nomination process. After reviewing Mr. Estrada's personal and professional credentials-- including personally interviewing the nominee--I believe he is qualified to serve on the D.C. Circuit Court--and, I will vote in favor of his nomination. A Federal appellate judge's power to decide and pronounce judgment and carry it into effect is immense and comes with a moral and legal obligation to conform to the highest standards of conduct. Federal judges must possess a high degree of knowledge of established legal principles and procedures and must also be impartial, even tempered and have a well-defined sense of justice, compassion and fair play. In addition, a judge must have the integrity to leave legislating to lawmakers. Judges must have the self-restraint to avoid injecting their own personal views or ideas that may be inconsistent with existing decisional or statutory law. I believe Mr. Estrada possesses the knowledge and skills needed to be a successful court of appeals judge. Few would argue with his academic credentials, litigation experience or intelligence. And based on my conversation with him, and those who know him well, I believe he respects--and will honor--his moral and legal obligation to uphold the law impartially. However, should Mr. Estrada someday be considered for a position on the Supreme Court--as some have suggested he could be--I believe further inquiry not only will be justified, but necessary. While appellate judges are constrained to a great degree by precedent, and by a check on their power by the Supreme Court, justices on the High Court have greater latitude to insert their own ideological viewpoints. Mr. Estrada agreed wholeheartedly with this point when we discussed his nomination. Make no mistake; I believe all judicial nominees should be completely forthcoming during the confirmation process. Mr. Estrada has argued that he's satisfied a minimum threshold of disclosure, and that revealing additional information about his personal ideological beliefs may compromise his image of impartiality-- if he eventually is seated on the federal bench. I disagree with his approach, because it leads to the suspicion and mistrust--like that which now engulfs us. Furthermore, I do not believe a similar argument reasonably can be made by a nominee to the Supreme Court. Ideology can be central to the High Court's decisions. As a result, absolute disclosure by Supreme Court nominees is necessary to protect the public interest. In sum, while I believe Mr. Estrada could have been more forthcoming in order to avoid this controversy, my conclusion is that he is qualified to serve on the D.C. Circuit. Should he come before the Senate as a nominee to the Supreme Court, he must be willing to provide additional information about his personal beliefs.

Mr. NELSON of Florida

Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, I strongly support S. 151, the PROTECT Act. Unfortunately, I was detained in Florida earlier today and was not able to cast my vote in favor of this important legislation. Current law not only provides a convenient defense for child pornographers, but also allows a practice to continue which endangers the Nation's kids regardless of whether actual children are used in the production of the pornographic materials in question. Because of the Supreme Court's decision in Free Speech Coalition, defendants in child pornography cases are now arguing that the pornographic images at issue are computer generated and are therefore legal and harmless. This defense requires the government, in nearly every child pornography prosecution, to prove that the child portrayed in the image is in fact a minor. Unfortunately, those who would prey on our children have already successfully used this defense. Even when pornographic materials are not generated using actual children, simply implying that the image is of child contributes to behaviors, which endanger the Nation's kids by encouraging exploitive practices. The exploitation of children through child pornography is one of the most despicable crimes in our society. The government clearly has a compelling interest in curbing child pornography, whether virtual or real, and I believe this legislation was drafted narrowly enough to withstand constitutional scrutiny. I hope the House will join the Senate in quickly passing this legislation, so that it can be sent to the President as soon as possible.

Mr. NELSON of Florida

Mr. NELSON of Florida. Madam President, I rise today to thank the conferees for helping the City of Boca Raton, FL, and the County of Palm Beach, FL, begin to deal with the bio-terrorist attack on the American Media Building in October of 2001, and the death of Robert Stevens, who worked in the building, due to anthrax. That building remains closed off with 24-hour security, still infested with anthrax, within a short distance of homes, schools, and other office buildings. But, now the U.S. Congress has authorized the General Service Administration to receive title to the building within 12 months of enactment of the omnibus bill. The residents of Boca Raton and the surrounding communities will be relieved to know that, with this language in the omnibus bill help is on the way. I am confident that the General Service Administration, the Florida Congressional Delegation and the owners of the American Media Building will be able to carry out the language in the omnibus bill and transfer the building to GSA or another appropriate agency to rid south Florida of this public health hazard. The omnibus language provides for a report by GSA to Congress within 270 days of enactment of the bill describing the expected agreement between GSA and the owners of the American Media Building regarding the transfer of the property to the Federal Government. The language further requests that a public health risk be shown. The local public health officials and the Governor of Florida both have acknowledged that the AMI Building poses a public health threat. And since it is the first attack of its kind in the United States, the amount of danger posed is still unknown. Another provision talks about the liability of the owner of the property. It is logical that the owner of the building would remain liable until title is transferred to the Federal Government. All of these provisions can be easily worked out to reach an agreement on the transfer of this building to the Federal Government. And, as this process moves forward, I know that each party will carry out their responsibilities under this language with the utmost integrity and with the concerns of the residents of Palm Beach County in mind. I look forward to monitoring the parties' progress toward an agreement. In fact, I encourage the parties to meet on a regular basis with members of the Florida delegation so that this issue is resolved in the most efficient manner. As we all live with the increased threat of a chemical or biological attack, we need to keep in mind that a biological attack is not a mere threat to south Florida and it is not something that occurred in the past and was taken care of--the anthrax attack remains. Let us employ the powers of the Federal Government as the Founding fathers intended. In Federalist Paper No. 23, Alexander Hamilton outlined the four principal reasons why the Federal Government was formed. And the very first reason was for the common defense--national security. An attack from an unknown source was perpetrated on this community and the Federal Government has the power and the expertise to protect and safeguard these citizens. I look forward to the day when I can walk on the Senate floor and declare that this community is finally free of anthrax.

Mr. NELSON of Florida

Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Equal Access to Medicare Act to combat the growing practice of ``concierge care'' medical practices. As my colleagues may recall I introduced similar legislation last Congress to deal with the growing problem of doctors shutting down their practices and opening new ones, only accepting those patients willing to pay a membership fee. These fees range from $1,500 to $20,000 annually. By charging these dues, or requiring patients to purchase non-Medicare covered services, doctors have been able to shrink their patient load and maintain high profit margins while continuing to bill Medicare, all on the backs of low- and middle-income beneficiaries. This is a dangerous model that causes significant disparities in the care available to Medicare beneficiaries. A doctor receiving Medicare reimbursement should not be allowed to turn away those Medicare beneficiaries who cannot, or choose not to pay a membership fee. My bill simply prevents Medicare from reimbursing doctors who charge membership fees or require the purchase of non-Medicare covered services as a condition for the provision of care. Since the introduction of this bill in 2001, the practice has been rapidly expanding with versions in many states. As an increasing number of Medicare beneficiaries voice their concerns, it is time for Congress to act. I hope that as we debate Medicare modernization this year, Congress will agree to put an end to this egregious practice. In addition to the concerns of seniors, health care advocacy groups have begun to weigh in as well. Both the American Academy of Family Physicians and the American Medical Association have expressed concern about the ``. . . risks associated with the spread of this model'', AMA, June 2002 report. Should this practice proliferate, a doctor shortage for low- and middle-income Medicare beneficiaries is likely, exacerbating an already ailing health care marketplace. I must emphasize: this bill does not interfere with a doctor's ability to set up a practice with a limited number of patients while remaining adequately compensated. Nor would doctors who participate in Medicare be prevented from contracting privately with patients for non- Medicare covered services. It simply provides that doctors who participate in the Medicare program may not select patients based upon willingness or ability to pay a fee for other services. This is the same standard that private insurance companies apply to their providers. I hope my colleagues will join me in helping Medicare keep its promise of accessibility to seniors who have paid a lifetime of ``premiums.'' I ask unanimous consent that the text of this legislation be printed in the Record.

Mr. NELSON of Florida

Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Equal Access to Medicare Act to combat the growing practice of ``concierge care'' medical practices. As my colleagues may recall I introduced similar legislation last Congress to deal with the growing problem of doctors shutting down their practices and opening new ones, only accepting those patients willing to pay a membership fee. These fees range from $1,500 to $20,000 annually. By charging these dues, or requiring patients to purchase non-Medicare covered services, doctors have been able to shrink their patient load and maintain high profit margins while continuing to bill Medicare, all on the backs of low- and middle-income beneficiaries. This is a dangerous model that causes significant disparities in the care available to Medicare beneficiaries. A doctor receiving Medicare reimbursement should not be allowed to turn away those Medicare beneficiaries who cannot, or choose not to pay a membership fee. My bill simply prevents Medicare from reimbursing doctors who charge membership fees or require the purchase of non-Medicare covered services as a condition for the provision of care. Since the introduction of this bill in 2001, the practice has been rapidly expanding with versions in many states. As an increasing number of Medicare beneficiaries voice their concerns, it is time for Congress to act. I hope that as we debate Medicare modernization this year, Congress will agree to put an end to this egregious practice. In addition to the concerns of seniors, health care advocacy groups have begun to weigh in as well. Both the American Academy of Family Physicians and the American Medical Association have expressed concern about the ``. . . risks associated with the spread of this model'', AMA, June 2002 report. Should this practice proliferate, a doctor shortage for low- and middle-income Medicare beneficiaries is likely, exacerbating an already ailing health care marketplace. I must emphasize: this bill does not interfere with a doctor's ability to set up a practice with a limited number of patients while remaining adequately compensated. Nor would doctors who participate in Medicare be prevented from contracting privately with patients for non- Medicare covered services. It simply provides that doctors who participate in the Medicare program may not select patients based upon willingness or ability to pay a fee for other services. This is the same standard that private insurance companies apply to their providers. I hope my colleagues will join me in helping Medicare keep its promise of accessibility to seniors who have paid a lifetime of ``premiums.'' I ask unanimous consent that the text of this legislation be printed in the Record.